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

201–210 of 225 posts

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

#201

Post by petilon »

neoromantique wrote: post #173
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So police officers should just carry out their duty and charge with reckless abandon toward the business end of an AR-15 like automatons? Wait...

Yeah, if we go down this path, then maybe (just maybe), introducing robots with guns isn't really the best approach.

Even a robot with a fake gun is better than no robot. If the shooter is distracted by the robot then the police have a better chance to take him out.

In addition to fake gun the robot should have a camera too, so that police can see him.

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

#202

Post by Fatnino »

The robots aren't going to get killed. They can't justify using lethal force because the robot feared for its safety.

The whole benefit of a robot is that no lives are put at risk. The robot just rolls up to the suspect while tanking a hail of bullets and subues him. No one has to die.

The robots should not be authorized to kill anything.

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

#204

Post by plugger »

spoils19 wrote: post #191
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo. The military is a tool wielded by the government. They don't go anywhere without being ordered.

Do coups not exist?

not in america, unless you count the recent bay of chuds attempt

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

#205

Post by random314 »

Alupis wrote: post #121
random314 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!

What is the point? They have to have had X number of hostages die in a year before we approve a remotely controlled robot? Even if the number was zero, being able to remotely assess the situation before risking your own life and/or killing someone is nothing but a good thing. Officers don't shoot people for funsies, despite the current prevailing narrative. We remove all risk to an officer's life, and we will get mor…

I see, so it is a solution in search of a problem.

Sorry about being misled by the funsies killing of George floyd.

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

#206

Post by nojvek »

Every time a robot is deployed by police and harms someone, even in a non-lethal scenario, the recording ought to be publicly available if someone asks for it.

If someone was shot in malice or incompetence, then they ought to face court and potentially prison time.

Police need to be accountable. They have way too much power in the US.

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

#207

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

petilon wrote: post #201
neoromantique wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, if we go down this path, then maybe (just maybe), introducing robots with guns isn't really the best approach.

Even a robot with a fake gun is better than no robot. If the shooter is distracted by the robot then the police have a better chance to take him out. In addition to fake gun the robot should have a camera too, so that police can see him.

Dazzler, bean bag rounds, pepper spray, camera.

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

#208

Post by runarberg »

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…

> A human still has to pull the (digital) trigger to use lethal force.

I guess you haven’t read up on the Milgram experiment. Humans are more likely, not less, to order deadly force when there is an intermediary between you and the victim. This robot will be another layer for the police to wash away their ethics and “follow orders”. We’ve already seen this with drone operators during the Iraq invation (which still suffer from PTSD despite never going to the frontlines), that they are no less likely—and even more if anything—to use deadly force on the innocent if ordered to do so.

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

#209

Post by runarberg »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #144
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…

For now. Israel has already implemented/tested AI driven non-lethal guns. It is a matter of time before it is normalized. Yes. Drones in Afghanistan ( and elsewhere lately ) truly taught us nothing about human nature and how we perceive danger. If anything, it will significantly increase it, because: 1) cops will demand more of them 2) they will get them 3) budgets will forever be increased 4) people that are trigger…

> > Maybe in theory,

Not even in theory. In the 1970s there was a series of psychological experiments called The Milgram experiment where they tested how far subjects were ready to obey orders. Turns out around 60% of subjects are willing to use lethal force against subject just because a scientist tells them to.

Unlike most experiments in social psychology, this one has been replicated numerous times, and in one variation they introduce an intermediary between the subject and the acting victim. Turns out that even more humans (closer to 90% if I remember correctly) are willing to order a deadly force if there is someone else that actually presses the shock button.

So our current theory is actually the reverse of your parent claims, and we have experimental data to prove it. Drone operators in the Iraq invasion can actually attest to this as well. Humans are more likely, not less, to use deadly force the further they are away from the victim.

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

#210

Post by l3uwin »

spoils19 wrote: post #191
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo. The military is a tool wielded by the government. They don't go anywhere without being ordered.

Do coups not exist?

Name a successful coup of the American government by an armed force
Post reply on HN