BLM shooting suspect killed by robot; do you support robots/drones use to kill suspects?

[Ender]

I completely agree, LE.

It's pretty obvious he did this to himself I'm not sure why only you and I see it

Yeah- how dare that guy look like a convenience store robber- what was he thinking!

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Robots disarm bombs. This is useful technology in a situation like this or in a hostage situation.

This guy has given up his right to life. He shot 10 people. His choices are surrender instantly or die. There should be no negotiations in these situations. You come out immediately or you die. Those are your options.

Killing this guy is like killing that gorilla in the zoo. His life is meaningless compared to everyone else. If there is any remote chance he or the gorilla could cause harm then that isn't a risk worth taking.

Not sure if srs or trolling or sociopath...

 

[MelissaWV]

Can't support this- it can turn into a nightmare for "suspects" and will infringe even more on rights.

Do we have any proof besides the MSM/PTB word that this was the shooter?

If a well-armed citizen is in the same store as an active shooter, that is one thing- to kill someone that we are told is the shooter by questionable sources is other. Now we will never know the details for sure. Sorta like the Boston bombers.

And where are the other reported shooters?

Would we have proof besides the well-armed citizen's word that they were the shooter? If the shooting was not justified, if the guy ended up NOT being an imminent threat, then it is wrong to kill him regardless of whether it's a person pulling the trigger to their face or via proxy. The next logical step would be to have *very* good cameras on these robots (which they do in general, because that's how the operator is going to be able to navigate them in most instances) and have indisputable proof available to justify a kill.

 

[Ender]

Would we have proof besides the well-armed citizen's word that they were the shooter? If the shooting was not justified, if the guy ended up NOT being an imminent threat, then it is wrong to kill him regardless of whether it's a person pulling the trigger to their face or via proxy. The next logical step would be to have *very* good cameras on these robots (which they do in general, because that's how the operator is going to be able to navigate them in most instances) and have indisputable proof available to justify a kill.

All this is valid thinking- I just trust an armed citizen stopping a robbery over po-pos deciding who should die.

An armed society is a polite society.
-Robert A. Heinlein-

 

[MelissaWV]

Yeah- how dare that guy look like a convenience store robber- what was he thinking!

I keep seeing this, and the photo/still that's posted of the guy's gun (sitting over his seatbelt, which is still fashioned, but off to the side). It doesn't look like much of anything to me, and if the contention here is the police officer is so observant that, glancing at a moving vehicle, he noticed that the person in this car in the middle of the day (which means glare off the windows) had the same characteristics and was in the vicinity of where they were looking for this suspect, to the point he was sure enough that he just HAD to pull him over... I mean wow that cop deserves an award.

In the audio, the man, purportedly the officer, says “I’m going to stop a car,” the man says on the recording. “I’m going to check IDs. I have reason to pull it over.”

“The two occupants just look like people that were involved in a robbery,” the man continues. “The driver looks more like one of our suspects, just ‘cause of the wide set nose.”

Of course, the people championing this as a good reason to pull them over seem to not notice that the cop says the two occupants look like the suspects. Both of the suspects were male. They don't really look like the boyfriend, which I guess is irrelevant. The four-year-old must have been the getaway driver in the original robbery.

Police have released few details on the shooting, other than to say it originated in a traffic stop and they recovered a gun.

Oh, wait, it originated with a traffic stop? I could have sworn someone earlier said the taillight thing was made up BS on the part of the girlfriend. Weird. And yeah they recovered a gun... has anyone been disputing there was a gun?

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Yep.

Article on this incidence:

This suspect wasn’t going anywhere. Had he made some attempt at escape or a suicidal charge, he would have been cut down by dozens of police rifle and pistol bullets.
...
He didn’t have explosives.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/07/mike-holmes/summary-judgement-execution-robot/

No guarantees that the guy would be "cut down" before he inflicted more damage. And he supposedly claimed that he did have explosives. Apparently he did have explosives at his home. Did they find his home bomb making factory before they killed him?

 

[Brian4Liberty]

My view. A robot cannot "fear for it's life." Therefore, it should not be used in a lethal manner. There is no reason these robots cannot be equipped to use non-lethal means of apprehension.

True. Then again, weaponizing the robot is another slippery slope. The key talking point with domestic drones has always been "but they aren't weaponized."

 

[Ender]

No guarantees that the guy would be "cut down" before he inflicted more damage. And he supposedly claimed that he did have explosives. Apparently he did have explosives at his home. Did they find his home bomb making factory before they killed him?

Now, the question is: did they really kill him? Any body been identified?

 

[JK/SEA]

Now, the question is: did they really kill him? Any body been identified?

he's in surgery now getting a face transplant, and new identity.

 

[Ender]

he's in surgery now getting a face transplant, and new identity.

Ah..........