3 ms·

Bystanders. You can't bet someone elses life based on how well a taser may or may not work. LTL is a real dice throw.

by vorpalhex 4y ago

titzer 4y ago
> Bystanders. Also vulnerable to bullets, as it turns out.
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  There is a reason firearms come with sights and we make cops qualify with their service weapons.
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    That qualification hasn't meant much, going by the rate at which police hurt themselves (and innocent members of the public) with their own service weapons.
    - vorpalhex 4y ago
      I agree police should get more training. You will have to fund them more if you want that.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - woodruffw 4y ago
        At least where I live, giving the police more funding hasn't meaningfully improved their ability to comport themselves. If anything, it's markedly declined over the last 30 years (while their funding hasn't). I think an easier way to make the police more careful with their guns is to limit which cops can carry guns, and to require cops to live in the neighborhoods they police. People tend to be a little more careful with firearms when the stray bullet might hit their friends or family.
        zbrozek 4y ago
        That could be difficult in places with $8M homes.
        woodruffw 4y ago
        It occurs to this reader that that's symptomatic of the problem!
      - bombcar 4y ago
        Look up the rates at which a coo draws his duty weapon let alone fires it. And many places offer free range time and many cops don’t even bother.
      - JadeNB 4y ago
        > I agree police should get more training. > You will have to fund them more if you want that. I think nowhere else on Hacker News would the idea that "you're doing so badly at this job that we ought to pay you more to motivate you to do it well" get serious traction.
        vorpalhex 4y ago
        I didn't say give them a raise. I said fund them.
      - bandyaboot 4y ago
        Maybe they could start by selling all those military toys.
DiggyJohnson 4y ago
LTL = Less than lethal (?) How does a lethal robot mitigate bystander risk compared to a policy officer using lethal force?
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  Less targets. Robots can also physically go into areas cops can not. The robot getting shot is a budget issue, not a dead cop.
stefan_ 4y ago
People do not in fact immediately fall over just because you shoot them. The idea of shooting someone with a pistol or rifle caliber to stop them from doing something in a split second is firmly a movie trope.
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  And that is why cops get taught to mag dump suspects in center mass. Shooting someone a half dozen to a dozen times does tend to make them dead.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- tzs 4y ago
  If I recall correctly there is some interesting discussion of that in the delightful book "Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers" [1]. One it describes (unless I'm mixing it up with another book) involved someone getting shot at close range through the heart, destroying their heart. They still had time to draw their own gun, aim, and fatally shoot the first shooter. Another dramatic example, which I read about in the wonderful "Bloodletters and Badmen: A Narrative Encyclopedia of American Criminals from the Pilgrims to the Present" [2] is the death of the 1930s bank robber Baby Face Nelson. He got in a shootout with two FBI agents. They shot him in the abdomen. He then advanced on their position while they continued shooting at him, hitting 8 more times in the legs. Still he managed to keep going and killed one of the agents and seriously wounded the other (who would later die of his wounds, as would Nelson). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiff:_The_Curious_Lives_of_Human_Cadavers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiff:_The_Curious_Lives_of_Hu... [2] https://www.amazon.com/Bloodletters-Badmen-Narrative-Encyclopedia-Criminals/dp/087131777X https://www.amazon.com/Bloodletters-Badmen-Narrative-Encyclo...

Bystanders. You can't bet someone elses life based on how well a taser may or may not work. LTL is a real dice throw.

titzer 4y ago

> Bystanders. Also vulnerable to bullets, as it turns out.

vorpalhex 4y ago
There is a reason firearms come with sights and we make cops qualify with their service weapons.
- woodruffw 4y ago
  That qualification hasn't meant much, going by the rate at which police hurt themselves (and innocent members of the public) with their own service weapons.
  - vorpalhex 4y ago
    I agree police should get more training. You will have to fund them more if you want that.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - woodruffw 4y ago
      At least where I live, giving the police more funding hasn't meaningfully improved their ability to comport themselves. If anything, it's markedly declined over the last 30 years (while their funding hasn't). I think an easier way to make the police more careful with their guns is to limit which cops can carry guns, and to require cops to live in the neighborhoods they police. People tend to be a little more careful with firearms when the stray bullet might hit their friends or family.
      - zbrozek 4y ago
        That could be difficult in places with $8M homes.
        woodruffw 4y ago
        It occurs to this reader that that's symptomatic of the problem!
    - bombcar 4y ago
      Look up the rates at which a coo draws his duty weapon let alone fires it. And many places offer free range time and many cops don’t even bother.
    - JadeNB 4y ago
      > I agree police should get more training. > You will have to fund them more if you want that. I think nowhere else on Hacker News would the idea that "you're doing so badly at this job that we ought to pay you more to motivate you to do it well" get serious traction.
      - vorpalhex 4y ago
        I didn't say give them a raise. I said fund them.
    - bandyaboot 4y ago
      Maybe they could start by selling all those military toys.

DiggyJohnson 4y ago

LTL = Less than lethal (?) How does a lethal robot mitigate bystander risk compared to a policy officer using lethal force?

vorpalhex 4y ago
Less targets. Robots can also physically go into areas cops can not. The robot getting shot is a budget issue, not a dead cop.

stefan_ 4y ago

People do not in fact immediately fall over just because you shoot them. The idea of shooting someone with a pistol or rifle caliber to stop them from doing something in a split second is firmly a movie trope.

vorpalhex 4y ago
And that is why cops get taught to mag dump suspects in center mass. Shooting someone a half dozen to a dozen times does tend to make them dead.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
tzs 4y ago
If I recall correctly there is some interesting discussion of that in the delightful book "Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers" [1]. One it describes (unless I'm mixing it up with another book) involved someone getting shot at close range through the heart, destroying their heart. They still had time to draw their own gun, aim, and fatally shoot the first shooter. Another dramatic example, which I read about in the wonderful "Bloodletters and Badmen: A Narrative Encyclopedia of American Criminals from the Pilgrims to the Present" [2] is the death of the 1930s bank robber Baby Face Nelson. He got in a shootout with two FBI agents. They shot him in the abdomen. He then advanced on their position while they continued shooting at him, hitting 8 more times in the legs. Still he managed to keep going and killed one of the agents and seriously wounded the other (who would later die of his wounds, as would Nelson). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiff:_The_Curious_Lives_of_Human_Cadavers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiff:_The_Curious_Lives_of_Hu... [2] https://www.amazon.com/Bloodletters-Badmen-Narrative-Encyclopedia-Criminals/dp/087131777X https://www.amazon.com/Bloodletters-Badmen-Narrative-Encyclo...