So, in Chicago, those now well-known ShotSpotters have run out of time. Their contract with the city has expired and Mayor Johnson says he will not renew it. But there’s a chance it may be back anyway because some members of the City Council are working on bringing it back. The ShotSpotter is a multi-million-dollar technology designed to help the police wage war against gun violence. It’s an alarm system that alerts police to trouble faster and more accurately than a call to 911. Mayor Johnson insists the ShotSpotter is not reliable enough to be worth millions. Those members of the City Council insist that residents of their wards insist the spotters are worth whatever they cost because they have demonstrated an ability to get police and ambulances to the spot of a shooting and are saving the lives of people hit by gunfire. It is fair to speculate that Mayor Johnson’s determination to remove the ShotSpotters is motivated by the politics – his politics – of his plan to run for reelection. To pay for ShotSpotters during an election year, on top of everything else, he’s paying for, candidate Johnson may have to raise our real estate taxes, which, for a candidate for public office, is a bad thing to have to do. So, the debate goes on. Should there be a ShotSpotter in Chicago? Yes or no? Yes or no? Yes or no? To fight gun violence and to save lives, my opinion, for sure, is yes.

Walter Jacobson gives his Perspective: