New Robot Technology Tested during Dallas Shootout

This post is also available in: עברית (Hebrew)

Last week shootout at a protest in Dallas has shed some light over the use of robots by the police forces. Dallas police set an unsettling precedent when they killed the shooting suspect with a remote-control robot, after a three-hour long standoff with Dallas police.

The Police used a bomb robot and “placed a device on its extension for it to detonate where the suspect was,” Chief David Brown said in a press conference. “Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.”

According to thestar.com, the device used was likely a remotely controlled bomb disposal robot, otherwise known as an explosive ordnance disposal robot or EOD. These devices have been used by the military for years to safely defuse bombs from a distance, and have been widely adopted by police forces for similar reasons. But while these devices were created to prevent explosions, this is apparently the first time police in the United States have used the device intentionally as a weapon.

“The technology is now being used as an offensive, weaponized equipment,” said Adam Molnar, a Canadian researcher who specializes in the militarization of police forces. “It’s a change in tactic, no doubt” he told thestar.com.

According to Defense One, that use of a robot raises questions about the way police adopt and use new technologies. While many police forces have adopted robots—or, more accurately, remote-controlled devices — for uses like bomb detonation or delivery of non-lethal force like tear gas, using one to kill a suspect is at least highly unusual and quite possibly unprecedented.

Seth Stoughton, an assistant professor of law at the University of South Carolina who is a former police officer and expert on police methods said “this is sort of a new horizon for police technology. Robots have been around for a while, but using them to deliver lethal force raises some new issues.”

Robotics expert Peter Singer of New America said he doesn’t think Dallas’s decision is particularly novel from a legal perspective. Because there was an imminent threat to officers, the decision to use lethal force was likely reasonable, while the weapon used was immaterial.