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 ...
Okay, but just remember. When it is you or I that the JBTS have got treed, then we will get the same kind of raw deal.
Well I plan on obeying the law, so I don’t have anything to worry about.
Maybe, there’s a 0.0000001% chance that something could happen to me at the hands of the police, but I’ll take my chances.
Yeah those Dallas cops were real jackbooted thugs for killing someone who murdered 5 cops and wounded 7, and was still trying to kill more.
If you get “treed”, are shooting at cops and refuse to surrender, you are going to be killed. It hardly matters if it’s by gunshot or robobomb.
How long was it from the time he fired his last shot and when the police decided to kill him?
What difference does that make? He was still armed and threatening to kill more cops. They sent in the robot and gave him the choice to surrender or die. He chose to die. I’m fine with it. Why should the cops give him the chance to kill more when they had a safe alternative? Why does it matter if a cop pushed a button rather than pulling a trigger, other than it didn’t put them at risk?
Sounds to me like you sympathize with the perp more than the cops.
Exactly. Surrender or die.
I get that you (and many others here) are okay with the police taking upon themselves the roles of judge, jury, and executioner.
Johnson admitted he did it. The police certainly saved the nation a lot of drama, and the taxpayers a lot of money.
It is only my personal opinion that it is reprehensible no matter how vile the suspect may be.
That's not what they are doing. Killing someone who is armed and threatening others is not something new. If they killed him after he was captured him it would fit that description. Why should he have been given a chance to either kill more right then or get away and kill more later? That's just nuts. By your logic, if someone breaks into your home and is about to kill your spouse and you shoot him you are "acting as judge, jury and executioner".
This is why the question “how much time passed between when he fired his last shot” is important. It has been reported the police had been negotiating with him for more than an hour.
Did he really pose an immediate threat, or did the police, for their own reasons, simply decide to end it all with a (literal) bang?
When (if) the whole story comes out, then the world will know for certain f DPD took the law into its own hands.
Thanz
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.