Live data from Hacker News

Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones

eff.org

141–145 of 145 posts

Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones

#141
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vast majority of police never actually need their weapons. So why are they routinely carrying them? https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/08/a-closer-lo... There's tons of dangerous things we could carry around just in case, but we don't because they'd be seen as aggressive.

You can use a weapon without firing it. For example, in this video[1] a rioter stole an M4 carbine from a police car. A security guard pointed a pistol and ordered the rioter to drop the weapon. He did. No shots were fired and the police carbine was recovered. Had the security guard not had a gun, I doubt the situation would have ended as harmlessly as it did. 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVAMUejexa0

And in other situations pointing a weapon escalates the problem, causing people to respond like their life is in danger - because it is!

Also that example is a funny one to use, because if the police didn't have carbines in their cars people wouldn't be able to steal them, so this whole situation would never had happened in the first place!

Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones

#142
post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm clearly talking about today and the future.

Right. So, the most obvious answer is to simply restore the institution of the Sheriff while abolishing police. An even better answer is to reimagine decentralized community security with all of the capabilities of an information age society - cameras, drones, etc.

What problems are you trying to solve? I think there were a lot more very serious issues with law enforcement the further in the past you go.

> An even better answer is to reimagine decentralized community security with all of the capabilities of an information age society - cameras, drones, etc.

You're going to have to be a _lot_ more detailed when you're proposing something so radical if you want me to at all understand how that would actually work and work better than what we've got now. What you just described sounds to me like my entire community invading my privacy.

Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones

#143
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those who say they want a future without police are often told to "move to Somalia," or some such place where local warlords provide the only semblance of law. Those who say they want to increase authoritarian influence are told the same thing. This makes me think we are probably close to the optimum solution. The police just need to be held accountable for their actions. Right now, that seems to be the biggest weakn…

> The police just need to be held accountable for their actions. Right now, that seems to be the biggest weakness in the system. I worry that the lack of accountability might be fundamental to the current system, and the "just" in "just need to be held accountable" is not even remotely as trivial as it sounds.

Agreed. That's usually true when anyone including me uses "just" in a sentence like that.

Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones

#144
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can use a weapon without firing it. For example, in this video[1] a rioter stole an M4 carbine from a police car. A security guard pointed a pistol and ordered the rioter to drop the weapon. He did. No shots were fired and the police carbine was recovered. Had the security guard not had a gun, I doubt the situation would have ended as harmlessly as it did. 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVAMUejexa0

And in other situations pointing a weapon escalates the problem, causing people to respond like their life is in danger - because it is! Also that example is a funny one to use, because if the police didn't have carbines in their cars people wouldn't be able to steal them, so this whole situation would never had happened in the first place!

Yes, sometimes introducing a gun escalates a situation. Sometimes it de-escalates by forcing compliance.[1] Sometimes it saves people's lives by stopping a threat. My point is that every country on the planet allows some people to carry guns. Different places just draw the line at different levels of screening, training, and places and times in which one can carry a gun.

There's also an issue of path dependency. What works for one country won't work for others. We learned from the war on drugs that banning something doesn't make it go away. There are more guns in the US than people. A lot of people here don't want them to go away. Unless the federal government wants to fight a civil war, Americans will be armed for the foreseeable future.

Several times in my life, I've had men who were bigger and stronger than me use violence against me. When a man tried to stab me in Oakland, I really wish I'd had a gun instead of nothing. When a stranger in San Francisco pushed me to the ground and tried to beat me with his bare hands, I wish I'd had something more effective than pepper spray. There were other occasions that I don't want to get into. As I said in another comment, the police were absolutely useless. They never caught any of these people. I'm certain that after my encounters with them, these violent criminals victimized dozens of others. These things happen so often that many people don't even report them to the cops. Why waste more of your time when you know nothing will come of it? The statistics in the SF bay area are definitely underestimating the magnitude of the problem.

I've seen similar crimes happen to others. A few years ago I watched a man try to kidnap a woman at knifepoint. The woman was powerless and so was I. The only reason he was stopped was because men with guns showed up and ordered the man to drop the knife. He decided he'd rather be in prison than six feet underground.

Now I live in a place that lets law-abiding citizens carry firearms for self-defense (after background checks, training, and fingerprinting). The difference in people's demeanor is night and day. Civilians aren't scared here. Homeless people exist, but they're not aggressive like they are in SF and Oakland. After moving, my girlfriend (a California native and lifelong Democrat) was so shocked by this that she revised her position on guns. She's now learned to shoot and is interested in getting her own concealed carry permit.

1. https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/onpu1m/conc... Here's a News article explaining what happened: https://www.fox6now.com/news/demanded-a-refund-man-charged-a...

Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any other examples? I don't deny that they could be quiet about it - but it actually seems easily knowable given the reports that finally come out. Plus - there are so few situations where the suspect has barricaded themselves anyway. Its not like car chase suspect or people running away from cops have been able (in the past) to be attacked by anything other than cops guns or tasers or guns.

Most news stories from the late 80's/early 90's don't seem to be available outside of paid archives, so I don't have any links to provide.

PBS on Ruby Ridge:

"The Weavers wouldn’t go near the robot — even after they took off the shotgun that had been strapped to the front of it."

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/ruby-ri...

Post reply on HN