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

[enhanced_deficit]

Do you support robots/drones use by US Police to kill suspects?
BLM movement had been quiet about escalated killing of suspects including many civilians/children by DGP administration, would be interesting to see if they will take a stance on use of such automated kill machines by US Police.



Micah Xavier Johnson

Army Veteran Identified As a Gunman in Dallas Protest Shootings

The Dallas police department used a bomb robot to take out last night’s sniper

On Thursday (July 7), a suspect involved in the fatal shooting of five police officers during a Black Lives Matter protest in Dallas was himself killed by police using a robot outfitted with a bomb.

The US government has been using automated machines to take out targets for years—think drone strikes in the Middle East. Last year, North Dakota even became the first state to legalize police officers’ use of drones fitted with weapons such as tasers and pepper spray.

http://qz.com/727153/the-dallas-poli...nights-sniper/



Related

Even the highest U.S. government estimates are significantly lower than death totals compiled by watchdog groups. One estimates a maximum of 801 civilian deaths.

Obama claims US drones strikes have killed up to 116 civilians

Long-awaited assessment of death toll under Obama, criticized as an undercount, acknowledges government does not always know how many civilians it kills

The White House and the CIA pioneered the strikes during the George W Bush era and dramatically accelerated them during Obama’s presidency.

Friday 1 July 2016

Barack Obama has claimed that droneand other airstrikes,his favored tactics of war, have killed between 64 and 116 civilians during his administration, a tally which was criticized as undercounted even before Friday’s announcement.

The long-promised assessment acknowledged that the government itself does not always know how many civilians it kills and that it may revise its death tolls over time.

The assessment presents the White House’s account of the death toll from a method of warfare that defines Obama’s legacy in many parts of the world. The White House released its long-awaited drones report the afternoon before the Fourth of July holiday weekend, having pledged transparency on the drones issue for years.
Yet the count is also incomplete, leaving out the civilian toll from drone strikes in Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq. Nor did the administration go into detail about where the strikes occur, citing what an official told reporters on Friday were “diplomatic sensitivities”, even as it presented the assessment as a significant advance in transparency. The Guardian has filed a freedom of information act request for records relating to the civilian-death assessment in the US bombing campaign in Iraq and Syria, where thus far the US military has concluded it has killed 36 civilians since summer 2015.

In 2013, senior Republican senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said that drone strikes had killed 4,700 people, some 2,000 more deaths than the upper limit the administration released on Friday.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ivilian-deaths






Has civil rights movement been tainted for embracing suspected war criminal?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWKG6ZmgAX4

Obama: US police shootings of black men 'should concern all'
8 hours ago
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36741336

Obama called "war criminal" & "hypocrite of the century" in Irish Parliament


Drone King's Victims Diaries I

Drone King's Victims Diaries II

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/201...-15droneC1.png


New Obama HS Chief: MLK would love our wars!
A top Pentagon official says the antiwar civil rights leader would support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

While You Were Debating Obama’s ‘Selfie,’ U.S. Drones Killed 13+ Yemen Wedding Guests



Ice Cube: Hillary Clinton Helped ‘Justify’ a War on Black People

[wizardwatson]

If he was saying he had remote detonators for explosives around the city, what's the alternative here? Even I was thinking if they're that sophisticated why not a tranquilizer dart, but if he's claiming to have remote detonation capability then he's given probable cause for drone/robot tactical methods. He probably thought that would buy him some time, telling that lie, but didn't account for the robot thing. Even I was surprised they did that. Never heard of that before.

[Brian4Liberty]

Yep, this was a "drone" strike. And it probably qualifies as the type that Rand Paul said might be permissible.

He was an active shooter, in the true sense of the word. He had already killed, engaged in gunfights, and was prepared, willing and able to engage in further gunfights. He initiated the battle. At any time, he could have made a move, and continued the fight. He could have been killed by Police gunfire at any point. The robot was essentially the same thing.

It's a much different situation than someone who is simply holed-up and refusing to come out. And that is the key element that is often missing in Police procedure and training. "I feared for my life" is elevated to being equal with an active shooting situation, but they are not the same at all. "I feared for my life" and/or "I thought he had a weapon" by itself is no justification.

[enhanced_deficit]

Understood the arguements of case by case allowance based on determination made by US Police to minimize risk to Police lives.

Even US Army / other agencies make drone use suitability assessments before making a determination if drone use is warranted to minimize risk to personnel's lives.

It would be interesting to see which stance BLM movement will take on this issue given the widespread reports of upto thousands of innocent people/children killed by drone kill practice Obama sharply escalated.

BTW, this Poll question is about use of robot drones by US Police in future to kill American suspects (where warranted) and not in this one specific case.


Ofcousre there is always possibility of mistakes in quick assessments/ Police ID'ing the wrong black suspect when they are looking for a black suspect.






Also, if allowed as a matter of policy, Police may use drones very rarely/conservatively (like George Bush administration) in one State/City and very actively/liberally (like Barack Obama administration) in another State/City. State Rights may also come into play.

[limequat]

Why is the bot built to kill instead of apprehend?

[Created4]

Why is the bot built to kill instead of apprehend?

Exactly! They did not want this guy alive and talking. A bot could have administered any number of chemical or gas agents which would have taken him down and kept him alive.

[fisharmor]

Exactly! They did not want this guy alive and talking. A bot could have administered any number of chemical or gas agents which would have taken him down and kept him alive.

"Knockout gas" is not actually a thing.
If you're talking about a pepper spray bomb, yeah, that would have done it. But you're right, that would have allowed him to talk, and dead men don't get to comment on domestic policy.

[enhanced_deficit]

Why is the bot built to kill instead of apprehend?

Police seems to be following DGP Obama doctrine of "taking no prisoners"/"closing Gitmo"/killing suspected suspects with drones
instead of following Bush doctrine of arresting/interrogating suspects.

[Schifference]

"Knockout gas" is not actually a thing.
If you're talking about a pepper spray bomb, yeah, that would have done it. But you're right, that would have allowed him to talk, and dead men don't get to comment on domestic policy.

[Weston White]

Where is information about the other three shooters? Why so much focus on just this one? Why is the police chief speaking only singularly with regarding to suspect statements?

Also this bomb-bot needs to be looked into, were the residents of Dallas aware their police department purchased such robots and bomb materials, did their city counsel approve this? Are police exempted by federal statutes from bombing, setting such lethal traps, and the like as are "civilians"? ...Was this equipment provided to the police by a federal agency?

[BV2]

Who would be responsible if a robot is used to kill someone illegally?

[Slave Mentality]

What a slippery slope we are on.

[William Tell]

Who would be responsible if a robot is used to kill someone illegally?

No one would be held responsible.

[phill4paul]

Like everything else some are above the law....

Isaac Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics"

A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

[Schifference]

do you support robots/drones use to kill suspects?

A suspect is not guilty and has rights.

[Suzanimal]

In Dallas, Drone Wars Just Came Home

Written by Daniel McAdams

The Dallas shootings have ushered in a very new world for US citizens. For the very first time, drones have been used on US soil to kill Americans without trial or charges. The suspected shooter in yesterday's tragic killings, US Army veteran Micah Xavier Johnson, was, according to police and press reports, holed up in a parking garage and would not give himself up. After hours of what police claimed were fruitless negotiations with Johnson, a weaponized robot was sent to where he was hiding and blown up, taking Johnson with it.

Get past the horror of what Johnson was accused of doing and think about that precedent for a moment. Is it not chilling?

RPI regular contributor Peter Van Buren, a retired State Department official who did a tour in Iraq, put a very fine point on the "robot" bomb:

Indeed, even without wings, this was a drone sent in to kill an American suspected of a crime.

Police claim that continuing the negotiations was pointless and attempting to capture him would have put officers at risk. He was supposedly shooting. While no sane person wants police officers to be killed, risk is something we are told they willingly accept when they sign up for police duty. There are plenty of low-risk jobs out there.

The media and opinion-leaders are presenting us with a false choice: if we question the use of drones to kill Americans -- even if we suspect they have done very bad things -- we somehow do not care about the lives of police officers. That is not the case. It is perfectly possible to not want police officers to be killed in the line of duty but to wholeheartedly reject the idea of authorities using drones to remotely kill Americans before they are found guilty.

African-American Dallas protester Mark Hughes was wrongly identified by Dallas Police as a suspect in the shootings. Police tweeted photos of Hughes marching with protesters openly carrying a rifle, as is permitted in Texas. Police claimed was involved in the shooting. He was a suspect just like Johnson was a suspect. During questioning they told Hughes that they had video of him shooting people, which was a lie. What if police had sent in a drone to take out Mark Hughes? What will happen in the future to a future Mark Hughes, falsely accused by police of being involved in a shooting? Will we come to accept murder without trial?

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives...ust-came-home/
Copyright © 2016 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

[phill4paul]

Flashback...

"I’ve never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an active crime going on. If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash, I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him…" Rand Paul

I'm not a heretic for posting this since he dropped out of the POTUS run am I?

[pcosmar]

Why is the bot built to kill instead of apprehend?

There is a question no media will ask.

[pcosmar]

Flashback...

[B][SIZE=3][COLOR="#FF0000"]
I'm not a heretic for posting this

Nope. I didn't like it when I heard it. and he lost my support.

well,, that and the Iron Dome Hoax.

[pcosmar]

do you support robots/drones use to kill suspects?

A suspect is not guilty and has rights.

Dead suspects have no defense.

suspicion is not even grounds for arrest. it may be grounds for investigation..but nothing more.

[bunklocoempire]

In Dallas, Drone Wars Just Came Home

Written by Daniel McAdams



http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives...ust-came-home/
Copyright © 2016 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

Police claim that continuing the negotiations was pointless and attempting to capture him would have put officers at risk.

What goes around. There's your law and disorder.

[phill4paul]

There is a question no media will ask.

Correct.

[Schifference]

Flashback...

"I’ve never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an active crime going on. If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash, I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him…" Rand Paul

I'm not a heretic for posting this since he dropped out of the POTUS run am I?

I wouldn't agree with killing a person exiting a liquor store with a weapon and fifty bucks.

[enhanced_deficit]

What a slippery slope we are on.

This sums it up.

Where is information about the other three shooters? Why so much focus on just this one? Why is the police chief speaking only singularly with regarding to suspect statements?

Also this bomb-bot needs to be looked into, were the residents of Dallas aware their police department purchased such robots and bomb materials, did their city counsel approve this? Are police exempted by federal statutes from bombing, setting such lethal traps, and the like as are "civilians"? ...Was this equipment provided to the police by a federal agency?

Little chance of getting answers to all these Qs.
Surplus gear from Iraq/Afghan freedom wars was being given to US Police in various cities and at least one of the cops shot dead had served in Iraq.
The extremist in Dallas shooting himself had served in Afghanistan and won WOT medals.


Quote:
Cops:
Brent Thompson, among those killed in Dallas, was a former U.S. Marine who had served in Iraq and Afghanistan to train local police, Fox News reported. The 43-year-old was a newly married grandfather who joined the Dallas Area Rapid Transit police department in 2009, the news organization reported.

Patrick Zamarripa, 32, who was also slain in the attack, was a Navy veteran who had survived three tours in Iraq before joining the Dallas police department about five years ago, Stars & Stripes reported.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...r-reports.html

Extremist suspect:
Johnson was a decorated veteran, having received a National Defense Service Medal, an Afghanistan Campaign Medal, a Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, an Army Service Ribbon, an Armed Forces Reserve Medal, and a NATO Medal, according to Military.com.
He also achieved the rank of private first class, according to The New York Times.

do you support robots/drones use to kill suspects?

A suspect is not guilty and has rights.

Dead suspects have no defense.

suspicion is not even grounds for arrest. it may be grounds for investigation..but nothing more.

This may depend on race/nationality/wealth status etc of the 'suspect'.

For example, many so called "liberals" in media/hollywood and probably over 90% of BLMer's support a drone gangster who has been repeatedly violating human/living rights of brown children/civilians in poor countries .. they certainly don't protest in public against such killings.

[Krugminator2]

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.

[69360]

Killing is killing. It's either justified or isn't. The device used to kill is besides the point. Killing this shooter seems to be justified.

[MelissaWV]

Killing is killing. It's either justified or isn't. The device used to kill is besides the point. Killing this shooter seems to be justified.

This. I have a problem with using drones/robots to kill, but it's not any more of a problem than I have using human beings to kill. Most of the time it's not going to be justified. Once in a blue moon it will be.

You can't have it both ways. If, in some of your minds, a well-armed citizen should/could have killed an active shooter, then it extends to a police officer or a drone. I don't assign them any special super powers. If the standard's met for you and your weapon, then anyone else and their weapon falls into the same category. Now, if your taillight's out, I'm going to have a problem with anyone shooting you --- drone, citizen, or cop.

[pcosmar]

Killing this shooter seems to be justified.

from one point of view.

[pcosmar]

His life is meaningless compared to everyone else.

hmm

I see this a lot

[kahless]

Kind of a loaded poll question since of course we do not shoot "suspects". In an active shooter situation or trying to stop someone with a bomb, then yes - so poll choice "other".