Gutfeld: These people are REMOVED from reality
The short version: Gutfeld and his panel mock Boston for dropping ShotSpotter over racial-equity concerns, but the bigger story is how easily 'public safety tech' debates skip the surveillance question entirely.
Our Take
Greg Gutfeld's panel spent this segment ridiculing Boston officials for pulling gunshot-detection sensors after equity concerns, treating the whole debate as another case of a city being "removed from reality." Fair enough that reasonable people can argue about whether ShotSpotter-style tech actually reduces crime. But the clip glosses over the more important question that never got airtime: once a city wires a neighborhood with always-on acoustic sensors, who decides where the microphones go, who audits the false positives, and what else that network of poles and cameras gets used for down the line.
That's the same blind spot we see constantly with license plate readers. Flock and its competitors get sold to city councils as narrowly targeted crime-fighting tools, then quietly expand into blanket surveillance grids that log every car, every driver, every day, regardless of suspicion. The Boston fight was framed by Fox as a culture-war punchline, but it's really a preview of the fight every city eventually has: convenience and "safety" arguments versus who's watching, why, and for how long.
Mocking a city council for asking hard questions about bias and oversight doesn't make the technology neutral. If you want to see how far this infrastructure has already spread near you, check our camera map, and if your town is debating a new system, get ahead of it with our take-action resources before the vote happens without you.
This is DeFlock The USA’s original commentary. The video above is the work of Fox News, published on YouTube — full credit to the creator.