Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

lughnasadh OP t1_ixo2d87 wrote

Submission Statement

Arming robots feels inevitable. They would allow the lives of police officers to be protected, if the robots could face armed assailants instead. Russia's invasion of Ukraine has seen drones move to the forefront of 21st armed conflict. I'm surprised quadruped robots, like Boston Dynamics Spot, haven't been used more yet. The Boston Dynamics robot is expensive, but there are several inexpensive clones of it produced in China. Though a Chinese manufacturer seems to be working on something like this.

2

UniversalMomentum t1_ixo2iz5 wrote

It seems to me that one of the advantages of drones is that you can use them to apply non-lethal Force while not risking the human police officer as much so why is that not already more prevalent.

We should have pepper spray and pepper bomb drones and led high intensity spot lighting to your eyeball drones and maybe even taser drones before we have lethal Force drones though I am not necessarily against the idea does one of the main reasons that has police officers so lethally trigger happy is their training to protect themselves at all costs.

9

Man-EatingChicken t1_ixo38g5 wrote

Can't they just give them so super dope bolos or something?

2

manicdee33 t1_ixo453x wrote

Further reading:

Equipping drones with tools the police want to use but can't due to the threat of physical force against the police just means those tools will get more frequently used as the police force engages in a collective power trip. Give them the tools and they'll use them even in situations where use of those tools isn't warranted such as pepper-spraying a crowd that is already docile.

In NSW, Australia, we already have issues with excessive force but also no-cause strip search of minors. In Victoria we have police using lethal force that is no justified, facing consequences as severe as a stern talking to.

50

sethonomics t1_ixo5aat wrote

I guess they don’t test for intelligence in that department…

8

RauthTho t1_ixo5n71 wrote

And where does the liability fall upon a wrongful shooting? The city? Because I highly doubt they’ll take any responsibility. San Francisco is a cesspool of opioid addiction and homelessness, there is no universe where I see this situation playing out correctly.

88

xenata t1_ixo5yxi wrote

Just call it Skynet it's what we're all thinking anyway.

2

FuturologyBot t1_ixo634p wrote

The following submission statement was provided by /u/lughnasadh:

Submission Statement

Arming robots feels inevitable. They would allow the lives of police officers to be protected, if the robots could face armed assailants instead. Russia's invasion of Ukraine has seen drones move to the forefront of 21st armed conflict. I'm surprised quadruped robots, like Boston Dynamics Spot, haven't been used more yet. The Boston Dynamics robot is expensive, but there are several inexpensive clones of it produced in China. Though a Chinese manufacturer seems to be working on something like this.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/z3x1c5/san_francisco_police_propose_using_robots_capable/ixo2d87/

1

AppointmentMedical50 t1_ixo6385 wrote

Aren’t there 2 Robocop movies explaining why this shouldn’t happen

172

Cheapshot99 t1_ixo6t4h wrote

They aren’t autonomous, they’re drones that are manually controlled

6

Into-the-Beyond t1_ixo73ay wrote

I’m not sure this is the most humane method for solving the homeless crisis…

16

Ct-5736-Bladez t1_ixo8sk3 wrote

I get it, they don’t want to put officers in harms way in high risk situations but I’m pretty sure there are movies on why this is a bad idea.

1

captainmcfuckface t1_ixoawvx wrote

San Francisco:

Murder Bots = yes

Prosecuting Shoplifters = no

and this is one of the world’s most expensive cities why?

1

Beginning-Mistake-75 t1_ixob9y4 wrote

No, please! Haven’t you seen the movies?!? This never ends well.

1

sardoodledom_autism t1_ixoc9c1 wrote

Not tasers , but lethal force ? Sounds like they want to reduce the amount of poor and homeless

2

genericaddress t1_ixocepg wrote

Replying to lughnasadh (#657,149)

Part of Boston Dynamics EULA is that the users can't mount any sort of weapon on their robots. They've threatened suspension and legal action to people who mounted toy guns on their Spots.

8

Petal_Chatoyance t1_ixoco0u wrote

"I didn't shoot that child, the robot did!" - Police sergeant Whitey Bigotti

"Besides, the robot thought he was threatening-looking."

1

manicdee33 t1_ixofaj0 wrote

Replying to jordantask (#658,622)

We still have to prove that the operator was operating it. But funnily enough all the body cams failed at the same time and nobody can remember who was actually operating the drone when it killed that unarmed black kid.

20

Sentsuizan t1_ixofw6m wrote

Theoretically, cops would use this instead of themselves to go up against armed criminals. In reality, it's just another weapon for them to use against all of us. "We have investigated ourselves and found it was a malfunction. The officer will go on paid leave for the stress this situation has caused."

16

pickpocketsgetsnacks t1_ixog7e1 wrote

Because of course,it's to keep their uniforms cleaner. More sanitary to pick off and eat donut crumbs when it's not saturated with blood.

1

Spsurgeon t1_ixoj4fk wrote

Just watched 2001, a movie about an AI computer that decided humans are a liability.

1

fartiestpoopfart t1_ixopuvq wrote

crazy to think that they would rather build killer robots than have competent well-trained officers who are both mentally and physically equipped to deal with high pressure situations. then again why would they do that when they can just keep hiring morons (and psychopaths) and just send in the killbots when they get scared to do their own jobs.

wild stuff.

15

want-to-say-this t1_ixoq0w0 wrote

So we are to assume it won't be ambushed and the weapons removed?

2

xScopeLess t1_ixorcoc wrote

Good because they can’t kill over “fearing for their lives”

Bad because there’s an emotional disconnect between pressing a button and the gun going off.

1

Antares284 t1_ixotog2 wrote

Because police are so adept at using lethal force, let's make it even easier for them.

2

Delamoor t1_ixovs9s wrote

Replying to jordantask (#658,622)

Ah, so a cop, so... Zero accountability.

The US is a goddamn police state. Your cops already shoot an insane number of people, why do they need to do it remotely too? What a rotting shitpile.

5

FaitFretteCriss t1_ixoxylo wrote

Lets fix police accountability AND viability/reliability of robots first, yes?

As of now, cops dont get punished for their deadly mistakes, and robots/AI just arent that great just yet…

Lets fix those first.

1

Zealousideal-Ad634 t1_ixoy4p9 wrote

But can only shoot people if its feel threatened or scared, right?.....right?

1

Classic_Butter t1_ixp58vp wrote

Why does it need to use lethal force? It’s a drone. It can be equipped with nonlethal equipment and subdue the criminal. And if it gets destroyed, no big deal, get another one. No lives lost.

4

xScopeLess t1_ixp5ncn wrote

Replying to PitcherTrap (#661,849)

I believe the actual trigger is manually operated, but I’d have to agree that the line has been pushing back slowly so this is a conversation we’ll eventually have to have. Autonomy in policing will one day take over and we’ll have learn the hard way whether it benefits or hurts us.

1

proposlander t1_ixp6fa9 wrote

Replying to UniversalMomentum (#657,168)

That was my reaction too. Robots are expendable compared to human life so why would they need to use lethal force to subdue a suspect? Presumably if we can make robots capable of policing duties we can design then to be very effective at using non-lethal force to negate practicality all threats.

3

Splizmaster t1_ixp99eo wrote

Oh boy. AI is replacing artists, writers, software engineers etc how could we not predict RoboCop becoming reality? My dystopian bingo card is quickly filling up.

1

GeorgieWashington t1_ixpant6 wrote

Is this the same police department that used a woman’s rape kit DNA to arrest her?

1

theweightoflostlove t1_ixparpk wrote

Smithers, release the robotic Richard Simmons. Shake shake shake, shake yo booooty!

5

johnyj7657 t1_ixpawox wrote

So if a robot enters a situation why would it need deadly force.

It's not a human that can be killed it should be equipped with tasers, tear gas or other non lethal.

Seems like turning it into a video game is a bad idea. They will shoot then say ohh a software glitch did it not me.

3

PM-ME-RED-HAIR t1_ixpb4n7 wrote

The only ones who should kill, are those who are prepared to be killed.

1

Gohron t1_ixpd23g wrote

I know the robots in question are drones controlled by people so it’s not the same as an autonomous robot but I’d honestly rather deal with an autonomous robot than some fascist cop. My area has been installing a lot of red-light and speed cameras on busy roads over the last decade and while it’s got a bit of a dystopian vibe about it, it encourages more honest traffic conditions and eliminates encounters with law enforcement in place of getting a ticket in the mail. An autonomous robot that could potentially make a decision to kill me sounds pretty scary, but there is more than enough evidence to show that having a human in that role can go quite poorly as well.

1

lightknight7777 t1_ixpexj3 wrote

Might be safer to employ something that isn't afraid for its own life. Safer for civilians. Too much shooting first out of fear.

1

Acypha t1_ixprg3n wrote

If they’re not autonomous then it’s not any different than an armed cop.

1

bookweiser t1_ixptmmf wrote

Ah, this is going to play out great.

  1. We have bought Robots
  2. we don’t have money because robots are expensive
  3. we have fired regular workforce to pay for the robots
  4. we have less people for preemptive police work so
  5. crime is rising, so let’s buy more robots
  6. rinse and repeat

I mean in theory if we look at what happened in Uvalade a robot would probably have done a better job. So a hybrid workforce would be a good thing.

But… we’ll fuck it up because we only think about short term cost savings.

1

ParadigmTheorem t1_ixpu3od wrote

At least the controllers sitting in the van can't claim they were afraid for their life if they continue to murder minorities.

1

unclemandy t1_ixpuuny wrote

Ah yes, exactly the thing Isaac Asimov told us not to fucking do.

2

Pillowtalk t1_ixpx8dw wrote

Dallas police used a bomb on a robot to kill an active shooter in 2016. It was controversial.

2

Jedmeltdown t1_ixqdkkm wrote

They need to teach them how to turn off their WebCams also

1

Sentsuizan t1_ixqk0x7 wrote

Replying to want-to-say-this (#660,112)

It could be designed in such a way that the weapons are integral. So not like you just get a full Glock 40, but probably ammunition and maybe some components which can be salvaged. Still, an awful idea to make killer robots to use on the populace. It's bad enough that cops rarely live in the neighborhoods they patrol but now they're literally showing up as a faceless machine

1

wowdickseverywhere t1_ixqwgxw wrote

"They would allow the lives of police officers to be protected, if the robots could face armed assailants instead. Russia's invasion of Ukraine"

"police officers to be protected; Russia's invasion of Ukraine"

Did San Francisco just compare their situation to Ukraine? Did San Francisco get their power stations blown up by missles?

1

echochambers_suck t1_ixrk6yz wrote

For this to be a democratic strong hold they sure do come up with some whacked ass ideas of what society should be.

1

tatleoat t1_ixru1ou wrote

If we're able to use robotic precision that enables us to be super discerning and accurate then shouldn't we be able to use more elaborate but more consistent non lethal force instead?

1

mortonr2000 t1_ixrzrvh wrote

After that, maybe you could hook them up to the internet. I am sure they won't go looking at Skynet

1

Griffstergnu t1_ixs00yr wrote

They would only use deadly force if they feared for their lives. You know cause reasons.

1

quettil t1_ixu6ddf wrote

The SF police who have decided not to arrest anyone because crime is legal?

1

azsheepdog t1_ixwbrkd wrote

Dont they already do this, I mean for years I have been seeing headlines of gun discharges or gun accidently shoots... It was never the police officer who did it. The guns have a mind of their own. Thought they were using robotic guns.

1

nocofoconopro t1_iy2qjnc wrote

We have these now and many are called police officers.

1