Strategic SIEGE ROBOTS defeated by 'heavily intoxicated' man, 62 In yet another sign of the continued supremacy - for the moment at least - of humanity over its machines, reports are coming in that a duo of powerful police robots has been bested in combat by an elderly American man who was "heavily intoxicated" at the time after the "strategic" enforcement machines attempted to storm his …
In the UK we are probably more likely to kill the robot with a golf club, tennis racquet or cricket bat as we don't have ready access to automatic weaponry and 1000's of rounds of ammunition.
Can't wait for the report from America when one of these is destroyed by an RPG7 or other anti-tank weapon that the American householder happenes to have stashed under his bed. Now that would be news.
Quote: "Can't wait for the report from America when one of these is destroyed by an RPG7"
That's Bulgaria, not America. I am to lazy to dig, but you can find it yourself - we had a guy arrested for threatening his in-law with a shoulder launched missile inside an apartment. He would have won the Darwin award if he used it of course and taken half of the apartment block with him too.
In fact I know how he got it (not first hand, this got retold a few times)- he used to trade books (I actually bought some from him a couple of times). When the ex-soviet block collapsed so did the trade which opened the opportunity for individuals doing blockade runs in vans and trucks to buy and sell goods. Funnily enough books were one of those as Russia was still printing the most accessible tech literature at very low prices too so they commanded a healthy margin.
So on one of his runs, somewhere near the Romanian border inside todays Moldavia a guy walks onto the road in front of his van with an AK47 and collects a "toll" - 50 bucks. Being a psycho (and ex-special forces) our "hero" stashes a handgun in the truck for the next run. On the next run he unpacks the gun ~ 100 km from the border and prepares himself. Same place, different guy walks in front of the truck - this time with a shoulder launched missile. Asks for 80 bucks. The driver grudgingly digs into his pockets (with a weapon like that it you really do not want to risk the dead-man trigger). After which the guy with the missile hands him the weapon and says "Thanks, nice doing business with you".
A few years down the road the same missile was (nearly) used in a domestic incident.
"Can't wait for the report from America when one of these is destroyed by an RPG7 or other anti-tank weapon that the American householder happenes to have stashed under his bed. Now that would be news."
No doubt will a statement along the lines of
"Hey, the 2nd amendment allows me to bear arms in the defense of my home. It don't way what arms I can carry, right?"
Of course you know it's only a matter of time before one of them has one something bigger stashed under their bed. At which point it really will be a case of "There goes the neighbourhood"
"At which point it really will be a case of "There goes the neighbourhood""
To be clear that is "There goes the neighbourhood" in the sense of being converted into a cloud of radioactive dust.
I suppose the other reason would be the notion it suggests America is a country full of trigger happy nut jobs will will inevitably graduate to home nukes.
To which I would say either accept that's how parts of the world views you or do something about it.
The choice is entirely yours.
Um, no, in the U.K. you are more likely to kill the robot with a long, lethal kitchen knife. That's how how you blokes like to kill each other without guns. A bit sloppier, as it takes longer to bleed out from a knife wound, which is why the U.K. has one of the highest violent crime rates in the civilized world.
Oh, wait. Now there's a movement to to ban long kitchen knives in the U.K., too (no joke). What WILL you use to satisfy your homicidal tendencies next?
[Broadcast Eclear, sent 1362068630.6]
xGSV Slightly Perturbed
o(unknown) Anonymous Coward
> What WILL you use to satisfy your homicidal tendencies next?
Sharpened spoons perhaps. Humanity's creativity knows no bounds.
They're pretty awesome when they're not killing each other.
" which is why the U.K. has one of the highest violent crime rates in the civilized world."
Funny how "violent crime" and "homicide" are different. See, *because* knives are less lethal, there may be more *attempted* homicides but far fewer *successful* homicides. The difference is that in one of these, they can fix you up and put you back on the street, raising your kids or *whatever* it is you do in life (selling coke and stabbing people perhaps, after your lengthy prison term). The end consequences are different, as a result.
I don't think it's to do with availability of guns at all, it's just violent culture.
As in, TV, films etc. The worship of stylised ultra-violence above all else.
Canada and Switzerland have just as many guns ..... many countries have whole populations that have to do national service and pretty much all know how to use a gun, but don't.
TV cop films look increasingly like braindead fascists in trendy designer clothes ....
and as for army-themed films .... well, Leni Riefenstahl springs to mind, especially the more "sophisticated" recent films.
With the possible honorable exception of Jarheads, at least they tried to show it as it is.
TV cop films look increasingly like braindead fascists in trendy designer clothes ....
Yeah like the way the 'heros' are depicted pressurising employees to reveal customer details "Because you don't want the hassle of us with a warrant" or the classic "I think I heard a noise inside, we'd better go in".
I bet half the the audience just nods its head sagely thinking 'Anything to catch the plebs'. 'Cause of course the officers only do it when they know the perp is guilty anyway.
As in, TV, films etc. The worship of stylised ultra-violence above all else.
If that holds, then Indonesia should cook off pretty nicely then! I just watched this movie, "The Raid: Redemption" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1899353/ -> Solid Action, decent acting - and - stuck on "Ultra Violence" all the way, maybe 10 minutes of soppy'ness in total. Japan is big on tentacle rape - e.t.c.
I don't think media drives it. Someone proposed lead poisoning as the hidden driver behind US violence.
"Um, no, in the U.K. you are more likely to kill the robot with a long, lethal kitchen knife. That's how how you blokes like to kill each other without guns. A bit sloppier, as it takes longer to bleed out from a knife wound, which is why the U.K. has one of the highest violent crime rates in the civilized world."
And too scared to post with your name on a UK website.
That's a ROTLFAO moment.
But seriously do you know anything about murder and crime rates in the G20?
But recently I heard Americans are trying to do something about this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr8PQDoZXSo
@ anonymous, knife wielding troll.
No one's going to ban long knives, how would our dear Queen knight someone if she couldn't hit him with a sword. It's the carrying of dangerous items, such as long knives, in a public place with intent to use as an offensive weapon* that is illegal - as it is in other European countries and probably also in the US of A.
Yes, punch-ups and such have been remarked on by shocked visitors to Blighty for a long time. Probably not a good characteristic but nevertheless we do seem to actually kill fewer of our people than some other civilisations.
* something like that - IANAL.
A problem that robots will always have is that they (or their operators) do not have a reasonable claim to self-defence. If police officers go in and get shot at, they can reasonably shoot back to defend their lives. If a robot gets shot at, they have no "life" as such to defend, so they (or their operators) are less likely to shoot back unless they become aware of an actual threat to a life. The robot is mainly going to end up being used for reconnaissance, trying to talk the guy down, or at best a tasering. Taser vs bullets, I'd bet on the bullets.
"If a robot gets shot at, they have no "life" as such to defend."
But then the guy adds one to his tab, something on the line of "destruction of public property" or "attempt to dest...." or something like it, right? Resisting arrest is already there, right?
Rather than spray these robots with bullets it might make more sense to spray them with "paint" or drape a towel overs their eyes ( webcam).....
Blinding a robot renders it ll but useless **.
**( Unless they are also equiped with volumetric, heat detection or vibration detection sensors, then you would have to push them over or short circuit them)
Being 'heavily intoxicated' may be a very good way of gaining an advantage over the machines. Their internal assessment and prediction algorithms wouldn't be able to cope well with a drunken adversary.
"Dad, the machines are coming." "Ok son, take the whiskey bottle to your mother and bring me the crystal meth."
Was this ever actually tried in say an episode of Doctor Who? I'm not too well versed in the Whoniverse, being a Star Trek fan myself, but the incident piques my curiosity to wonder if a Dalek or two just couldn't get their weapons on target because the target kept lurching around drunk.
I'm a bit mystified that you can get booked for vandalising a trespasser: the man has obviously not let the robot in his house, I doubt he has had a warrant put in his hand --- so it's an illegal intruder.
A bit the same like dogs biting UK postmen on private property, they don't have to be put down as they're doing their duty. Clearly that law needs changing; but someone violently breaking in your house seems a legitimate target.
"Vandalising government property?
I'm a bit mystified that you can get booked for vandalising a trespasser: the man has obviously not let the robot in his house, I doubt he has had a warrant put in his hand --- so it's an illegal intruder."
That's not how the law works.
The guy was drunk and waving a firearm around. That's more than enough legal cause to kick in the door and taser the guy.
That's not how the law works.
The guy was drunk and waving a firearm around. That's more than enough legal cause to kick in the door and taser the guy.
Hmm. It depends if the robot in question made itself known as controlled by law enforcement. I personally would have assumed the kid next door had upmodded their robot grass mower unless it had clear signs to say otherwise (maybe a blue flashing light or something) and would thus feel free to consider it fair game for demolition if I had the idea it was about to endanger me. I have no idea what these things look like, but you are not compelled to assume the sender is law enforcement unless it makes it clear in one way or the other.
It's actually an interesting question: what is the status of remote controlled kit? Does it have powers of arrest? Can it Mirandise you by loudhailer? Who is guilty if it backs up over the neighbour's kid? Or their dog?
"Hmm. It depends if the robot in question made itself known as controlled by law enforcement."
You don't think that maybe there was at least half a dozen police vehicles parked outside with lights going and people with megaphones saying "Put the gun down you maniac. We're the police and you're a crazy-a$$ SOB"?
"and would thus feel free to consider it fair game for demolition if I had the idea it was about to endanger me."
Ignorance of the law is not a legitimate justification for breaking it. "I didn't know that shooting something is illegal" makes it no less illegal.
"It's actually an interesting question: what is the status of remote controlled kit? Does it have powers of arrest? Can it Mirandise you by loudhailer?"
It wouldn't need to. Miranda is read *after* someone is taken into custody, but *before* interrogation. There's also a public safety waiver, where a subject might be asked a question prior to reading if public safety is endangered.
> Ignorance of the law is not a legitimate justification for breaking it
That's a red herring.
If an intruder is not identified as a cop, he's fair game. End of story. That's how these "stand your ground" laws get created. People hear horror stories from California or the UK and think they need extra legal protections because liberal idiots in another jurisdiction entirely are willing to put up with nonsense.
People hear these "you must flee your home" stories with relevant members of the peanut gallery chiming in their full support and an obvious backlash ensues.
"That's a red herring. If an intruder is not identified as a cop, he's fair game. End of story."
No it's not. Think about it for a moment. Do you for a second genuinely think that the police quietly rolled up unannounced and slipped a disguised robot silently into this guys house without at any point before-hand telling him to get the hell out because the police were outside and they wanted him to come out.
For comparison, imagine a hostage situation where a SWAT team sneak in. The hostage-taker sees them before they start shouting and guns them down. Do you for a *second* thing that 'stand your ground' laws would be any kind of legal defence. Really?
I'm a bit mystified that you can get booked for vandalising
Perhaps it's along similar lines to the idea that leads to people wrongly banged up being charged for room and board for their incarceration. Perhaps in the future we'll be charged for wear and tear on handcuffs and if you get shot you have to pay for the ammunition :-/
I can't help wondering if the bot was built by those two arseholes from Battle Machine Brothers.
Perhaps they should have went for something that was made in China.
As for mini skirts, they had to fit those to the old RUC landrovers as a beer barrel and some scaffolding poles where commonly used to tip those over.
Pass me my drivin' whiskey woman I'm going to work
quote: "world of difference between a .22 calibre weapon and a .223 calibre weapon."
Pfft, rounding errors... what is .223 to 2 decimal places? ;)
We both know that there is a world of difference between a .22 handgun and 5.56mm NATO, but that's in the cartridge size, propellant loading and projectile makeup, not the calibre per se ;)
Same goes for the much hyped Desert Eagle .50 cal, vs a .50 BMG intended for an M87... two different kettle of fish entirely, and they are theoretically identical calibre.
> Pfft, rounding errors... what is .223 to 2 decimal places? ;)
It means that the guys that actually know what they are talking about called you out on your obvious lack of precision. Computing isn't the only area where minute differences matter.
Although you usually don't get sent to the sand pit with the rest of your platoon for misplacing a semi-colon.
quote: "It means that the guys that actually know what they are talking about called you out on your obvious lack of precision. Computing isn't the only area where minute differences matter."
Fair enough, to be more precise I make 5.56/25.4 to be 0.21890" (rounded to 5 places). Not only is that not .223, it's also the other side of .22 entirely. Looks like "lack of precision" is endemic in the ammunition specs as well as my posts, since the NATO "5.56mm" cartridge should really be called the 5.66mm (5.6642 exactly), given it is based on the Remington .223 ;)
On top of sending him to jail, with a plea sentence of 246 years, he'll have to pay damages of 64 million USD to have the cops repaired.
we may laugh, but THEY are coming. Every action like this is a precious educational ground for people designing and building those machines. We're digging our own grave, as yet, manually.
This used to be a 'lost' Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy episode linking the first to the second radio series. It was only broadcast twice originally, and then disappeared from the airways as it was neither in series 1 nor series 2. I recorded it
It's since made it into the CD collections fortunately.
What I like is when Marvin is left to delay a Frogstar D. Can you guess with what weapons? Something pretty devestating surely? No, nothing.
IIRC, his last comment as the Hitch-Hikers offices collapse around him after being destroyed by a neutron-ram is "What a depressingly stupid robot"
>IIRC, his last comment as the Hitch-Hikers offices collapse around him after being destroyed by a
>neutron-ram is "What a depressingly stupid robot"
"What a depressingly stupid machine"
</pedant>
...mine's the one with the 6-cassette recording of the radio series in the pocket. And the full H2G2 scripts that I was given as a birthday present a couple of years ago, but still haven't read completely (yet).
"We all know the real reason they called in the robot team...
Neither of the first responders were going to fit through the doorway."
You're not sure suggesting the average American police officer is a wobblebottom little broader in the beam than is convenient for getting through the average door are you?
According to this article the "dangerous ordinance" was a 75 round drum magazine presumably for an AK type weapon. The pistol was likely too ordinary to bother naming since we all know that if it was the latest super wiz-bang it would certainly have been plastered all over the national nightly news.
As to subduing the gent, they tased him bro.
someone makes the joking assumption that he has something as expensive and (since they refuse to sell them to "civilians" because we're not high-speed, low-drag tacticool hardcore operator enough for them) unobtainable, all the usual suspects treat it as truth and launch on their anti-constitutional diatribes.
My wager is, with police exaggeration what it is, that the guy had a .22 (small caliber) rimfire pistol, using pretty much the same cartridge that kids have been using to plink cans for over a hundred years. Hell, maybe he even had the uber-scary .22 magnum, a slightly newer and weightier rimfire cartridge which does not have any real armor piercing capability, less than that of a good Sikes-Fairbairn commando dagger.
the sad fact is, most police "robots" can be disabled with a Red Ryder BB gun.
But let's believe the cops when they complain about guns, even tho we won't believe them when they talk about drugs, gangs, illegals and #Occupy deviants.
"My wager is, with police exaggeration what it is, that the guy had a .22 (small caliber) rimfire pistol, using pretty much the same cartridge that kids have been using to plink cans for over a hundred years. Hell, maybe he even had the uber-scary .22 magnum"
So? That's still a guy with a firearm who was clearly willing to shoot shit up. I don't know what you had for breakfast, but I'd still be unwilling to get shot in the face with a 'wimpy' .22. If you tell me to go into a house and arrest someone because they've 'only' got a .22, I'd still prefer a hunk of metal to get shot than myself.
I have no problem them sending in a robot rather than risk getting shot. Or with throwing the book at the guy afterwards.
The first (fictional dramatic) defeat of a Robo-Cop that I can recalled occurred in an episode of U.S. TV series Hill Street Blues. Actor Dennis Franz, had two roles in the series, and I remember being impressed by his acting in this first role, and had a good chuckle when the creators must have thought so too and brought him back a couple of seasons later. According to his Wikipedia article, he played the role of Detective Sal Benedetto, a corrupt cop in the 1983 season, who later kills himself. What I remember about that is this: he was in a drunken rage, barricaded himself in his apartments, and they (the cops) busted down the door and sent in their pride and joy, a newly purchased robot. From the outside they watch in dismay as the camera view rocks around, showing a close-up of an enraged Sal smashing the crap out of it.
Anyone have that scene burned into their memory?
They guy was charged with possession of dangerous ordinance.
How far down the chain do you need to go for ordinance to not be regarded as dangerous?
"Suspect was armed with water pistol filled with orange juice. Suspect fired water pistol, which got into officer's eye and stung quite badly. Suspect arrested for possession of dangerous ordinance."
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
