It's ineffective.

https://www.macarthurjustice.org/blog2/shotspotter-is-a-fail...

https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/four-problems-w...

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/law-justice/shotsp...

https://www.axios.com/2022/04/07/campaign-zero-against-shots...

The technology is not only unreliable [0] the company will manipulate and change reports to suit police officers [1].

[0] https://eu.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2018/01/11/ju...

[1] https://www.thetrace.org/2021/08/chicago-police-shotspotter-...

>> ShotSpotter seems like a good idea. Why am I supposed to be hating on them? I guess I'm out of the loop.

Because (right or wrong) people protested ShotSpotter and the city agreed to stop using it. But they keep using it.

These devices are typically installed in "high crime" areas. They then detect more crime (Or just loud noises). This calls police to respond to the area, and increased interaction with police commonly leads to increased confrontation with police leading to arrests. Thus re-enforcing the "high crime" reputation of the area.

Because it doesn't actually work as advertised, leading to things like over-policing and poorer response times to actual crime [1].

[1] https://council.seattle.gov/2023/11/13/police-chiefs-critica...