Associated Incidents
The New York City and Chicago police departments spend millions of dollars a year on gunshot detection technology that a privacy group argues is ineffective and invasive.
The departments pay ShotSpotter Inc. for technology that uses microphones and audio software to identify the sounds of gunshots in neighborhoods. But the technology hasn’t made an impact on gun violence and typically doesn’t result in investigatory leads, according to a new report from the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, a nonprofit privacy organization.
“Americans are desperate to feel safe, but we have to look at what surveillance companies are really selling us,” the group’s executive director, Albert Cahn, said in a statement. The microphones pick up sounds other than gunshots, including voices, according to the report, adding: “This technology is worse than a gimmick, it can put people in harm’s way.”
If ShotSpotter detects that a gun has been fired, it ascertains the location of the sound, isolates it and compares it to previous gunshot sounds before sending it to a human technician who performs a review. If the technician believes the sound is an actual gunshot then the police are alerted.
The company says more than 200 jurisdictions use its products around the world, many of which are US cities and towns. Both New York and Chicago are key customers however, accounting for nearly half of the company’s first quarter revenue this year, according to filings with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. The cities have contracted with the policing technology company for at least five years. Chicago added an additional year and $5.7 million to a contract with the company that could be worth as much as $33 million, while New York signed on for a $22 million contract in December that extends through 2024, according to city procurement records.
ShotSpotter said in a statement that the technology makes communities safer by solving cases, saving lives and deterring crime. The report “is simply a rehash of previous false and misleading allegations,” the company said. “The report is not presenting any new information and only serves to undermine the critical work ShotSpotter is doing to combat gun violence and save lives.”
In a statement, the New York Police Department called ShotSpotter “a highly effective crime-fighting tool,” adding that “false positives” are not passed along to officers. The Chicago Police Department said in a separate statement that “gunshot detection technology has detected hundreds of shootings that would have otherwise gone unreported.”
“CPD receives real-time alerts of detected gunfire, enabling patrol officers to arrive at a precise location of a shooting event quickly,” according to the statement. “This allows law enforcement to respond more quickly to locate and aid victims, identify witnesses, and collect forensic evidence.”
Yet the report argues that the technology brings a heightened police presence to neighborhoods with little to show for it in the end. New York and Chicago have been grappling with an increase in shootings since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, which has not slowed even as they renewed contracts with ShotSpotter this year, according to city procurement data.
An audit of the technology done by Chicago’s Office of Inspector General last year found that of the more than 50,000 ShotSpotter alerts for probable gunshots, only 9.1% resulted in evidence of a gun-related offense. The report went on to conclude that the product had little operational value for police, given that it rarely produced evidence of a gun crime, an investigatory stop or the recovery of a firearm. The audit did find that police were more likely to stop people based on the frequency of ShotSpotter alerts.
The company typically deploys the microphones in areas that police and other city officials deem hotspots for shootings and violence. Microphones are then placed on streetlights, buildings and utility poles, according to the report.
In response to the Chicago audit, ShotSpotter said “many factors” could lead to the lack of evidence of a gun-related crime and that its findings did not speak to the product’s accuracy.
The nonprofit’s report also raised privacy concerns around the company’s microphones, which record audio on a rolling 30-hour basis. Because the system consists of microphones and recording software, it can pick up other sounds during normal operations. The Legal Aid Society raised issue with the potential for the company’s products to serve as a “massive eavesdropping device.”
ShotSpotter said in its statement that the “risk of sensors picking up human voices is extremely low.”
It’s not clear if the company would turn over recordings other than gunshots or what data is kept on its servers. A representative did not comment on that process.
ShotSpotter has publicly defended itself from allegations that its devices lead to bad community outcomes, filing a defamation suit against Vice Media in October over news reporting about the company’s involvement in an arrest. It vehemently maintains that it plays no role in decisions to arrest, charge or prosecute individuals.