5 ms·

I have a hard time believing it is a good negotiation tool. It sounds like something that would escalate things quickly. There is a reason why the negotiators

I have a hard time believing it is a good negotiation tool. It sounds like something that would escalate things quickly. There is a reason why the negotiators on SWAT teams are explicitly referred to as “human negotiators”, and not just “negotiators”. The qualifier “human” has been intently stated for years.

Alupis 6y ago
It's a cell phone with propellers. It's still humans doing the negotiating. You didn't think we send humans into armed and barricaded situations to negotiate face to face did you? That would be incredibly dangerous.
- disabled 6y ago
  Using some abstract device that comes out of nowhere and can also injure the criminal, for negotiation, is an open invitation for escalation. There is a reason why human negotiators use normal human communication tools (ie phone or megaphone) to deescalate the situation.
  - Alupis 6y ago
    This is a device to use when traditional negotiation techniques fail, and/or to find out the condition/location of the suspect for medical attention, or prior to breaching when all else fails. It's another tool designed to keep people safe (both good guys and bad). As an aside, I think you've read far too deeply into titles. Nobody emphisizes the "human" title, because there's literally no other way to negotiate. In fact, their actual titles are often Hostage Negotiator or Crisis Negotiator. This isn't CSI Miami nor Law and Order.
- underwater 6y ago
  Sending an incredibly loud robot smashing through someones window seems like the worst possible way to start a negotiation. Is a highly agitated suspect really going to negotiate via this thing?
  - Alupis 6y ago
    Who said they're starting with this bot?
    - candiodari 6y ago
      Everybody who realizes what comes after a swat team member shouts "oh cool" after seeing this thing. Then in 5 years some bean counter that decides a robot with lethal weapons is cheaper to use for speeding tickets than an actual officer. This is the same police force that use bugs and wiretaps to figure out how to punish ex-girlfriends, and not even just on the ex-girlfriend at that: https://philly.metro.us/former-officer-gets-fine-for-spying-on-ex-judge-girlfriend/ https://philly.metro.us/former-officer-gets-fine-for-spying-... No worries, the police officer had good reason to bug her: she had "stolen" heroin from his car trunk ... And no worries, we have judicial oversight! Who does the judicial oversight? Well these guys: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/28/nyregion/brooklyn-prosecutor-accused-of-using-illegal-wiretap-to-spy-on-love-interest.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/28/nyregion/brooklyn-prosecu... But surely the higher-ups in these organisations have our backs, right? https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/oct/28/secrets-and-lies-untangling-the-uk-spy-cops-scandal https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/oct/28/secrets-and-... I find it baffling how people trust the police. They are not your friends, not even when a criminal is involved. It is far better to take basic (NOT guns) measures to protect yourself, and when you lose something to just accept it as a cost of doing business. You will be much happier. Frankly your self interest is always to comply with direct requests from the police where required (but still delay to absolute maximum, which for any written request is 2 weeks after a reminder), but refuse any and all cooperation beyond what the law requires. Always. Not (just) because they're very much not helping, but because any cooperation from you may cause the police to come after you.
      - Alupis 6y ago
        You realize your sources are from 3 geographically different areas - one of which isn't even in the US? Everything else you said has nothing to do with the article nor the drone in question. It's just conspiracy theories about cops, predicated off slanted facts from an extreme minority of police interactions. In other words... what?
ackbar03 6y ago
It makes an offer you can't refuse

Alupis 6y ago

It's a cell phone with propellers. It's still humans doing the negotiating. You didn't think we send humans into armed and barricaded situations to negotiate face to face did you? That would be incredibly dangerous.

disabled 6y ago
Using some abstract device that comes out of nowhere and can also injure the criminal, for negotiation, is an open invitation for escalation. There is a reason why human negotiators use normal human communication tools (ie phone or megaphone) to deescalate the situation.
- Alupis 6y ago
  This is a device to use when traditional negotiation techniques fail, and/or to find out the condition/location of the suspect for medical attention, or prior to breaching when all else fails. It's another tool designed to keep people safe (both good guys and bad). As an aside, I think you've read far too deeply into titles. Nobody emphisizes the "human" title, because there's literally no other way to negotiate. In fact, their actual titles are often Hostage Negotiator or Crisis Negotiator. This isn't CSI Miami nor Law and Order.
underwater 6y ago
Sending an incredibly loud robot smashing through someones window seems like the worst possible way to start a negotiation. Is a highly agitated suspect really going to negotiate via this thing?
- Alupis 6y ago
  Who said they're starting with this bot?
  - candiodari 6y ago
    Everybody who realizes what comes after a swat team member shouts "oh cool" after seeing this thing. Then in 5 years some bean counter that decides a robot with lethal weapons is cheaper to use for speeding tickets than an actual officer. This is the same police force that use bugs and wiretaps to figure out how to punish ex-girlfriends, and not even just on the ex-girlfriend at that: https://philly.metro.us/former-officer-gets-fine-for-spying-on-ex-judge-girlfriend/ https://philly.metro.us/former-officer-gets-fine-for-spying-... No worries, the police officer had good reason to bug her: she had "stolen" heroin from his car trunk ... And no worries, we have judicial oversight! Who does the judicial oversight? Well these guys: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/28/nyregion/brooklyn-prosecutor-accused-of-using-illegal-wiretap-to-spy-on-love-interest.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/28/nyregion/brooklyn-prosecu... But surely the higher-ups in these organisations have our backs, right? https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/oct/28/secrets-and-lies-untangling-the-uk-spy-cops-scandal https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/oct/28/secrets-and-... I find it baffling how people trust the police. They are not your friends, not even when a criminal is involved. It is far better to take basic (NOT guns) measures to protect yourself, and when you lose something to just accept it as a cost of doing business. You will be much happier. Frankly your self interest is always to comply with direct requests from the police where required (but still delay to absolute maximum, which for any written request is 2 weeks after a reminder), but refuse any and all cooperation beyond what the law requires. Always. Not (just) because they're very much not helping, but because any cooperation from you may cause the police to come after you.
    - Alupis 6y ago
      You realize your sources are from 3 geographically different areas - one of which isn't even in the US? Everything else you said has nothing to do with the article nor the drone in question. It's just conspiracy theories about cops, predicated off slanted facts from an extreme minority of police interactions. In other words... what?

ackbar03 6y ago

It makes an offer you can't refuse