It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
According to a Request for Information (RFI) posted on the FedBizOpps website on January 18, the DHS, in tandem with the Secret Service, "Is seeking information on commercially available gunshot detection technologies for fixed site surveillance applications. Typical coverage areas are expected to be from 10s to 100s of acres per site, located within urban areas. Due to the secure nature of these sites, a high gunshot detection rate (>95%) is strongly desired while daily, operational monitoring of the system by external parties is undesirable."
Note that the location of the surveillance system will be in "urban areas," and will cover hundreds of acres per each unit, meaning the detection technologies are not merely being prepared for sensitive areas around the White House or the Capitol building.
link
While the systems are touted as "gunshot detectors," as the New York Times reported in May 2012, similar technology is already installed in over 70 cities around the country, and in some cases it is being used to listen to conversations.
"In at least one city, New Bedford, Mass., where sensors recorded a loud street argument that accompanied a fatal shooting in December, the system has raised questions about privacy and the reach of police surveillance, even in the service of reducing gun violence," states the report.
I don’t know about you but I’m really tired of the continuous attacks against law abiding citizens in this country. These systems cost @$250,000 per mile. Does this seem like a good use of tax payer dollars? What might they be listening for anyway - political dissent maybe?
So you mean to say this is above and beyond the "secret street lamps" that they have already been putting in place?????
If the Worlds Governments continues its policy of being open and transparent, pretty soon it will not be seen at all. Go figure.
Originally posted by beezzer
I'd like to see someone defend this.
*waiting*
I dont think they are in denial... most people are either ignorant to the facts or feel hopeless to do anything
I'd like to see someone defend this.
*waiting*
James G. Beldock, a vice president at ShotSpotter, said that the system was not intended to record anything except gunshots and that cases like New Bedford’s were extremely rare. “There are people who perceive that these sensors are triggered by conversations, but that is just patently not true,” he said. “They don’t turn on unless they hear a gunshot.”
Federal and homeland security agencies too have embraced gunshot location systems and their benefits; notably the FBI successfully used a ShotSpotter gunshot location system during the 2003-2004 Ohio highway sniper attacks, in conjunction with the Franklin County Sheriff.
You simply adjust the gain on the trigger and you'll be hearing everything all the time. A squirrel fart would trigger it.
But I'll go along as soon as we have the same sensor set-up in congress hooked to a webcam. I mean, fair is fair, right?
Originally posted by beezzer
I'd like to see someone defend this.
*waiting*
Could the system be abused? Absolutely, like a lot of other technologies.
At least currently, it sounds like the system is used to locate gunshot fire in urban areas, which usually involves the bad guys.
The Times has discovered that in at least one city, however, the system recorded a loud street argument. And the recording, which was made in New Bedford, Mass., is likely to be at issue in the case against two men charged with murder.
ACLU< br />
In addition to the apparently accidental eavesdropping reported by the Times, an important question is whether microphones can be remotely activated by police who want to listen to nearby conversations.