Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« Got promoted! | Main | The militia rises! »

"ShotSpotter" having big problems

Posted by David Hardy · 5 March 2022 12:25 PM

Story here.

I wonder that the machine's results are even admissible in court. Some tests are, like fingerprints and DNA, because they are accepted and have been proven to the point that their results are admissible without having to call an expert to prove that, for example, the odds of two people having the same fingerprint or DNA are very, very low. But this technology is said to rely upon algorithms that will not be disclosed, and upon some human judgment. I can see it being good enough for probable cause, but admission into evidence at trial? This machine says the defendant is guilty, and no, we won't tell you how the machine works? I'd be one thing to say, we got three digital records from these locations, they are gunshot sounds and of the same shot, and a human triangulated the location of the shot, but this machine, by secret methods, does the same, is a different matter.

2 Comments | Leave a comment

Lagman | March 6, 2022 11:24 AM | Reply

Thank you, I have been following this company since near when the technology was first deployed. The communities were it is deployed are clearly places to stay away from; thus it is providing some public service.

One only need look at current (and past directors) and investors to understand this is a government oligarch "revolving door" scam; advancing the infringement of every law abiding citizen's freedoms (supposedly Constitutionally protected). It is analogous to the body scanners deployed at all airports (TSA is a separate unlawful infringement), "Red Light" programs, license plate scanners, other thermal scanners, etc.

Work for the government join the board or management of a company which was previously marketing its technology to functions you were involved in, make a fortune (because Lord knows your government pensions, double-, triple-, or more dips are not enough).

"Shotspot" is based on the presumptive principles that anyone who (sans badge) carries a firearm and uses it is "guilty until proven innocent", technology is infallible, and LE is apolitical and trustworthy.

What the uninformed citizens need learn: i) basic foundational principles of the US Constitution; ii) "jury nullification"; and iii) courage.

Old Jarhead | March 6, 2022 12:32 PM | Reply

One more boondoggle like shell casing comparison, ballistic fingerprinting, gun registration, and bite mark analysis.

Leave a comment