The article has a flawed approach, why shouldn't the cops use it? it does a decent job of monitoring, and alerting when gun shots are in an area?<p>Where its time for it to stop being used is in the court of law, I mean you could say possibly compare wave forms and then that of the weapons fire, there are several weapons that have a distinct sound, and cadence, but this is something that a expert witness would have to give testimony about.<p>its like a polygraph test, they can't tell if your lying, but they can't detect a rapid state change, which could indicate they aren't being truthful, which is fine for an investigation, but is why it can't be used in court.<p>And its huge stretch that the public is at greater risk of harm, because the system would lead to cops to treat everyone in the area where a sensor tripped seems like a stretch and I think without actually supporting evidence shouldn't have even been used.<p>I like the eff, but sometimes they seem to over due it, but then again, I guess that true for lawyers and marketers.