As citizens we can’t fall for the political smoke screens when it comes to the safety of our communities. For the County Executive, the Commissioners to think this gunshot detection technology will actually prevent crime, they are betting on a long shot themselves.
According to the National Institute of Justice, Police response times to technology-generated reports of gunfire were compared to response times to citizen generated reports both before and during the test period. For the most part, there was little difference between response times to technology-generated reports of gunfire during the test period and response times to citizen-generated reports before the test period. However, the mean response time to citizen-generated reports of gunfire during the test period (about 30minutes) was about 30 percent less than the mean response time to technology-generated reports (about45 minutes). Nonetheless, the overall mean response time during the test period (to the technology- and citizen-generated reports combined) was about 41minutes, just 2 minutes longer than the mean response time before the test period (to citizen-generated reports only). Researchers concluded that using the technology did not change in any substantial way the speed with which the police responded to reports of gunfire.
Key findings: The study of the use of gunshot detection technology in local law enforcement led the research team to four broad conclusions:
Gunshot detection systems are likely to reveal rather high citizen under-reporting rates of random gunfire problems (23 percent of incidents are reported).
The technology is likely to increase the workloads of police officers, particularly if departments dispatch a patrol unit to every gunfire incident detected by a technological system.
Gunshot detection systems are not likely to lead to more arrests of people firing weapons in urban settings because it is highly unlikely that offenders will stay at a gunshot location long enough for the police to arrive.
Finally, gunshot detection systems seem to offer the most potential as a problem-solving tool and would fit nicely within the emerging problem-oriented policing paradigm. The technology can help police identify random gunfire hot spots and develop strategies to address the problem.
Finally, if the police department may not have a rapid response policy or the resources to implement such a policy. Second, if the tool is inaccurate, police resources may be wasted by dispatching units to false alarms. Third, a police department that is committed to community policing may prefer to focus its resources on preventive measures, rather than on rapid response measures. Regardless of the amount of tax payer’s money they spend for gadgets and toys. Nothing is better than good old fashion community policing, something that has not been implemented in Yonkers or Mt. Vernon. Three Million can go along way. Maybe they should start by fixing the car- cams in Mt. Vernon’s fleet of cars and install car-cams in Yonkers fleet, along with requiring Yonkers PD to wear name tags, put more Police Officers on the street and truly invest in Community Policing. That is where the tax payer’s money is truly needed and would be well spent.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment