In the 2002 film “Minority Report,” starring Tom Cruise and directed by Steven Spielberg, society has developed a system called “Pre-crime,” where a trio of psychics predict murders before they happen. Law enforcement acts on these visions, apprehending would-be perpetrators and preventing crimes before they ever occur.
While the story raises ethical and philosophical questions about free will and due process, it also presents a provocative vision of a world where violent crime is virtually eliminated through early intervention.
We don’t have psychics foreseeing crimes today, but modern technology is quickly closing the gap between when a crime is committed and when the offender is identified. Cutting-edge tools — such as automated license plate readers, networked video surveillance, drones, forensic analysis and advanced artificial intelligence platforms capable of rapidly ingesting and analyzing large volumes of data — are revolutionizing public safety.
We are standing on the verge of a new era where committing a crime without being identified and caught is increasingly difficult. If the likelihood of being apprehended continues to rise, could this change the calculus for potential criminals? And if so, how might it reshape criminal behavior?
Today’s law enforcement environment is evolving rapidly thanks to the integration of several key technologies.
Automated license plate readers capture and store data from passing vehicles, helping to solve crimes ranging from car thefts to violent felonies. In many cases, hits by license plate readers provide the first solid lead in an investigation, allowing law enforcement to quickly connect suspects to crime scenes.
High-definition closed-circuit camera networks, increasingly supplemented by drone deployments, offer real-time situational awareness. Drones, particularly in first-responder programs, can arrive at scenes faster than ground units, providing live video feeds to responding officers and investigators.
Gunshot detection systems and other environmental sensors alert authorities the instant an incident occurs. The integration of this data into real-time crime centers helps officers respond to crimes in progress and identify patterns across jurisdictions.
Artificial intelligence and machine learning platforms are revolutionizing investigations by automating the analysis of massive volumes of data — from surveillance video to license plate records to social media. These tools can detect patterns and generate leads in minutes, not days.
A recent example illustrating the power of this technological convergence is the case of Luigi Mangione. In December 2024, law enforcement arrested Mangione for the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, highlighting the power of public surveillance and community engagement.
Despite attempts to conceal his identity with a mask, the clarity of the footage from various cameras that caught images of Mangione before and after the murder made identification and capture possible. This case exemplifies how the integration of real-time camera networks, public alerts and the human element of recognition accelerates apprehension timelines, reinforcing the notion that evading detection is increasingly untenable for premeditated offenders.
Research consistently shows that the certainty of being caught has a greater deterrent effect on crime than the severity of punishment. Criminologist Daniel Nagin has emphasized that it is the likelihood of apprehension — not the severity of punishment — that primarily dissuades criminal activity.
Most offenders, particularly those committing premeditated crimes, believe they will get away with it. In fact, studies suggest that many offenders perceive little or no risk of apprehension. However, as law enforcement leverages technology to more consistently and visibly close that gap, that perception may begin to shift.
If potential offenders begin to see that crimes are solved quickly and that data trails are difficult to escape, the perceived risk of getting caught increases — and with it, the potential to deter criminal behavior.
It is important to distinguish between different types of criminal behavior when discussing deterrence. Technologies that increase the certainty of apprehension are most likely to affect premeditated crimes such as burglary, car theft and organized retail theft. These crimes involve a level of planning, where offenders weigh risks and rewards.
Crimes of passion or those committed in moments of emotional rage or fear are different. In such cases, offenders often act impulsively without considering consequences. These crimes are less likely to be deterred by the presence of cameras, sensors or forensic tools. Therefore, while the technologies discussed can significantly reduce deliberate criminal activity, their effect on impulsive or emotionally charged crimes will likely be more limited.
As we continue to adopt increasingly advanced crime-solving technologies, we must also confront important ethical and legal questions. Surveillance, data aggregation and predictive tools raise legitimate concerns about privacy, civil liberties and bias. To ensure these technologies serve the public good, law enforcement agencies must implement strong oversight, transparency and accountability practices. Community trust is not guaranteed but must be earned and maintained through responsible use.
Society may never reach the predictive capabilities portrayed in “Minority Report,” but we are undeniably moving into a time where committing a serious crime and remaining unidentified is becoming harder with each passing year. That shift has real potential to reduce victimization, increase clearance rates and change the mindset of potential offenders.
The challenge ahead will be ensuring that this new era of crime-solving is deployed in a way that is equitable, ethical and focused on public safety. If done right, we may find ourselves entering a golden age of justice — not because crime disappears, but because it becomes truly difficult to get away with.
Mike Moulton is a retired chief of police for the City of El Cajon, California, with 29 years of service in law enforcement. He is a fellow at the Future Policing Institute and a member of the California Police Chiefs Association, the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Police Executive Research Forum.
