On Wednesday, Chicago aldermen decided to take a stand against Mayor Brandon Johnson's attempt to shut down ShotSpotter, a gunshot detection technology that aids law enforcement in the fight against gun violence.
They voted 34 to 14 to take control over the ShotSpotter issue and away from Johnson's hands, throwing a wrench in the works given that the Chicago mayor campaigned on ditching this high-tech, high-cost and — according to critics — super-racist machinery.
Mayor Johnson … didn't take it well.
Under this new order, Chicago City Council gets to vote on whether or not to cancel the ShotSpotter contract. However, Johnson has already announced he's ending the deal, and he's saying, "Hold up, this council order is illegal!"
Back in February, Johnson's office announced that its ShotSpotter contract would not be renewed:
The system, which relies on an artificial intelligence algorithm and network of microphones to identify gunshots, has been criticized for inaccuracy, racial bias and law enforcement misuse. An Associated Press investigation of the technology detailed how police and prosecutors used ShotSpotter data as evidence in charging a Chicago grandfather with murder before a judge dismissed the case due to insufficient evidence.
Chicago politics. Never a dull moment…
With violent crime now as much a part of Chicago as disappointing draft picks, debate over solutions will continue to rage, especially when the use of technology becomes marred with cries of systemic racism.
Those darn racist robots…
Alderman Silvana Tabares, however, spoke out against the efforts to oppose ShotSpotter, comparing the system to ambulance infrastructure or fire alarms, and saying that this is all about one thing: money.
Watch:
Alderman Peter Chico, a former police officer, explained the benefits of ShotSpotter to the council.
"I've used ShotSpotter. I've seen what happens. I've seen it works," Chico said, recalling the technology helping him find wounded gunshot victims despite no one calling 911. "That body that I saw there, many, many times, we cannot put a price tag on that."
Meanwhile, opponents say that the $9 million a year technology is too expensive, doesn't lead to convictions, and hurts police-community relationships.
Follow Ian on Substack or X (@ighaworth).
P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇
