3 ms·

When I was an MP (military police), they taught us a bit about escalation, wherein you only use what is necessary for the task at hand and reevaluate as the sit

When I was an MP (military police), they taught us a bit about escalation, wherein you only use what is necessary for the task at hand and reevaluate as the situation changes. Cops certainly do not need to be using 'weapons that belong on the battlefield' as their go-to weapon for any raid unless it is suspected that there may be body armored opposition (an absurdly rare occurrence - worth treating as an outlier). It would not be unreasonable to have one or two rifles on standby, in case a situation escalates beyond what was expected. I do not like this trend of increasing para militarization of the US police forces. You are supposed to trust a police officer. It is hard to trust someone wearing BDUs and carrying assault weapons - you are more likely to respond fearfully, which can often make things worse.

sneak 14y ago
> unless it is suspected that there may be body armored opposition You mean like in the case where someone deceives them into thinking someone well-equipped and violent is in a certain location? Swatting is a hard problem. We can't really put strong authentication in place because of the asymmetry of needing anyone to be able to report a violent crime in progress at any time at any location. And the anonymous report is, indeed, cause for suspicion that a crime is being committed, and if that anonymous report further claims that the bad guys are heavily armed and/or wearing body armor, that is cause for suspicion that they may indeed be telling the truth and the bad guys are ready to rock and roll at the drop of a hat. It's a sticky situation.
- derefr 14y ago
  You know, this actually, just this once, sounds like a sensible use-case for civil deployment of surveillance drones! Not pre-emptively, mind you--but when someone reports something like this, it'd be great to be able to send a robot ahead of the police to see what they're up against.
  - ceejayoz 14y ago
    Robots are actually frequently used to make contact with armed suspects holed up in buildings.
mpyne 14y ago
Well, I think we actually agree on what you say, though I'd point out I don't ever really feel awesome having a traffic cop behind me on the road no matter how awesome I'm driving. BDU's wouldn't make me trust him/her less, button-up shirts wouldn't make me trust him/her more.

sneak 14y ago

> unless it is suspected that there may be body armored opposition You mean like in the case where someone deceives them into thinking someone well-equipped and violent is in a certain location? Swatting is a hard problem. We can't really put strong authentication in place because of the asymmetry of needing anyone to be able to report a violent crime in progress at any time at any location. And the anonymous report is, indeed, cause for suspicion that a crime is being committed, and if that anonymous report further claims that the bad guys are heavily armed and/or wearing body armor, that is cause for suspicion that they may indeed be telling the truth and the bad guys are ready to rock and roll at the drop of a hat. It's a sticky situation.

derefr 14y ago
You know, this actually, just this once, sounds like a sensible use-case for civil deployment of surveillance drones! Not pre-emptively, mind you--but when someone reports something like this, it'd be great to be able to send a robot ahead of the police to see what they're up against.
- ceejayoz 14y ago
  Robots are actually frequently used to make contact with armed suspects holed up in buildings.

mpyne 14y ago

Well, I think we actually agree on what you say, though I'd point out I don't ever really feel awesome having a traffic cop behind me on the road no matter how awesome I'm driving. BDU's wouldn't make me trust him/her less, button-up shirts wouldn't make me trust him/her more.