jonny5
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2012
- Messages
- 27,581
- Reaction score
- 4,664
- Location
- Republic of Florida
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
The use of a bomb-disposal robot to trigger an explosive to kill the Dallas gunman has also triggered questions on what tactics are or aren't permissible by law enforcement:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/09/science/dallas-bomb-robot.html
How far should police be allowed to go to deal with a clear and present danger?
IMHO, they were justified - and it helps that no bystanders were killed by the bomb explosion. On the other hand, if the police were to have used a bomb or some other highly unconventional method, and it resulted in significant casualties among bystanders, then I think we'd all probably criticize the police for going off the yellow brick road.
When everything turns out okay, then you face less questions. When something goes awry, then everybody's going to Monday-Morning-Quarterback you.
It sort of reminds me of the waterboarding debate - suppose you waterboarded some guy, but it turns out that doing so saved a whole bunch of lives?
I think this is over the line. There has to be a way to take someone down without killing them. Especially when you have them trapped. SWAT has armor, tactics, special weapons. This seems like excessive force.
The use of a bomb-disposal robot to trigger an explosive to kill the Dallas gunman has also triggered questions on what tactics are or aren't permissible by law enforcement:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/09/science/dallas-bomb-robot.html
How far should police be allowed to go to deal with a clear and present danger?
IMHO, they were justified - and it helps that no bystanders were killed by the bomb explosion. On the other hand, if the police were to have used a bomb or some other highly unconventional method, and it resulted in significant casualties among bystanders, then I think we'd all probably criticize the police for going off the yellow brick road.
When everything turns out okay, then you face less questions. When something goes awry, then everybody's going to Monday-Morning-Quarterback you.
It sort of reminds me of the waterboarding debate - suppose you waterboarded some guy, but it turns out that doing so saved a whole bunch of lives?
A cordoned off parking garage in the middle of the night?I would like to see some footage of the explosion this actually caused. Until then, I think this sounds like a very risky tactic. I am worried about the police blowing up, killing, or injuring innocent people in the collateral damage. If there is a serious risk of that, I would not support this as a solution.
As long as this is used as an absolute last possible option and they can guarantee no innocents will get hurt, i don't see the problem with this.
I assume the explosives they are using are basically the size of cherry bombs and not, say C-4
"The robot used was the Remotec, Model F-5, claw and arm extension with an explosive device of C4 plus “Det” cord," they added, noting the weight of the charge was one pound.
Probably could have killed him with an airstrike and no collateral damage, alone in the garage. But that would have been rather messy. Kudos for creative problem solving. Of course the bomb was totally legit.
I would like to see some footage of the explosion this actually caused. Until then, I think this sounds like a very risky tactic. I am worried about the police blowing up, killing, or injuring innocent people in the collateral damage. If there is a serious risk of that, I would not support this as a solution.
The Dallas police used C4 to kill the gunman:
Dallas Shooting: Police Use Of Bomb-Bearing Robot To Neutralize Sniper...
But some see the suspension of his due process and the use of battlefield tactics as troublesome.
I hope they eventually release any footage they have. Not because I have doubts about the tactic, but I want to see the look on the scumbag's face.
The fact that they neutralized the threat, and there was no collateral damage, kinda demonstrates the positive potential for this tactic. I would like to see robots developed specifically for this purpose.
Ya, this is what militarizing our police force looks like. Congrats.
North Dakota is one of the first states to have law enforcement use drones in apprehending criminals. They may only use non-lethal methods such as rubber bullets, tear gas, and pepper spray.
I think in the near future drones will be used by law enforcement throughout the country. It would give police more options and not endanger police.
It was expedient, economical, and for the most part funny as hell.
Why waste a trial on that sack of ****.
I hope it was painful as he felt himself being torn apart.
It was a robot used typically to remotely detonate suspicious packages, not a T1 Terminator or even a remotely piloted mini tank.
Those robots have been around for some time.
They most likely jury rigged a small amount of C4 plastique to the end of its arm and set it off in his vicinity
The concussion alone is enough to kill someone as it breaks small blood vessel's in the lungs causing the person to essentially drown in their own blood
The guy was terrorist racist scum, I have no sympathy for him.
Simpleχity;1066062114 said:C4 is ~1.2x more powerful (faster shock wave) than TNT.
I imagine in this case EO technicians would fashion the C4 to deliver a lethal shock wave in a constrained area.
Micah Xavier Johnson probably died of blast overpressure (BOP) injuries.
I think the use of the robot was appropriate here if the shooter made clear that he would not surrender.
Simpleχity;1066062114 said:C4 is ~1.2x more powerful (faster shock wave) than TNT.
I imagine in this case EO technicians would fashion the C4 to deliver a lethal shock wave in a constrained area.
Micah Xavier Johnson probably died of blast overpressure (BOP) injuries.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?