Following up on the multiple sniper targeted shooting of Dallas police officers- SNIPERS kill 5 Officers in Dallas at Protest- SNIPERS!! Classic Destabilization Move We're supposed to believe that Dallas police had one suspect contained, right? Common sense would or should tell us that it would be good to ensure he is taken alive in order to gather more information on additional perpetrators etc., The plan. Who was involved. Connections to any organizations. All that kind of relevant, important information.Instead, the Dallas police send in an armed police robot to blow the suspect up!YUP! One couldn't conceive of a more bizarre move. Why would they do this? Now everything coming out of the DPD is suspect- All claims they make about what this suspect did or said are hearsay! Who made this decision? And, why?Use of police robot to kill Dallas shooting suspect believed to be first in US history Bomb-disposal robots such as the one seen here have been used by the military as a weapon, according to Peter Singer of the New America Foundation, but never before by police.
For what experts are calling the first time in history, US police have used a robot in a show of lethal force. Early Friday morning, Dallas police used a bomb-disposal robot with an explosive device on its manipulator arm to kill a suspect after five police officers were murdered and seven others wounded.“We saw no other option but to use our bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the suspect was,” Dallas police chief David Brown told reporters.
Clearly they had this man surrounded (the patsy?) Since they sent the robot in to kill him!Admitted: "Place a device on it's extension to detonate where the suspect was"And clearly they wanted him dead rather then alive!- Killing him makes no sense at all to me.They could have sent the robot in with flash bang grenades and tear gas then went in a got him- But they chose to execute him! Why???????
Peter Singer, a strategist and senior fellow at the New America Foundation who writes about the technology of warfare, said he believed this was a first. “There may be some story that comes along, but I’d think I’d have heard of it,” he said. Others concurred. “As far as I know, it appears to be the first intentional use of a lethally armed robot by the police in the United States,” said Elizabeth Joh, law professor at the University of California at Davis.
This is not the first time a robot designed with other functions in mind has been used as a weapon, but this kind of repurposing has until now been limited to the military. Singer said that in the early 2000s, a solider he interviewed repurposed a surveillance robot called a Marcbot with a bomb. These robots aren’t autonomous, Singer emphasized – the Marcbot “is like a toy truck with a sensor and camera mount they’d use to drive up to a checkpoint”. But this soldier had improvised: “They duct-taped an explosive and you can figure out the rest. You can see the parallels here.”
Late Thursday night, Dallas police attached an explosive device to what’s known as a “bomb-disposal robot,” rolled it into an area where one of the suspected shooters was holed up, and detonated the bomb, killing him on the spot. The move marked the first time that civilian police have used a robot to kill an American suspect on American soil, according to several legal and robotics scholars, raising major questions about the use of such machines in domestic stand-offs. “The situation definitely raises interesting questions,” said Peter Asaro, an assistant professor at the New School for Public Engagement in New York City and a co-founder of the International Committee for Robot Arms Control. “Who was controlling the bomb? Who was controlling the robot?” Not to mention: Was this the best use of force in this case? What does it mean for the use of robots in future instances?
It means the populace is being prepped for robotic "justice"- Drones etc., Technocray