Robotic police dog shot, credited with averting bloodshed | Hacker News Reader

Robotic police dog shot, credited with averting bloodshed

theguardian.com

15 pointsbookofjoe11 comments

I fear it's not long until police use deadly force to protect a robot dog from a criminal.

In theory, police shouldn't be able to use deadly force to protect the life of a (biological) police dog, but they regularly do, and the courts accept it. The argument given and accepted in court is like this; whilst a dog is not entitled to the same protections as a human, the suspect attacking the dog caused me to fear for my life and that of others.

You could give the same argument about a robot dog.

Doubt it. If somebody attacked my dog I’d shoot them, but not if they attacked my hoover.

This scenario has almost nothing to do with a scenario that includes armed law enforcement.

You sound too reasonable, you wouldn't be able to work in law enforcement.

This fetishistic anthropomorphizing of what amounts to destruction of property is weird and gross. Is the language used meant to make us sympathetic towards the militarization of American police? Are we supposed to feel sorry for this piece of equipment?

It's not a robotic "police dog", it's a mobile surveillance and weapons platform. You know these things are going to have guns mounted on them eventually, if they aren't already.

I wouldn't mind tasers on them, but all interactions with the public should be recorded and available for civil rights watchdog organisations.

Good that no person was shot. Bad that this will bolster US police use of robots. Who knows what will happen down that road.

Metalhead

I am not sure robots being tasked with intervening in situations with potentially violent persons is such a bad thing. a robot does not need to fear loss of life, it seems like this will be a good thing for discouraging the use of deadly force

I've been watching a bunch of youtube videos about police activities lately and quite often the officers will cite their need to "get home to their family" as an excuse for some seriously unconstitutional behavior. Some officers place their personal safety above all else with law abiding citizens (and, tragically, sometimes victims) paying the price.

I say we have a RoboDog following around every law enforcement officer to record their interactions with citizens and, if possible, protect both sides from harm.

A fictitious corporate person expressed fictitious human emotions over the fictitious mortal danger that imperilled a fictitious dog.

Reading this article has ruined my suspension of disbelief in The Guardian.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com