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

Draft policy proposal would authorize SF Police to use deadly force with robots

missionlocal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 225 posts

Re: Draft policy proposal would authorize SF Police to use deadly force with robots

#71

Post by greenhorn360 »

vorpalhex wrote: post #39
pstuart wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of the stress is manifested by the police themselves (which is an issue specifically called out by the "defund the police" movement, e.g., mental health crises when the better path is deescalation by trained mental health workers)

Have you followed up on those "trained mental health workers"? Yeah they stopped going on calls unless cops were present because they kept getting injured or used as hostages.

This isn't even remotely true. My city, Portland, etc. Have had great success with these programs. The vast majority of calls they respond to don't require police.

Please cite your sources (or any evidence at all) if you're going to make statements like that.

Re: Draft policy proposal would authorize SF Police to use deadly force with robots

#72

Post by falcolas »

surfpel wrote: post #34

Pros - Police not exposed to deadly situations - Robots (presumably) equipped with variety of sensors and cameras mitigating misidentification of people or what they’re holding - Better firing accuracy - Greater accountability as all actions could be recorded Cons - Myriad of possible misuse cases - Further militarization of police - Drones on US soil

> - Greater accountability as all actions could be recorded

I see exactly the opposite. There's no reason for them not to pull the trigger, as it's not as if any police will suffer the repercussions and be shot back at.

And recordings... let's just say I believe they will be as broadly available as police's body camera footage is today. A shocking number of camera failures everywhere, all the time.

My answer to the headline: Request Vehemently Denied

Re: Draft policy proposal would authorize SF Police to use deadly force with robots

#73

Post by chimeracoder »

Spivak wrote: post #63
cyberphobe wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually the high stress situation is manufactured entirely or significantly heightened by the officers involved

Which is why I think I might be on board with this. The “police are professionals trained to keep their cool even in life threatening situations” boat sailed ages ago. So making it so police aren’t in the life threatening situation at all might be a win.

> So making it so police aren’t in the life threatening situation at all might be a win.

Cops routinely kill people even when there's no reasonable way to claim they were in a "life threatening situation".

All this will do is make it easier for cops to kill people and evade accountability.

Re: Draft policy proposal would authorize SF Police to use deadly force with robots

#74

Post by phkahler »

Alupis wrote: post #53

Folks - this is not a lethal autonomous robot. This is a remotely controlled bomb disposal robot retrofitted with a gun. A human still has to pull the (digital) trigger to use lethal force. This is nothing but a good thing. Nobody cares if a robot is destroyed. A robot will allow everyone time to think and assess the situation before making a snap-judgement we all question later on. This can do nothing but reduce let…

Put a taser on it, not a gun.

Shit, I'd say put a taser on an autonomous drone with remote target selection before putting a gun on anything.

Re: Draft policy proposal would authorize SF Police to use deadly force with robots

#75

Post by mattrick »

eightysixfour wrote: post #56
Imnimo wrote: post #10

Maybe I lack imagination, but it seems like if you have enough control over a situation that you can deploy a police robot instead of charging in, then you have enough control to make non-lethal force a viable option.

They used a bomb disposal robot with a pound of C4 attached to stop the Dallas gunman in 2016. People did not like talking about whether it was necessary or not at the time. > Sr. Cpl. Banes said they considered using a .50 caliber rifle to fire at the shooter, which had been successful in a similar attack on police 14 months earlier. However, in that case, the suspect had driven an armored truck into police headquar…

It seems odd to me that a rifle was deemed too dangerous to use in a populated area but a pound of C4 strapped to a robot was acceptable.

Re: Draft policy proposal would authorize SF Police to use deadly force with robots

#76

Post by seabird »

For those who have an issue with this, I have to ask; have you actually thought this through at all? Would it really be preferable to make an officer literally risk their life trying to make the right decision? The will to survive in a situation that's shaping up to be a shootout is going to trump any reprimand or consequence. People generally don't like dying. Removing all risk from the situation for an officer only serves to make them more accountable.

Re: Draft policy proposal would authorize SF Police to use deadly force with robots

#77

Post by standardUser »

According to a recent article...

"Since 2000, some 58 people have been shot and killed by police in San Francisco"

A dense city of 800k has about 2.5 deaths from police shootings per year. According to the "Officer Down Memorial Page", 3 police officers were killed due to hostile actions in that same time period (but I'm not certain that site is fully up-to-date).

Sounds like an expensive and risky solution in search of a problem.

https://www.odmp.org/agency/3445-san-francisco-police-depart... https://missionlocal.org/2022/10/police-shooting-deaths-san-...

Re: Draft policy proposal would authorize SF Police to use deadly force with robots

#78

Post by anonexpat »

wheresmycraisin wrote: post #25

I can't possibly imagine how anyone thinks this is a good idea. US police are already over-militarized and under-accountable. We as Americans need to stop worshiping "men in uniform" including all levels of law enforcement and military and hold them to the same standard as any other member of society -- stop giving them everything they want and stop spoiling them when they call us unpatriotic.

The military is held to a much, much higher standard than regular law enforcement. Their rules of engagement are much stricter.

Re: Draft policy proposal would authorize SF Police to use deadly force with robots

#79

Post by russellbeattie »

There is zero need for a device which can't be killed to use deadly force. What are they thinking? The justification for police to have and use guns is that their lives could be in danger from so much as a broken bottle. Police have guns to protect themselves. Yes, in reality they use them to threaten, intimidate and "take out the bad guys" before they potentially harm others ("We shot him in the back 40 times as he was running away because he could have been a threat!"), but that's not what they're supposed to have them for.

A remote controlled robot does not have that rationale. There is no reason for it to have anything more powerful than a taser or a flash-bang style explosive. If that doesn't work, send in another, and another. But sending in a robot with a gun or a grenade to take out the bad guys? What's the reasoning? Robots are expensive? That if they didn't use it the bad guy might get away?

No. Full stop. No.

Re: Draft policy proposal would authorize SF Police to use deadly force with robots

#80

Post by [deleted] »

vorpalhex wrote: post #70
woodruffw wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That qualification hasn't meant much, going by the rate at which police hurt themselves (and innocent members of the public) with their own service weapons.

I agree police should get more training. You will have to fund them more if you want that.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN