91–100 of 225 posts
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.
And many places offer free range time and many cops don’t even bother.
- This is about remote controlled guns. A human is still making the decision and all of the same rules and oversight apply. You can make an argument for existing oversight is insufficient but that is a problem we already have with police walking around with guns.
- You can certainly come up with situations where someone is a danger to the public. Imagine an active shooter scenario. Normally they are also a danger to a responding officer who is fearing for their life. This removes that fear in the decision making process.
- I don't think the slippery slope argument is helpful here. We can be against fully autonomous kill chains while still being okay with this. The importance is that a trained and accountable human is making the decision to take a life and that it's a method of last resort to protect others. This is just a more effective tool for a method of last resort.
I say all of this with the utmost respect for issue of concerning police militarization and abuse of power. I think these are important issues that we need to solve and the presence of them makes everyone fearful and distrusting. A just and highly effective police force shouldn't have these issues. I don't think it's a good idea to get rid of police to solve it though.
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.
I respect the military much more than I do the police, but it would still be a good idea to cut down on the fetish made at least of militarism for its own sake (a big, though probably not the main, part of the problem with US police forces).
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.
When people say "defund the police" this is the kind of shit they are talking about. There is no reason for a police force to have access to lethal robots. None.
One word --> Uvalde. A remote-controlled robot equipped with a gun is needed in this type of situation. The gun will be operated by a human, remotely.
This is insane and shouldn't even be up for debate. Tbh I don't see how it's any different than drone strikes though. Just feels wrong and when something feels wrong...
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…
> A human still has to pull the (digital) trigger to use lethal force. Because cops have such a great track record with those decisions so far? > In the field, lethal force happens because people are forced to make snap judgements. This is what cops always claim when these discussions come up, but a look at the actual data proves otherwise. Cops routinely kill civilians - including innocent ones - in situations where…
If you believe officers use excessive lethal force, then removing their lives from the equation can only make it better.
With that said, you grossly overstate this "problem" and the data doesn't tell the story you think it does... but regardless, there is no way to frame this but positive. Unless you just are anti-police in general...
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.
Indeed, cops are just humans, and we correctly think of them as such when asking them to perform duties on behalf of the citizens they are supposed to protect. But somehow, when it comes time to holding them accountable for misdeeds carried out in the course of their professional duties, they are held apart from other humans. At least one side of this imbalance should be rectified.
I see a lot of knee jerk reactions in the thread but I actually don't see why you wouldn't be okay with this if you're already okay with police having guns. I believe there is a more nuanced view point here. A few points: - This is about remote controlled guns. A human is still making the decision and all of the same rules and oversight apply. You can make an argument for existing oversight is insufficient but that i…
Compare, for example, the US using video game controllers to pilot drones in Afghanistan. One wonders how many botched drone missions wouldn't have been performed in the first place had the operators been physically present in the areas they were attacking.