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

101–110 of 225 posts

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

#101

Post by bigDinosaur »

anonexpat wrote: post #78
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.

Right, but the military can change the entire planet by invading Iraq (or wherever) based on a lie tomorrow leading to the destabilisation of entire regions and ramifications that will last not just for decades but potentially centuries. And it's arguable that much military abuse is actually 'held' to the higher standard as opposed to ignored covered up, or redefined (e.g. definitions of combatants), but I suppose that's another discussion.

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

#102

Post by cwillu »

bombcar wrote: post #82
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…

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

Don't ask for the bomb squad when you actually want the bomb removal squad.

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

#103

Post by chimeracoder »

treeman79 wrote: post #88
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.

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

Empirically, they don't, so this is a straw man.

It has literally been three days since the last mass shooting in which cops waited outside until victims had subdued the attacker before entering.

And it's not like that's an isolated incident either - it's the de facto standard practice, even though officially all documents say otherwise.

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

#104

Post by anonexpat »

bigDinosaur wrote: post #101
anonexpat wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Right, but the military can change the entire planet by invading Iraq (or wherever) based on a lie tomorrow leading to the destabilisation of entire regions and ramifications that will last not just for decades but potentially centuries. And it's arguable that much military abuse is actually 'held' to the higher standard as opposed to ignored covered up, or redefined (e.g. definitions of combatants), but I suppose th…

I think that’s a political problem, not a military one.

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

#105

Post by ethanbond »

MerelyMortal wrote: post #86
mattrick wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

And bounce in less predictable ways

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

#106

Post by random314 »

Alupis wrote: post #90
phkahler wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 vio…

Statistically how often does the SF police come across such a situation. What are the numbers from the past 10 years.

Surely, the SFPD has provided this data to justify the lethal robots.

> If you think police commit too much violence, then you should celebrate this.

So the SFPD won't be carrying any guns? George Floyd wouldn't have died? Sounds great!

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

#107

Post by Vt71fcAqt7 »

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.

>over-militarized

Can you explain what you mean by this? I've heard this term a lot, but it's not clear which aspect is the issue. For example, bullet proof vests: how is this bad? Similar with rifles such as the AR-15 - police already had pistols, nobody called them militarized for that. A riffle is just a more accurate pistol. I'd rather a cop have a riffle than a pistol for that reason: it's more safe. Beyond these two new things, I don't know what is new that should be called "over-militarized".

For the record, I'm not in favor of these robots and actualy I think this is an example of real militarization as it allows greater control by higher ups essentially turning cities into war games run by police generals. Police are meant to generally keep peace; a murder robot has a specific objective like a solder on the battlefield. I just mean this term as it has been used generally.

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

#108

Post by Kye »

petilon wrote: post #66
jef_leppard wrote: post #20

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.

How is that going to work against a target that moves, is possibly wearing armor, and is shooting back?

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

#109

Post by bcherny »

tvszzzz wrote: post #92

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…

US police already use force too often. Presumably, something stopping police from using even more force is that they too are human: they need to look their victims in the face before deciding whether to use force.

I worry what will happen if you take this humanizing, moderating aspect out of the decision for whether to use violence.

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

#110

Post by chimeracoder »

JadeNB wrote: post #99
treeman79 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that killer robots are a bad idea. Asking a cop to walk into an active shooter situation isn’t great either.

> 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 sid…

> asking them to perform duties on behalf of the citizens they are supposed to protect.

SCOTUS has ruled that police have no duty to protect citizens. "Protect and serve" is just a marketing slogan, just like "Don't be evil".

Post reply on HN