The Roanoke City Council approved the installation of 75 Flock Safety Raven Audio Detection Devices to Help the Roanoke Police Department Detect Gunshots and Other Crime Indicators

Roanoke, VA

Author: Roanoke Rambler Staff

Published: 5:05AM EST May 6, 2026

Edited: 5:05 AM EST May 6, 2026

A Roanoke City Council meeting turned tense on April 20, 2026, when police removed individuals protesting a proposed gun detection system, interrupting proceedings and highlighting a growing divide over public safety technology and civil liberties. The disruption came as city leaders considered the use of gunshot detection, technology, tools supporters say could help reduce violence, but critics warn may introduce new risks tied to surveillance and accuracy.

The incident unfolded during discussion of the proposed system, when protesters in the chamber were warned and ultimately escorted out by police. The situation escalated before officers intervened, though full details including warnings issued and enforcement justification, are still being reviewed. Following the meeting, the Roanoke Rambler spoke with two local residents to capture immediate reaction to both the technology and the disruption.

What Every day Roanokers Are Saying

Brian Maxwell expressed strong support for the technology, saying he believes it could play

a meaningful role in reducing gun violence. “First of all, I think it’s much needed,” Maxwell said. “I feel like some people see them and try to be a little bit more cautious with how they act with guns.” He pointed to examples in other cities, saying the systems appear to be making an impact. “I’ve actually seen them in other cities… and how it’s calmed some of the gun violence

down,” he said. Maxwell added that the technology’s ability to quickly detect and respond to gunfire could help improve safety locally. “I think it’s going to help with the community around here… and the percentage of gun violence is going to go down within the next couple of years.”

Effectiveness Concerns

The devices only operate within a 1.75-mile radius and is only activated when detecting audio that sounds like gunshots. There were past performance issues in similar systems used in Martinsville, which were later phased out. Donte Dunnaville of Roanoke, while acknowledging potential benefits, raised concerns about reliability and unintended consequences, particularly involving misidentification to the Roanoke Rambler. “I think it really is needed too,” Dunnaville said. “But the crazy thing is… if it’s a wrongful conviction.” He warned that reliance on technology could lead to innocent people being wrongly implicated. “You don’t want… an innocent bystander getting arrested,” he said. “It’s only going to be so trustworthy, not 100%.” Dunnaville emphasized the need for caution as cities adopt more advanced systems. “Everything is technology now… we’re going into a new era, and you just got to be careful with everything.”

Flock Safety raised $275 million at a $7.5 billion valuation in 2025, and has investors including Andreessen Horowitz, Bedrock Capital, Matrix Partners, Sands Capital, Founders Fund, Kleiner Perkins, Tiger Global, Y Combinator, and others. Flock Safety's signature, Raven Gunshot Detection: uses smart acoustic sensors and machine learning to detect and pinpoint gunfire in real time, sending instant alerts to police. It claims over 90% accuracy in locating shots within 60 seconds, far faster than 911 call according to its website. Flock Safety has installed over 100,000 cameras through the United States. Roanoke City will pay for Flock Safety initially through a grant from the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Program.

Crime Prevention v. Civil Liberties 

The system under discussion, often referred to as gunshot detection or acoustic detection technology, uses sensors to identify and locate gunfire in real time, allowing faster police response. Experts note that most gunshot detection systems rely on acoustic sensors rather than facial recognition technology, though surveillance tools are sometimes discussed alongside them. City officials have framed the proposal as part of broader efforts to address gun violence. The meeting disruption, and the debate itself reflects a deeper divide between public safety and personal privacy, rapid response and technological risk, and crime prevention versus civil liberties.

Right after, the measure passed (5-2), chaos ensued and two members of the community were escorted out by police. It remains unclear whether those removed from the meeting were cited or arrested. A request for clarification has been made to the Roanoke Police Department regarding the incident. 

In other areas Flock Safety is facing lawsuits due to its potential privacy infringement. In a federal class action complaint filed in the Northern District of California, plaintiffs accuse Flock of running a nationwide surveillance network that “amasses” billions of plate scan records and violates California’s ALPR Privacy Act. The 87-page complaint requests for both damages and court orders that would rein in the system, arguing that Flock’s technology make it “easy to track” vehicles at a large scale.  In April, San Jose, CA residents filed a class action arguing that nearly 500 Flock cameras create unavoidable tracking across the city. Furthermore, a leaked memorandum from the City of Berkeley’s Attorney’s Office about Flock Safety warned that Flock technology might be incapable of complying with city, state and federal unauthorized data sharing restrictions.

Implementation 

Roanoke City has initial plans to have 50 gunshot detectors in Northwest Roanoke, 8 in Southwest Roanoke, 16 in Southeast and one in Northeast Roanoke. As Roanoke considers adopting new tools to address gun violence, the events inside City Council chambers suggest the debate will extend beyond policy, into questions of trust, fairness, and how far technology should go into shaping public safety.