The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
ND now allows POLICE to use WEAPONIZED DRONES
Poast new message in this thread
Date: August 28th, 2015 2:54 PM Author: Brass regret http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/28/north-dakota-police-can-now-legally-use-taser-drones.html
*serves warrants with weaponized drones* *retires with full pension at 45* |
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:02 PM Author: Brass regret (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644018) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:08 PM Author: vermilion chad senate aside from just invoking some shitlib boogeyman, why is use of force with drones unacceptable in a situation where the police would, if physically present, be justified in using the same force? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644063) |
 |
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:32 PM Author: Brass regret By eliminating risks to the officer, weaponized drones are likely to greatly increase use of force in situations that may not warant it. Further, ND police can now create situations where the use of force is justified while assuming zero risk to themselves. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644225) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:33 PM Author: blue school ...but the drone's behavior presumably leaves behind a lengthy digital trail. its no longer your word against theirs if the orders the drone received via computer are in a database somewhere. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644234) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:38 PM Author: Brass regret You've made a good case for cameras. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644257) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:38 PM Author: blue school I support both cameras on police officers, and flying police robots that can temporarily incapacitate people. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644259) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:45 PM Author: Brass regret I support cameras on police officers. Weaponized drones are just one further step towards complete police militarization. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644294) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:56 PM Author: vermilion chad senate what does that mean exactly? the police are already authorized to use force.
explain the problem to me like i'm six years old, without using the word militarization. |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:00 PM Author: diverse temple this argument enrages me. it's because using technology for these things is a qualitative change, not quantitative. our legal system developed under a certain set of realities - now those realities are being flipped upside down with technology, and law and policy aren't keeping up. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644374) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:05 PM Author: vermilion chad senate sorry you're mad bro, but it didn't seem like you explained anything just by saying it's qualitative not quantitative.
i guess pretend i'm five years old or like a really dumb six year old and explain again. |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:10 PM Author: Brass regret I can help with the quantitative part, bro:
1970s: ~300 SWAT raids per year 1980s: ~3,000 SWAT raids per year 2005: ~50,000 SWAT raids |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:18 PM Author: vermilion chad senate And this is demonstrably the result of technology, independent of the fact that almost no departments even had a SWAT unit in the 1970s, and then there were more in the 80s and still more in the 90s? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644492) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:28 PM Author: Brass regret Lol bro, the increase in SWAT teams = militarization of police. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644549) |
|
Date: August 29th, 2015 10:42 AM Author: mind-boggling dysfunction Cr. Swat shouldn't be used for much besides hostage situations, but instead it has become the norm for drug warrants. Fuck our sps country. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28648492) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:16 PM Author: diverse temple sorry if this is abrasive i have a paranoid streak hm take govt spying on citizens. decades ago that happened, of course, but it costed money - you had to hire a guy, and feed them and their family and give them insurance, and that person was limited by time and space in what they could accomplish. they could go to a house and shake someone down or do surveillance or whatever. that was expensive, and our culture and legal system set boundaries of what we were comfortable with in that context. now the govt can search your entire life with probably $5 worth of electricity. they can do that to tens of thousands of people, drawn conclusions with no public scrutiny, act on those conclusions, and create a private world of unimaginative, voyeuristic scumbags who are deluded into thinking that they're saving the world by judging your life the proper response to this isn't 'hey, it's legal because it was legal 30 years ago and those laws are the same as our laws', it's, number one, 'fuck the police', and number two 'we need to have a serious national conversation about it', and three 'nobody is allowed to use this tech until we've decided how we're going to use them' in the context of drone strikes on american soil, do you think our laws would have developed the way they did if the ability to shoot people from drones existed? would our process requirements be the same? probable cause? the entire structure of the justice system would be different, imo, so to pretend like it's just an extension of current capabilities that we're comfortable with covering with the same legal system we've used for 200 years and not a vastly different world where everything should be rethought - i think is a little shortsighted and, pardon me, bootlickery |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:18 PM Author: Brass regret 180 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644488) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:19 PM Author: vermilion chad senate Ty bro. Getting on a plane but I will read and reply later. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644498) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:25 PM Author: diverse temple (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644530) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:07 PM Author: Brass regret Equipment that makes it easier to use force tends to increase use of force incidents. For example, there were about 300 SWAT raids per year in the 1970s. It's currently closer to 40,000. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644421) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:45 PM Author: vermilion chad senate and by eliminating the risk to the officer and removing the option of using lethal force, they would greatly decrease the risk of death in use of force situations where the officer would otherwise be physically present.
and adding off what the above poster said, drones will force the police to have a video of all such encounters (can't engage a target with a drone if you don't have a visual on him) along with a digital trail of what commands were given and when that syncs to the video, which counterbalances, to a degree, the risk of more force overall.
i get there's a creepy skynet feel to the whole thing, but if you assess it rationally, is it really worse than the current system where dashcams are conveniently left off or incorrectly aimed and so long as you've got another cop there with you to back your story you can basically just call "they're commin right at us!" and shoot to kill? |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:46 PM Author: ocher hospital nobody ever said futuristic police state dystopia would be irrational (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644303) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:50 PM Author: vermilion chad senate i just figured the people who said that would be liquefied by the machines, refined into a nutritious slurry, and fed to the remaining survivors intravenously. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644323) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:53 PM Author: Brass regret You make a good point about nonlethal force being used in situations where a physically present officer would otherwise use lethal force, however I'm not convinced that it's worth it. The same arguments can and have been made in support of other military tactics and equipment being used by civilian police forces and I don't think that the militarization of police is a net positive for society. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644347) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:02 PM Author: vermilion chad senate i asked above for clarification on the "militarization bad" argument.
i'm not necessarily saying police drones are good, and i agree that it feels creepy. i just don't think "it feels creepy" is a good enough reason to show it's bad.
also, this was passed by the legislature. if everyone agrees that it just "feels" too creepy, they'll elect legislators who will repeal the law. failing that, if there's a constitutional violation here, by all means articulate it and have the courts throw it out. |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:52 PM Author: diverse temple (technology illiterate) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644338) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:54 PM Author: Brass regret (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644352) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:54 PM Author: mind-boggling dysfunction Jfc fuck our sps country (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644348) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:55 PM Author: Brass regret (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644355) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:01 PM Author: diverse temple (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644381) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 3:58 PM Author: Cerebral Twisted Plaza Cuckold Twist: The weaponized drones are union members. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644368) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:09 PM Author: duck-like tripping double fault *gets 5 years in prison for assaulting a police officer after throwing a beer can at a drone* (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644441) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:11 PM Author: Brass regret Lol (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644448) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:18 PM Author: Cerebral Twisted Plaza Cuckold (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644489) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:19 PM Author: Concupiscible french candlestick maker really tough guy (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644496) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:20 PM Author: vermilion chad senate (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644502) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:23 PM Author: deranged university (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644514) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 4:25 PM Author: diverse temple (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28644531) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 7:12 PM Author: Brass regret (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28645387) |
|
Date: August 28th, 2015 9:11 PM Author: Brass regret (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2975277&forum_id=2#28645977) |
|
Date: August 29th, 2015 2:27 PM Author: haunting goyim hall Wow.
This might be the year nirvanayoda's predictions come true. |