'More of a Band-Aid': US cities canceling ShotSpotter due to cost, efficacy questions
COLUMBUS, Ohio — As U.S. cities grapple with gun violence, city leaders and law enforcement agencies have approached the issue in a myriad of ways, including investing in community-based organizations and nonprofits that focus on violence prevention efforts to address the root causes.
More than 170 law enforcement agencies have sought help in the form of ShotSpotter, according to SoundThinking, the California-based company that sells the technology. The gunshot detection system uses acoustic sensor microphones placed in designated areas to identify and locate gunfire and notify police within 60 seconds.
Many law enforcement agencies have praised ShotSpotter for cutting down response times to shooting scenes and getting aid to victims more quickly. Others later canceled their ShotSpotter contracts or chose not to renew them, citing a low confirmation of shootings, the cost, and its underwhelming effect on gun violence.
"Something like ShotSpotter is more of a Band-Aid; it's a small component. The response times can be quicker, but it doesn't address the root cause of gun violence," said Terrance Hinton, a criminal justice and sociology professor at Ohio State University.
Minimal impact, high price tag
Eric Piza, Ph.D., a professor of criminology and criminal justice, director of crime analysis initiatives, and co-director of the Crime Prevention lab at Northeastern University in Boston, was part of a team that conducted extensive studies on ShotSpotter in Kansas City, Missouri, and Chicago using 15 years' worth of crime data.
Piza and his colleagues found that ShotSpotter helped police in those cities decrease their response times to shootings and allowed them to collect ballistics evidence more often — what he called "procedural benefits." But they also found no meaningful reduction in crime compared to similar areas without ShotSpotter.
"The lack of positive effects are consistent (across studies)," Piza said.
In Ohio, the Dayton Police Department chose not to renew its contract because of the cost and its inability to prevent gun violence. The Canton Police Department also decided to part ways with the technology because of the cost and instead established a replacement gunshot detection technology called Wi-Fiber.
In New York City, the comptroller's office found in an audit of the New York Police Department that only 13% of ShotSpotter alerts throughout the city were confirmed shootings. Additionally, the audit stated that the NYPD "substantially overstates" the reduction in response times achieved using ShotSpotter. The NYPD still uses ShotSpotter throughout its five boroughs.
And in North Carolina, several cities, including Durham, Charlotte, and Winston-Salem, acquired ShotSpotter but later canceled their contracts, citing the high cost and number of alerts that failed to recover evidence of gunfire.
Ohio community members call for transparency
Community members who spoke with The Columbus Dispatch, part of the Paste BN Network, said they have a general understanding of how ShotSpotter works and think it can be an effective tool for police responding to gunfire. But many said they weren't sure if it's helping Columbus police solve gun crimes or preventing gun violence.
Jasmine Ayres, 34, an Ohio community activist who has lived in North Linden for two years, said while there may be some benefits to ShotSpotter, she questions its value.
"I can guarantee you that (community members) prevent more shootings than ShotSpotter," she added.
Ayres also said Columbus police have not been transparent enough when it comes to the ShotSpotter technology, mainly the locations where they are placed and whether it helps prevent gun violence or solve gun crimes. Columbus police and SoundThinking officials declined to confirm the devices' location, citing concerns that vandals would try to damage the expensive equipment.
Ayres said she would like to see some of the millions earmarked for ShotSpotter go toward community initiatives she believes get to the root of violence, such as the Columbus CARE Coalition and Columbus police's Mobile Crisis Response for people experiencing mental health crises.
Thell Robinson, founder of Halt Violence, a Columbus-based nonprofit that works with at-risk youth and young adults to stop violence without involving the police, expressed skepticism that ShotSpotter is preventing any shootings.
"Is it a deterrent for shootings? No. Hell, you got cameras on every avenue, and that's not a deterrent," Robinson said.
SoundThinking executive: Cities have a lot of competing interests
When asked why some cities choose to keep the technology while others cancel, Thomas Chittum, senior vice president of forensic services at SoundThinking, which sells the ShotSpotter gunshot detection technology, said the reasons for cancellation are more complicated than the cost of the technology or its effectiveness.
"It's a policy decision at the end of the day, and (cities) have to make those hard choices," said Chittum, a former agent with the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. "Cities have a lot of competing interests, and we believe this is a local decision that people must make."
SoundThinking estimates the average annual cost of the gunshot detection system between $65,000 and $90,000 per square mile. Addressing complaints of ShotSpotter's cost, Chittum said that the alert system's ability to save lives is worth the price tag.
"I think, personally, it's hard to put a price tag on a human life," said Chittum.
'No police department wants to be the department without the newest toy'
Most experts in the criminal justice field agree that a large percentage of gunfire goes unreported to police. Public safety officials, for example, estimate that 88% of gunfire in Columbus is not reported to police.
Nick Konves, an assistant chief with Columbus police, said investing in policing technology like the gunshot detection system helps police stay ahead of crime. Konves explained that ShotSpotter alerts are treated as a Priority 2 call for officer response. But if police receive a corresponding 911 call reporting that a person was shot, then it is upgraded to a Priority 1 call, prompting a faster police response.
Mike Katz-Lacabe, director of research for the Center for Human Rights and Privacy, a privacy research group based in California, told The Dispatch that these types of technologies are often meant to appear as though law enforcement agencies and city governments are taking public safety and gun violence seriously, even if they don't necessarily work as they're promised.
"No police department wants to be the department without the newest toy," said Katz-Lacabe, who added city government leaders face pressures to show their constituents they are taking crime seriously, especially when there are spikes in homicides and violent crime, and when residents want to see what they believe are immediate results.