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

81–90 of 225 posts

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

#81

Post by falcolas »

rllearneratwork wrote: post #43

this is a great idea. Many (most?) killings by police are justified that by the "threat to the officer's life". With robots won't we have opportunity to minimize killings by police. The robot's well being is clearly not as important as that of a suspect.

> The robot's well being is clearly not as important as that of a suspect

Said by no police officer anywhere. You've seen how they react to K9 units being assaulted (at least, how they react when the assault isn't being administered by the police themselves).

I see the opposite. With no risk to the operators, they have no reason to hesitate in shutting the situation down as quickly as possible using the "easy button".

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

#82

Post by bombcar »

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…

Strapping a bomb to a bomb disposal robot is so quintessentially American.

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

#83

Post by woodruffw »

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.

At least where I live, giving the police more funding hasn't meaningfully improved their ability to comport themselves. If anything, it's markedly declined over the last 30 years (while their funding hasn't).

I think an easier way to make the police more careful with their guns is to limit which cops can carry guns, and to require cops to live in the neighborhoods they police. People tend to be a little more careful with firearms when the stray bullet might hit their friends or family.

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

#84

Post by antiterra »

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.

Genuinely curious, do you have a source handy for that?

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

#85

Post by bombcar »

mattrick wrote: post #75
eightysixfour wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The blast radius is much easier (cube law) whereas a .50 cal bullet could go for miles.

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

#86

Post by MerelyMortal »

mattrick wrote: post #75
eightysixfour wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

A bullet can travel further than a blast.

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

#87

Post by woodruffw »

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…

There was a decent amount of conversation about it at the time[1]. Looking back, the decision to kill a man (even a violent one with a gun) remotely, using a robot, is stunning. Particularly in light of the fact that the gunman wasn't targeting members of the public; instead, the police seem to have concluded that the most expedient way to handle him was to explode him.

[1]: https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2016/07/dallas-poli...

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

#88

Post by treeman79 »

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.

I agree that killer robots are a bad idea.

Asking a cop to walk into an active shooter situation isn’t great either.

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

#90

Post by Alupis »

phkahler wrote: post #74
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.

They already do put less-lethal options on these remotely controlled robots. It's even in the article...

This is for when there is a significant probability violence will escalate and harm anyone besides the "bad guy" (ie. hostages, active gunman, etc). Removing officer lives from the equation means folks can keep a level head and not just go guns blazing. This is a good thing.

If you think police commit too much violence, then you should celebrate this. Removing half of the necessary equation that results in lethal force will do nothing but reduce the use of lethal force.

Post reply on HN