Chicago Council votes to keep ShotSpotter; mayor says he will veto
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 сен 2024
- Streaming now at abc7chicago.co....
The Chicago City Council voted to keep ShotSpotter Wednesday; Mayor Brandon Johnson said he will veto the ordinance. FULL STORY: abc7chicago.co...
needs more public money to support Venezuelans
He must be a Venezuelan he wants more $
He doesn’t want those demonized teen to lose any advantage.
Brandon Johnson & Kim Foxx released a joint statement reminding the City Council & CPD not to interfere with their voting base
Chicago is all about that shot detecting and vise versa isnt it?
I wonder who and what is going on there?
Beto your way outta here Johnson.
Shotspotter is worthless. Quit wasting taxpayers money on worthless tech.
You must be a thug
I agree that the cost is too high for what it delivers in the aggregate. However, we fund many things in the name of public safety that are rarely used/needed. That's not to say that we should fund Shot Spotter or defund the other programs or systems. I would just like to see the mayor and city council suggest (in earnest) some realistic alternatives that offer better value and while being able to provide this type of utility to the communities that want it.
@@jaycee4899 I live in a different city and it doesn’t work.
🔥your Alderman
Exactly what is going to replace this? Is there better, newer technology out there and if so, let's get it!
I was always told to come with a possible solution when complaining about something. If the cost is too great, then he should offer a realistic alternative that can provide the same utility. 100 million sounds like a lot, I agree, but simply shuffling that money around and not investing in an alternative to this tech either shows his lack of leadership, at best, or demonstrates that his argument of cost is disingenuous.
Literally anything can replace Spotshotter and reduce crime. Detectives for one thing. They are the ones who build cases that keep criminals off the streets. Video cameras as well. Cameras can track criminals and the video they produce can also be used as evidence.
@@sixdonuts 1) a detective isn't going to respond to an unreported shooting within minutes
2) cameras would be more costly but, I agree, could be used as an alternative and possibly present additional information & evidence related to the shooting
@@RockwaterReese fighting crime is about catching the criminals and then having enough evidence to prosecute them and keep them off the streets. A detective can help with both of these objectives. Shotspotter is only an alert and does not guarantee police will be able to respond. Shotspotter also doesn't provide any evidence. How do lock up criminals without evidence?
@@sixdonuts totally hear your points about evidence needed to prosecute -- see my point about unreported shots. they aren't going to investigate what they are never made aware of. I'm also not advocating for spot shotter, in case you are assuming that. I simply think all or nothing is not the right approach.