Toggle sidebar

"Bomb Robot"

H

HighStickHarry_

Hall of Famer
Apr 21, 2006
63,219
120,160
0
It's quite a threshold to cross but was the right decision. It is now a matter of time before these robots are created to kill instead of just being adapted to kill. There will be robots with guns affixed manufactured in the next few years for police to use.
 
C

Cowpoke

Heisman
May 29, 2001
89,079
10,347
113
HighStickHarry said:
It's quite a threshold to cross but was the right decision. It is now a matter of time before these robots are created to kill instead of just being adapted to kill. There will be robots with guns affixed manufactured in the next few years for police to use.
Click to expand...

Next few years? I figured they already existed. I see no issue with them for standoff situations like this. Why is pushing a remote control button any different than a trigger?
 
H

HighStickHarry_

Hall of Famer
Apr 21, 2006
63,219
120,160
0
To my knowledge this robot was not built to kill nor do any police departments employ killer robots. I think automatic weapons will be part of the original design going forward and I think that is a significant elevation.
 
C

CowboyJD

Heisman
Dec 12, 2002
30,977
20,811
0
HighStickHarry said:
It's quite a threshold to cross but was the right decision. It is now a matter of time before these robots are created to kill instead of just being adapted to kill. There will be robots with guns affixed manufactured in the next few years for police to use.
Click to expand...

They already exist, we're already using them, and we're presently calling them Predator drones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trapped_in_tx, PDT816, JonnyVito and 3 others
C

CowboyJD

Heisman
Dec 12, 2002
30,977
20,811
0
HighStickHarry said:
police or military? I'm talking police. If the police are using them that is news to me.
Click to expand...

Gotcha....not Predator drones for the police. Surveillance drones for some police. I think we are a ways away from police use of armed drones.
 
H

HighStickHarry_

Hall of Famer
Apr 21, 2006
63,219
120,160
0
Accelerated now because spades have now been broken is what I'm getting at. Having armed robots has been possible for decades, but now it is a success and probably saved lives.

How long before a robot is the one approaching the car and retrieving license and registration and sending video back to the officer still in his vehicle? I would think the demand for this would be accelerated now too.
 
C

Cowguy

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
12,580
2,666
0
I just have to wonder if there could have been a non lethal application here ...
 
Been Jammin

Been Jammin

Heisman
Jun 26, 2003
66,122
49,038
113
Cowguy said:
I just have to wonder if there could have been a non lethal application here ...
Click to expand...

I'm guessing, but it is possible that their intention was to incapacitate the suspect but it ended up being lethal. Since this is not a commonly used strategy, they may had to make estimates on the amount of explosive and the distance from the suspect at detonation..

Here's a thought...This worked because the suspect wasn't expecting it. If this becomes common use, it will eventually stop working as the bad guy will cut down the robot as soon as he spots it (before it gets close enough to blow him up). Same if you try to use a drone, although, in certain situations, a drone would be more likely to be able to sneak up on the bad guy (i.e. approach from directly above if the standoff is happening outside).
 
P

PDT816

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
11,490
3,527
113
I think the victims being LEOs pretty much makes it an anything goes decision. They tend to expand the option set when it's their own.
 
C

Colorado_Poke

All-American
Jul 29, 2006
6,876
8,997
0
HighStickHarry said:
How long before a robot is the one approaching the car and retrieving license and registration and sending video back to the officer still in his vehicle? I would think the demand for this would be accelerated now too.
Click to expand...
I have to think that the biggest limiting factor would likely be cost.
 
MegaPoke

MegaPoke

Heisman
May 29, 2001
75,209
84,040
103
 
  • Like
Reactions: trapped_in_tx, 100TonsofOrangeFury, JonnyVito and 4 others
C

Cowguy

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
12,580
2,666
0
Pokes15 said:
Who cares. The guy was mowing down police officers. Better to blow that piece of sh*t up rather than pay for him to live in prison.
Click to expand...

I'm no bleeding heart. I asked because it seems there could have been some interrogation value here. Finding out now he had been doing some training and also belonged to some Facebook militant groups.

That being said ... If there was any chance that one more cop would be injured, well you just can't take that chance.
 
Been Jammin

Been Jammin

Heisman
Jun 26, 2003
66,122
49,038
113
Article in today's DMN says that the police chief considered 2 options. Sending in a team of men to overwhelm him or the robot with 1 pound of C-4 on an extension arm. The shooter was in a well covered position and armed to the teeth. He made it very clear that he intended to kill as many cops as he could. He claimed to have planted bombs in the parking garage, around downtown and to have bombs on his person. 4 cops were already dead (the 5th died of his wounds later). The chief did not want to risk more officers being killed from a raid or from bombs being detonated by the shooter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JonnyVito
MegaPoke

MegaPoke

Heisman
May 29, 2001
75,209
84,040
103
Been Jammin said:
Article in today's DMN says that the police chief considered 2 options. Sending in a team of men to overwhelm him or the robot with 1 pound of C-4 on an extension arm. The shooter was in a well covered position and armed to the teeth. He made it very clear that he intended to kill as many cops as he could. He claimed to have planted bombs in the parking garage, around downtown and to have bombs on his person. 4 cops were already dead (the 5th died of his wounds later). The chief did not want to risk more officers being killed from a raid or from bombs being detonated by the shooter.
Click to expand...

In this case I can't imagine having a problem with this solution. This guy was a terrorist not a liquor store robber.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JonnyVito, latimdj and Been Jammin
C

Cowpoke

Heisman
May 29, 2001
89,079
10,347
113
Colorado_Poke said:
I have to think that the biggest limiting factor would likely be cost.
Click to expand...

True, this would be several years away, but could be safer for both cops and citizens. The robot would not need to be armed at all. The cop is obviously much safer, and the driver doesn't have to worry about itchy trigger fingers.
 
C

CarrolltonPoke

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
5,996
3,584
113
Been Jammin said:
I'm guessing, but it is possible that their intention was to incapacitate the suspect but it ended up being lethal. Since this is not a commonly used strategy, they may had to make estimates on the amount of explosive and the distance from the suspect at detonation..

Here's a thought...This worked because the suspect wasn't expecting it. If this becomes common use, it will eventually stop working as the bad guy will cut down the robot as soon as he spots it (before it gets close enough to blow him up). Same if you try to use a drone, although, in certain situations, a drone would be more likely to be able to sneak up on the bad guy (i.e. approach from directly above if the standoff is happening outside).
Click to expand...
Based on interviews with the police, they intended to at least incapacitate the suspect and also detonate/destroy any explosive that he might have had with or on him. They certainly knew that it might kill him but I imagine their preference would have been to keep him alive. At that time it was still unclear whether this was a solo terrorist or part of a team. I agree that suspects may now expect this type of approach, but I would rather have a suspect trying to cut down a robot than putting more human lives at risk.
 
Been Jammin

Been Jammin

Heisman
Jun 26, 2003
66,122
49,038
113
CarrolltonPoke said:
Based on interviews with the police, they intended to at least incapacitate the suspect and also detonate/destroy any explosive that he might have had with or on him. They certainly knew that it might kill him but I imagine their preference would have been to keep him alive. At that time it was still unclear whether this was a solo terrorist or part of a team. I agree that suspects may now expect this type of approach, but I would rather have a suspect trying to cut down a robot than putting more human lives at risk.
Click to expand...

They used 1 pound of C-4. I'm no explosives expert, but if what I have seen in movies is accurate, that is a log of explosive power. I have a tough time thinking that they felt there was much chance that he might survive the blast. He did claim to have explosives with him, so detonating them might have figured into the plan.

What I am suggesting is that they can claim that they wanted him alive for interrogation, but it sure looks like they made the decision to do whatever it takes to prevent injury to additional police officers and that the plan was to take him down and leave no doubt.
 
C

CowboyJD

Heisman
Dec 12, 2002
30,977
20,811
0
Been Jammin said:
They used 1 pound of C-4. I'm no explosives expert, but if what I have seen in movies is accurate, that is a log of explosive power. I have a tough time thinking that they felt there was much chance that he might survive the blast. He did claim to have explosives with him, so detonating them might have figured into the plan.

What I am suggesting is that they can claim that they wanted him alive for interrogation, but it sure looks like they made the decision to do whatever it takes to prevent injury to additional police officers and that the plan was to take him down and leave no doubt.
Click to expand...

And I have zero issues with that decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trapped_in_tx, Winston Havelock and Been Jammin
1

100TonsofOrangeFury

Heisman
May 29, 2001
23,740
23,596
113
CarrolltonPoke said:
Based on interviews with the police, they intended to at least incapacitate the suspect and also detonate/destroy any explosive that he might have had with or on him. They certainly knew that it might kill him but I imagine their preference would have been to keep him alive. At that time it was still unclear whether this was a solo terrorist or part of a team. I agree that suspects may now expect this type of approach, but I would rather have a suspect trying to cut down a robot than putting more human lives at risk.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think all that C4 was more to deal with any bomb he had with him or on him, putting him down was just a given. I'm sure the decision-makers were considering the fact that shooters would be exposed to any explosion caused by their shooting him down.

Wonder how the robot is doing with all of this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Karsten Solheim
Been Jammin

Been Jammin

Heisman
Jun 26, 2003
66,122
49,038
113
100TonsofOrangeFury said:
Yeah, I think all that C4 was more to deal with any bomb he had with him or on him, putting him down was just a given. I'm sure the decision-makers were considering the fact that shooters would be exposed to any explosion caused by their shooting him down.

Wonder how the robot is doing with all of this.
Click to expand...

I saw, in the DMN article, that they had a pic of a robot and it said that the pic was of a newer model of the robot they used. I figured that meant that the older model was used (and sacrificed) since they had upgraded to a better robot recently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom