Sfdebris.net

CmdrKing wrote: ↑Sat Dec 03, 2022 12:07 pm

Madner Kami wrote: ↑Fri Dec 02, 2022 8:14 pm So they're talking and thinking about slightly improved "Goliath tracked mines", while the crowd thinks ED-209, Terminators and Skynet. That's the same bullshit that lead to Germany not aquiring the number one weapon system used successfully in Ukraine today: Militarized/armed drones. Gawd...

I would say the problem is that, while the usefulness/ethics of an exploding drone are debatable for a military, a police department has no legitimate use case for an exploding robot, and the only possible applications are all police state tactics.

Let me remind you of your words, when you ever end up in a hostage situation, where blowing up a wall or creating a distraction would solve the situation. There are plenty of situations where a machine like that is useful. For example in a case of a controlled explosion of an explosive device and so on and on.

All fun and games until the cops drone strike a wedding.

Madner Kami wrote: ↑Sat Dec 03, 2022 2:40 pm

CmdrKing wrote: ↑Sat Dec 03, 2022 12:07 pm

Madner Kami wrote: ↑Fri Dec 02, 2022 8:14 pm So they're talking and thinking about slightly improved "Goliath tracked mines", while the crowd thinks ED-209, Terminators and Skynet. That's the same bullshit that lead to Germany not aquiring the number one weapon system used successfully in Ukraine today: Militarized/armed drones. Gawd...

I would say the problem is that, while the usefulness/ethics of an exploding drone are debatable for a military, a police department has no legitimate use case for an exploding robot, and the only possible applications are all police state tactics.

Let me remind you of your words, when you ever end up in a hostage situation, where blowing up a wall or creating a distraction would solve the situation. There are plenty of situations where a machine like that is useful. For example in a case of a controlled explosion of an explosive device and so on and on.

Are you sure adding an explosion to a situation won't have unintended consequences if use in a hostage situation.

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Fri Dec 02, 2022 11:45 am I would think that police institutions are tightening their conduct to give officers less discretion as to when to apply state sanctioned aggression.

I think they are more concerned with public relations backlash than actually ensuring the safety of either suspects or officers. Anything they do will likely be with that priority in mind.

Madner Kami wrote: ↑Sat Dec 03, 2022 2:40 pm

Let me remind you of your words, when you ever end up in a hostage situation, where blowing up a wall or creating a distraction would solve the situation. There are plenty of situations where a machine like that is useful. For example in a case of a controlled explosion of an explosive device and so on and on.

Why exactly is the exploding robot necessary for the former when setting explosives manually is an option with far less potential to be used in other, more abusive applications. Similarly, while controlled explosions are certainly a thing, are the proposed payloads on these robots actually the sort that are useful for that, with the kinds of bombs likely to be set by civilians, and are said civilian-grade bombs actually of a kind where controlled explosions are a better solution than existing bomb-diffusing drones. And for either, why are these robots being purchased for the SFPD and not a separate, multi-district specialist unit for bombing applications.

Like setting aside the question of whether robots are the best means of achieving these ends, the larger issue is that police departments are simply not to be trusted with such things. Past behavior of every PD in the entire US suggests their most likely use case would be blowing holes in the houses of suspects who refuse them entry, followed by using the exploding drones for crowd dispersal.

Frustration wrote: ↑Sat Dec 03, 2022 9:15 pm

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Fri Dec 02, 2022 11:45 am I would think that police institutions are tightening their conduct to give officers less discretion as to when to apply state sanctioned aggression.

I think they are more concerned with public relations backlash than actually ensuring the safety of either suspects or officers. Anything they do will likely be with that priority in mind.

Why would they be concerned about the PR backlash? Both parties have made it clear that cops are above the law.

Frustration wrote: ↑Sat Dec 03, 2022 9:15 pm

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Fri Dec 02, 2022 11:45 am I would think that police institutions are tightening their conduct to give officers less discretion as to when to apply state sanctioned aggression.

I think they are more concerned with public relations backlash than actually ensuring the safety of either suspects or officers. Anything they do will likely be with that priority in mind.

That's how things work. It's literally designed to serve at the whim of the public.

I get that you're citing them for buckling to superficial pressure at the stake of their officiated liability, but the public sentiment is an intrinsic part of that liability.

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:14 pm That's how things work. It's literally designed to serve at the whim of the public.

It's actually intended to serve at the will of the public, but that's rarely how things work out.

As I've said before: dying civilization. It's fundamentally the case ecologically, but it's also culturally and intellectually.

Frustration wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 4:43 pm

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:14 pm That's how things work. It's literally designed to serve at the whim of the public.

It's actually intended to serve at the will of the public, but that's rarely how things work out.

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:14 pm I get that you're citing them for buckling to superficial pressure at the stake of their officiated liability, but the public sentiment is an intrinsic part of that liability.

It's very much the will of the people that might decide that punitive or counteractive measures that impose some permanent or fatal outcome unto a person are antithetical to the foundations of a society.

Also @clearspira, I get what you're saying now lol sorry.

Frustration wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 4:43 pm

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:14 pm That's how things work. It's literally designed to serve at the whim of the public.

It's actually intended to serve at the will of the public, but that's rarely how things work out.

As I've said before: dying civilization. It's fundamentally the case ecologically, but it's also culturally and intellectually.

The police very much are not meant to serve the will of the public. They are meant to serve the will of the wealthy and be a boot to the throat of the public as the origins of modern policing are from colonial oppression and slave catcher applied to the imperial core and citizens.

The difference between meaningful reform and abolition is what you think should be done after dismantling the entirety of existing law enforcement institutions.