While authorities laud the new technology, however, some people see it as a potential threat to civil liberties

Ah, who cares about those anymore in 21st-century AmeriKa?

Matthew Segal, the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, said Shotspotter helps police respond more quickly to crime scenes, but the marriage of that tool with any GPS-based tracking system could diminish constitutional rights for a sector of society that already has a reduced expectation of that protection.

“Often when police want to stop and frisk someone, they will use the ‘high crime area’ rationale, and this is another version of that,” Segal said.
Kenney said he is not a “big fan” of Shotspotter because it has been known to mistake loud noises, such as fireworks, for gunfire. However, he said, the Boston police’s new system “is an interesting application, if they do it in a controlled way.”
One problem that could arise from the cross-referencing, he said, is that many of the people wearing GPS monitors live in areas where gunfire is not uncommon.
But authorities say the system can also exonerate people. 

Tyranny always has its selling points.

“One overlay recently revealed that a person whose name came up during an investigation as the possible shooter couldn’t have done it because he was not in the area,” Fitzgerald said.
The cross-referencing is not a substitute for typical investigatory methods, authorities said, but they justify it by pointing to the high recidivism rates among former convicts. Fitzgerald suggested that it might also have a side benefit of helping authorities find witnesses.
“We are already seeing impressive results from the combined use of these two systems,” said Police Commissioner Edward F. Davis. “Our strong partnership with the Probation Department is providing us with the opportunity to quickly identify possible suspects and get violent offenders off the street.”