Will San Francisco police robots be authorized to kill?
The San Francisco Police Department suggests allowing robots to use deadly force in exceptional situations. The vote on the new equipment policy is scheduled for Nov. 29
San Francisco is currently engaged in a vigorous debate about the rights and capabilities of police robots. The city's Board of Supervisors has received a policy proposal that would give robots the right to kill. Of course, this refers only to exceptional situations when the risk of loss of life to members of the public or officers is almost imminent.
The SFPD's draft policy on new equipment has sparked resonance for several reasons. Not only does it officially give robots a license to kill suspects, but also excludes information about assault rifles from its inventory of military-style weapons and the maintenance costs of that equipment.
Aaron Peskin, a member of the City Board of Supervisors' Rules Committee, responded to the de facto legalization of murder with a key amendment:
Robots shall not be used as a Use of Force against any person.
However, the police department refused to approve this version of the draft and replaced the amendment with a statement conforming to its interests:
Robots will only be used as a deadly force option when the risk of loss of life to members of the public or officers are imminent and outweigh any other force option available to SFPD.
The adoption of a draft policy with this statement is a serious wake-up call for San Francisco. The robot use-of-force has never been officially banned, but it has not been approved by law, either.
Though Peskin initially argued against expanding robot powers, he joined the other members of the Rules Committee in approving the latest version of the document. In explaining his position, he referred to the SFPD's reservations and scenarios âwhere the deployment of lethal force was the only optionâ.
The new draft policy has not yet been voted on by the Supervisory Board, but it has already encountered growing public opposition from lawyers, journalists, and community leaders. For example, attorney Tifanei Moyer believes that such innovations cannot be accepted as a norm:
We are living in a dystopian future, where we debate whether the police may use robots to execute citizens without a trial, jury, or judge.
To date, the police department has 17 operational robots. Cops use these remote-controlled robots to demilitarize bombs and inspect potentially hazardous areas.
Police spokesman Robert Rueca states that these robots have never been used to attack anyone. After preliminary simulation training, they, if adopted, will be used to inspect suspicious devices, perform various tasks in urgent and critical situations, and apprehend intruders. Killing the suspect would be the last resort.
