groovethefish writes "NYT article highlights the use of electronic listening devices installed on utility poles, buildings, and other structures, then centrally monitered for gunshots. The company SureSpotter claims it helps reduce time wasted by police searching for the source of gun fire in their patrol areas, but the privacy implications are just hitting the courts. If they are monitoring 24/7 and also pickup conversations along with gunshots, can that be used against the people who are recorded? The company line from the article
— "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.”
Seems like audio filters would only alert the monitoring center upon gunshots, but wouldn't it have to listen nonstop in order to find the sounds to trigger the alarm?"
Link to Original Source