Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dallas Police Used Robot with Bomb to Kill Ambush Suspect: Mayor

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 128 posts

Re: Dallas Police Used Robot with Bomb to Kill Ambush Suspect: Mayor

#21

Post by pionar »

secstate wrote: post #14
mikeash wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think shooting him would have been legal either. You only get to shoot a suspect when there's an imminent threat, and it sounds like there wasn't one. (If there was, they wouldn't have had time to send in the robot.)

That's an excellent point, that in order to bring in a robot they more or less pre-meditated executing him in the field and likely means the suspect had not moved to escalate the situation. You don't prep the bomb and then only set it off once the perp has made his choice to hurt someone else.

The perp had told the police that he was going to kill more officers if any came near him. He had already (probably) killed before, so how is it not imminent danger?

You can't just "wait him out" and hope he won't escape.

Re: Dallas Police Used Robot with Bomb to Kill Ambush Suspect: Mayor

#22

Post by monk_e_boy »

eximius wrote: post #9

Wow. This feels incredibly wrong. I know it is just an extension of the militarization of American police, but should they be allowed to issue a death sentence like that? I argue no. Expend the time and resources to non-lethally incarcerate him.

Judge, jury and executioner. All in a highly charged and emotional moment.

I guess this also destroys evidence?

Re: Dallas Police Used Robot with Bomb to Kill Ambush Suspect: Mayor

#23

Post by Forge36 »

eximius wrote: post #9

Wow. This feels incredibly wrong. I know it is just an extension of the militarization of American police, but should they be allowed to issue a death sentence like that? I argue no. Expend the time and resources to non-lethally incarcerate him.

I agree. This may be because the title used suspect "suspect" to describe the man.

Reading the article it's clear the man was committing a crime. He was however not immediately threatening anyone was refusing to cooperate.

I think a question we should continue asking is at what point does Lethal force become acceptable?

Re: Dallas Police Used Robot with Bomb to Kill Ambush Suspect: Mayor

#24

Post by jonknee »

mccoyspace wrote: post #18

While aerial lethal robotic forces have been used for years, this is the first time I've heard of ground-based lethal robots. It's amazing that it's happened first not by the military in a war situation, but by domestic police forces against it's citizenry.

It may also be the first use of a robot to kill a suspect in the US. We like our aerial killing machines, but only in other countries.

Re: Dallas Police Used Robot with Bomb to Kill Ambush Suspect: Mayor

#25

Post by epoxyhockey »

mccoyspace wrote: post #18

While aerial lethal robotic forces have been used for years, this is the first time I've heard of ground-based lethal robots. It's amazing that it's happened first not by the military in a war situation, but by domestic police forces against it's citizenry.

It's amazing that it's happened first not by the military in a war situation

I would not make that assumption. The military does not publicly disclose a majority of its tactics.

Re: Dallas Police Used Robot with Bomb to Kill Ambush Suspect: Mayor

#26

Post by dTal »

PietdeVries wrote: post #4
Houshalter wrote: post #2

Is that legal? I don't have any sympathy for the guy, but Ive never heard of police doing this. It's certainly a creative way of resolving the conflict.

Well... If you have to chose between sending in your troops/colleagues or a robot, what would you pick?

If you have a robot you can send in with things, you have far more options than "send it in with a bomb". Tranquilizer darts? Chemical agents ("knockout gas")? Although the fact that they refer to it as their "bomb robot" suggests it's single purpose, which is idiotic - it's not clear if it's a bomb disposal robot they repurposed or some wacky military-industrial-complex contraption.

Either way, I can't think of any scenario where I'm comfortable with police having bombs.

Re: Dallas Police Used Robot with Bomb to Kill Ambush Suspect: Mayor

#27

Post by jonknee »

pionar wrote: post #21
secstate wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an excellent point, that in order to bring in a robot they more or less pre-meditated executing him in the field and likely means the suspect had not moved to escalate the situation. You don't prep the bomb and then only set it off once the perp has made his choice to hurt someone else.

The perp had told the police that he was going to kill more officers if any came near him. He had already (probably) killed before, so how is it not imminent danger? You can't just "wait him out" and hope he won't escape.

That's essentially every crisis situation and the normal response is a trained negotiator not an executioner.

Re: Dallas Police Used Robot with Bomb to Kill Ambush Suspect: Mayor

#28

Post by iandanforth »

eximius wrote: post #9

Wow. This feels incredibly wrong. I know it is just an extension of the militarization of American police, but should they be allowed to issue a death sentence like that? I argue no. Expend the time and resources to non-lethally incarcerate him.

This repurposing of a defensive, life saving robot into a lethal weapon also offends me deeply. If corporations had an ounce of human conscience the manufacturer would terminate their contacts with this department immediately.

Re: Dallas Police Used Robot with Bomb to Kill Ambush Suspect: Mayor

#29

Post by [deleted] »

was_boring wrote: post #19
daedalus_j wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tear gas, flashbangs, water cannons, a nice safe armored vehicle... All appropriate (ish) police tools. IEDs: rather less so.

Exactly. If they can have a robot with a bomb, then they can have a robot with tear gas + flashbang. This is the Dallas police department, they have equipment capable of dealing with this situation -- to include armored cars and ballistic shields. I hope the legal process is explored in this case.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN