3 ms·

How would a more violent arrest have solved anything?

• danbruc 5y ago
  Instead of moving the laptop you move the user. Unless the kill switch is connected to the user or you remove the user too slowly and allow them to manually trigger the kill switch, you may gain access to the laptop.
  • marvin 5y ago
    That's a very interesting proposition that looks completely insane to my European eyes, but I can certainly understand the philosophy behind it. So the premise is that if using kill-switches becomes common among criminals, we can expect suspects in computer crime cases to be apprehended in ways such as unexpectedly being hit in the head with blunt force trauma, gassed with anesthesics or similar violence. Seems like it would challenge some pretty central democratic principles!
• Ensorceled 5y ago
  The kill switch is useless if the accused is incapacitated before they could trigger it. No knock raids, which are inherently violent, to "preserve evidence" and reduce the risk to LEO happen about 20000 times a year in the US.
  • matheusmoreira 5y ago
    > No knock raids, which are inherently violent > reduce the risk to LEO I remember reading news about an american who killed an officer who entered without knocking. He was not convicted, it was ruled self-defense.
    • Ensorceled 5y ago
      20,000 no knock raids and, I think, two cases of officers being killed.
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]