Posted on 07/08/2016 5:10:15 PM PDT by Olog-hai
When Dallas police used a bomb-carrying robot to kill a sniper, they also kicked off an ethical debate about technology’s use as a crime-fighting weapon.
In what appears to be an unprecedented tactic, police rigged a bomb-disposal robot to kill an armed suspect in the fatal shootings of five officers in Dallas. While there doesn’t appear to be any hard data on the subject, security experts and law enforcement officials said they couldn’t recall another time when police have deployed a robot with lethal intent. […]
“If lethally equipped robots can be used in this situation, when else can they be used?” says Elizabeth Joh, a University of California at Davis law professor who has followed U.S. law enforcement’s use of technology. “Extreme emergencies shouldn't define the scope of more ordinary situations where police may want to use robots that are capable of harm.” …
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
- “Officer, where is the sniper?”
- “Bllooooowwwn up sir!!!!!!”
With props to Bill Murray in STRIPES ;-)
Not sure,
In one statement they said the robot deposited the C4 near the target. It could have moved away and allowed the police to detonate by remote control. Thus robot is still with us.
We have to watch the story.
First time robot used to kill a man and it was a black man; what could go wrong with that?
I think you would have more of a point if they had lots of arrows in their quiver. (Like Green Arrow). I believe they took the easiest approach and this is Texas.
When I lived in Texas I learned that Texas has a reputation for quick and sure justice. They were sure this was the guy. and they were sure several policemen had died, thus this guy was a cop killer. They did not need to waste a court’s time at this point. If they guy had thrown down his weapons and surrendered, then they probably would have taken him in. This is not totally clear to me, they might have had an accident with all that C4.
This is no different than using a drone or a smart munition. In fact, the police would be well advised to buy swarms of quad copters capable of carrying a grenade-sized charge. A gunman might be able to take out one or two quad copters, but a swarm of a dozen all sent in at the same time would be tough. Possibly a first wave with flash-bang grenades and only fragmentation grenades as a last resort.
Killer robot used by Dallas police opens ethical debate
No it doesn’t.
This is not the first time this tactic has been used. Soldiers in Iraq have mentioned doing this. It’s simply the first time it’s been used against an American citizen.
It does raise interesting questions. I don’t understand the negativity being pushed at Joh. That and that we shouldn’t let extreme situations set the ground rules is literally all she is quoted as saying.
Someone else pointed out that the perp had on so much body armor that shooting at him wasn’t doing much good. It took the concussion of the bomb to take him out.
I don’t know enough about body armor to know if that is accurate. I guess it sounds right. I’m sure there will be some sort of report or statement providing their reasons.
I do know it’s time to start debating the ethics of lethal robots in law enforcement since they are now being used.
The problem is that they set themselves up as judge, jury and executioner.
*********************************
No problem at all. The LEOs were doing their jobs in protecting the public as well as acting in self defense. The shooter had stated to the negotiater that he intended to kill more white cops and was still exchanging fire with the police.
The cops didn’t know whether or not he had a firearm so to keep themselves safe they sent in a robot.
************************************
He was still exchanging fire with police and said he was going to kill more. They sent in a RCV with some C-4 and detonated it remotely to save lives/injuries.
It’s a great idea! Just think...a new automated way to safely “take out the trash.”
You just gotta love technology.
Wow! I bet that robot had the new “vibro-max 6,000 weenie” installed!
K, thanks. Didn’t read that part.
Another poster said he was exchanging gun fire with the police so they sent the robot in with a cam and C4 explosives. I guess the MSM wanted the cops to charge the house like in a WW1 ‘over the top’ attack.
"Look, I'm no expert on this. Not by a long shot. The man definitely deserved death for his crime. But I, too, wonder why they didn't decide to wait him out and nab him."
So, what are you snarking about? Good Lord, I didn't say it was ethically wrong to kill an armed and armored cop-killer who refused to surrender after hours of negotiation. Nobody should condemn it from a moral or legal perspective.
I was asking about the LEO point of view in preferring a killing to a capture. They may have had excellent reasons. I read once--- once --- that the cop-killer claimed to have IED's hidden hither and thither which he could detonate. That would be an excellent reason to kill him pronto.
What puzzles me is that this point has NOT been pushed in the police statements to the press, and they're going for a "lone wolf" explanation, which seems pretty premature.
It leaves me wondering. That's all. I suppose we'll learn more in the next days and weeks.
If only the robot had a Coexist bumper sticker on it!
I have zero problem with the robot delivered bomb.
None, I kind of like the idea.
I would like to see the video that the taxpayers paid for.
That’s ridiculous. If an armed suspect is shooting people they have the duty to stop him. It’s not like he surrented and then they killed him. Why should more cops be killed trying to capture him? And what’s the difference between blowing him up by remote control robot, or an officer shooting him? None that I can see.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.