Drivers are modifying their car exhaust systems to sound like gunfire – and unsurprisingly, police are not happy about it.
The realistic-sounding modifications are illegal and “cause panic in the community,” Somerville police said in a press release Friday posted to department social media but not to the SPD website.
A rigged car exhaust system triggered a gunfire-detection system alert on Wednesday near Foss Park. The modifications are risky because “officers respond to such calls with greater speed, and even though they try to keep the greater speeds reasonable with respect to public safety and the amount of traffic they encounter, the risk of an accident while responding is increased,” police said.
Were officers responding to Wednesday’s false alarm involved in a collision or near-collision that prompted the alert? City spokesperson Grace Munns said the press release was only a general caution and not tied to a specific police incident. The false gunfire heard on Fellsway West was the second confirmed time it has happened, Munn said, after an incident at Broadway and Temple Street about four blocks west, also in the Ten Hills neighborhood.
The modifications, which can be called a “burble tune,” “straight piping” or “two-steps,” adjust a car’s timing, usually through its internal computer, so fuel ignites in the muffler instead of in the engine. In addition to the gunfirelike noises, sparks might shoot out a modified car’s tailpipes.
Sound Thinking, the maker of the ShotSpotter technology, has held a contract with the city of Somerville since 2016. The service is advertised as “AI-driven technology” that “locates shootings in seconds to protect the community.” It has faced scrutiny from the public and professionals who question its value and whether the placement of detectors can show racial bias.
The ACLU urged the city in March to end its contract with Sound Thinking, calling ShotSpotter “an expensive [and] unreliable system.” A letter submitted to the City Council described several sounds that may trigger the activation of ShotSpotter, including a car backfiring. In cases cited by the civil rights group, it was merely a car starting or revving up that triggered the activation that was seemingly not reclassified by analysts.
A stronger
Please consider making a financial contribution to maintain, expand and improve Cambridge Day.
We are now a 501(c)3 nonprofit and all donations are tax deductible.
Please consider a recurring contribution.
Seems like the tail wagging the dog. Police buy a surveillance system. The system is buggy. That results in the police speeding to places, and unsafe conditions.
No, people shouldn’t modify their exhaust systems. That should be some kind of noise ordinance violation and should be addressed with a modest fine.
However, the modifications are NOT “risky because ‘officers respond to such calls with greater speed.'” Police misuse of ShotSpotter is risky because it delivers false positives and results police taking unnecessary risks.
Blaming police errors on someone modifying their car, rather than on the system which delivers false positives of shootings, or of police misuse of that system, is just wrong. The police should take ownership of their mistakes.
I’ll also mention: If police are responding, they should use their horns when speeding. I’m a lot more worried about getting hit by a police car than by a bullet. I’ve already had one accident where I needed to intentionally crash my bike to avoid getting hit by a police car, and several near-incidents.