The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
Bomb Robot
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

From the New York Times:

‘Bomb Robot’ Takes Down Dallas Gunman, but Raises Enforcement Questions
By HENRY FOUNTAIN and MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT JULY 8, 2016

The Dallas police ended a standoff with the gunman suspected of killing five officers with a tactic that by all accounts appears to be unprecedented: It blew him up using a robot.

In doing so, it sought to protect police who had negotiated with the man for several hours and had exchanged gunfire with him. But the decision ignited a debate about the increasing militarization of police and the remote-controlled use of force, and raised the specter of a new era of policing.

The only thing that could have excited more lengthy discussions on the Internet is if the Dallas police had run over the terrorist with a runaway trolley.

By the way, the use by bomb squads of radio controlled self-powered devices with mechanical arms is not a 21st Century invention.

When I was under suspicion of being an IRA terrorist attempting to blow up former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in 1999, the small town police chief said he was about to have his bomb robot throw the dense package addressed to me in the Chesapeake Bay, when he decided to give me a call and see if I could explain. After about 5 minutes, I managed to persuade him that the mysterious package was a new set of business cards I’d had a discount printer do up in a rush and Fed Ex to me care of the hotel holding the conference.

 
124 Comments to "Bomb Robot"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. avraham says:

    They thought it was safer that to shoot it out with the terrorist. They made the right decision.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/bomb-robot/#comment-1484703
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:

    It would appear that the FBI (in relation to Hillary Clinton) and the Dallas Police Dept have signaled that the rule of law has ended in the US.

    Read More
  3. JimB says:

    Bulletproof exoskeletons aren’t too far off. Police could just walk up to an armed assailant and punch his head off.

    I’d pay a dollar to see that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I paid $6 to see that in 1987 in "Robocop."
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Bulletproof exoskeletons aren’t too far off. Police could just walk up to an armed assailant and punch his head off.
     
    Criminals would just arm themselves with bags of diatomaceous earth. There goes your exoskeleton.
  4. Jefferson says:

    “When I was under suspicion of being an IRA terrorist”

    You are not even Irish or Scots-Irish. Aren’t you fully German?

    Read More
  5. @JimB
    Bulletproof exoskeletons aren't too far off. Police could just walk up to an armed assailant and punch his head off.

    I'd pay a dollar to see that.

    I paid $6 to see that in 1987 in “Robocop.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Ok, but what color was the robot?
    , @Anonymous
    "I'm sure it's only a glitch."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrXfh4hENKs
    , @Taco
    Did movie tickets really cost $6 in 1987?

    I remember they were $7 when I was in high school in the late 1990s.

    Had to be more like $4 in 1987, right?
    , @Clyde

    I paid $6 to see that in 1987 in “Robocop.”
     
    The movie theater was packed the day I saw it in 1987. Decent scifi movie. I am liking the third season of "The Last Ship" that is on the boob toob now. The guy who plays the Chinese Prime Minister is very good at evil.
    , @benjaminl
    coincidence: Robocop was filmed in Dallas!

    http://www.dallasfilmcommission.com/robocop-dallas-locations-then-now/
  6. Dumbo says:

    I really cannot see what is the big deal. Obama has been killing thousand of innocent Afghan wedding revelers using drones, now it’s a scandal to kill a criminal with a radio-controlled toy?

    https://www.thenation.com/article/us-has-bombed-least-eight-wedding-parties-2001/

    Militarization of police is here to stay. You don’t have kind neighborhood cops when you no longer have a neighborhood but an empire.

    It’s a side effect of invade-the-world-invite-the-world mentality.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Militarization of police is here to stay. You don’t have kind neighborhood cops when you no longer have a neighborhood but an empire."

    It's hard to have kind neighborhood cops when on average America's Nonwhites are not as law abiding as Singaporeans and the Japanese for example.

    America does not get a lot of cream of the crop Nonwhites outside of Indians and the Chinese for example.
  7. @Steve Sailer
    I paid $6 to see that in 1987 in "Robocop."

    Ok, but what color was the robot?

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew
    I see trouble down the pike if these robots kill too many people of color.
  8. Jefferson says:

    “But the decision ignited a debate about the increasing militarization of police and the remote-controlled use of force, and raised the specter of a new era of policing.”

    Would The New York Times still be worried about increased militarization if the robot had killed a White Christian Donald Trump supporter who was gunning down members of Mulignan Lies Matter instead of White cops?

    The NYT are just upset because another one of Barack Hussein Obama’s sons bit the dust. I am quite confident The NYT wish law enforcement had used a robot to kill Dylann Roof. The NYT has never been Libertarian when it comes to White lives and our civil rights. The NYT is only Libertarian when it comes to Blacks, Muslims, and other Nonwhite lives.

    The NYT are cafeteria Libertarians. You never see them write negative articles about collge campuses shitting all over the 1st amendment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Senator Brundlefly
    I like that term, "Cafeteria Libertarianism." I think it captures something that bothers me about both this situation, Ferguson, and NSA. In all these cases, liberals use the language of libertarianism to defend their preferred groups-minorities. Whenever I see these arguments, I feel mixed. On the one hand, I know the left is being disingenuous. The examples they use inevitably suffer Narrative Collapse and if the injustices were real and happened to their political enemies, they would cheer it. On the other hand, because they use libertarian arguments, I see the kernel of truth hiding within.

    As a libertarian, I'm concerned about the militarization of the police. It inverts the relationship of citizen and state, turning the public and its public servants into domestic animals and their zoo keepers. But what other option do we have when cities descend into CVS burning anarchy?

    I hate the NSA's mass collection of data about us, destroying the 4th amendment. There are times where I think commenting here is a bad idea because I'm leaving evidence of political incorrectness that our government can take note of. But I see the other side too. When radical jihadists are living among us, ready to attack marathons and gay clubs, why shouldn't we take note when people frequent radical material?

    As a libertarian, I'm concerned when we use technology to remotely destroy people. I mean, look at SWAT teams, originally created for rare and dangerous situations, now used liberally for no-knock warrant serving, another knife in the back of the 4th amendment. This bomb robot is just the beginning of something that will escalate similarly. When the elites can take us out in such a sanitized manner, of course they'll take it. But in this specific situation, what option do we have? The use of the robot was perfectly reasonable, saving officer's lives. But now there's a precedent for it to be a routine tactic.

    That's the thing about multiculturalism, it produces results that make nascent authoritarianism seem understandable and reasonable. A boot in the door, ready to come closer to stamp on our faces forever. For when a people lack a culture to unify them and develop a common moral schema of the world, when their neighbors speak a different tongue and think things should be run in a fundamentally different way, when we can suppose nothing about each other and thus eye each other with suspicion, what other means do we have to keep things together than blunt, ugly, force? How can we afford such luxuries as civil liberties? That's why despite it being arguably unlibertarian to do so, I've grown to hate multiculturalism.
  9. I wonder why the gunman didn’t just shoot the robot and thus disable it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Yep
    I've been wondering this too. Hopefully that info will come out eventually.

    Also, compare and contrast how the Dallas PD handled this compared to Orlando PD. They seem to have done a much better job.

    The video of the cop sneaking up behind the gunman is one of the craziest things I've ever seen. Really brave on the cop's part and unbelievable that the gunman ran at the cop after the cop's bullets bounced off him. I've never seen anything like that before.
    , @Anonymous

    I wonder why the gunman didn’t just shoot the robot
     
    Possibly the robot was disguised as a hooker from Vegas. Or, it was short and harmless looking, barrel shaped, with blinking lights, and making cute noises.
  10. SPMoore8 says:

    The reason I thought it was funny when you brought the Trolley Problem up last night is because I think it is one of the dumbest issues in ethical theory.

    The problem basically comes down to actual practical conduct in life, and there are two choices:

    1. If you act, you will save the lives of X, but cause the death of Y.
    2. If you do not act, you will witness the death of X, and Y will be also be a witness to the death of X.

    Probably 90% of humans act in ways to maximize the saving of life rather than its destruction, that is a no brainer in practical terms, which is why, outside of professors of philosophy, the Problem is impressive in its dumbness.

    That doesn’t mean it can’t lead to some interesting real world issues with ethics, to the extent that ethics gets into utilitarianism, or duty-driven ethics, or self-sacrificing ethics, or Golden Rule ethics, or non-reward ethics. But I think it’s better to just study the evolution of those teachings than to get focused on the nature of the people tied to the tracks.

    The Trolley Problem is also a trivial simplification for any number of serious “end justifies means” arguments, as well as the fact that we tend to seek to protect people who are nearer and dearer to us than strangers, which is hardly surprising. Again, I am surprised at the extent that this is considered a serious “problem.” The more specifications that are prescribed for the problem (e.g., Jesus Christ is on the one track, Hitler on the other) just makes it more unrealistic and therefore silly.

    As to this case: A known killer who had just shot a dozen police officers and threatened to explode bombs all over the city was killed, but instead of threatening the lives of any more police officers, he was killed remotely. I think I’d rather argue about the All Star Game rosters than this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I always like the version of the Trolley Problem that tries to get around concerns that maybe pushing a man off a bridge to his death might not stop a runaway trolley by specifying that the man you could choose to push is the size of an NFL offensive lineman?

    Aren't those guys hard to push? Might he not push back?
    , @Expletive Deleted

    1. If you act, you will save the lives of X, but cause the death of Y.
    2. If you do not act, you will witness the death of X, and Y will be also be a witness to the death of X.
     
    Exactly. Would you rather be the calculating murderer of an hypothetically innocent party who'd had an accident (1.), or a cowardly and horrified bystander (2.) grieving for those poor simpletons who'd somehow contrived to get themselves, en masse, in such an unlikely fix?
    That random trolley-car is not who we are.
    The ancients called it "Fate", or "Doom", and not to be trifled with.
    In fact, this "problem" is so ethically gnarly, I'd have to light up my pipe and consider the options, if confronted with it in real life. Maybe order a brandy, for the incipient shock. Possibly take notes, for future reference.
  11. @Jim Don Bob
    Ok, but what color was the robot?

    I see trouble down the pike if these robots kill too many people of color.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iSteveFan

    I see trouble down the pike if these robots kill too many people of color.
     
    Well didn't we just have a post last month about computer programs, search engines, etc., having built-in racist tendencies since they are mostly written by white guys. They used examples like doing Google searches for gorillas and getting images of blacks.

    Well if those programs are racists, and these bots start to kill too many people of color, ....
  12. Jefferson says:
    @Dumbo
    I really cannot see what is the big deal. Obama has been killing thousand of innocent Afghan wedding revelers using drones, now it's a scandal to kill a criminal with a radio-controlled toy?

    https://www.thenation.com/article/us-has-bombed-least-eight-wedding-parties-2001/

    Militarization of police is here to stay. You don't have kind neighborhood cops when you no longer have a neighborhood but an empire.

    It's a side effect of invade-the-world-invite-the-world mentality.

    “Militarization of police is here to stay. You don’t have kind neighborhood cops when you no longer have a neighborhood but an empire.”

    It’s hard to have kind neighborhood cops when on average America’s Nonwhites are not as law abiding as Singaporeans and the Japanese for example.

    America does not get a lot of cream of the crop Nonwhites outside of Indians and the Chinese for example.

    Read More
    • Replies: @snorlax
    We do actually get cream of the crop Africans, but unfortunately only by African standards.
    , @Truth



    It’s hard to have kind neighborhood cops when on average America’s Nonwhites are not as law abiding as Singaporeans and the Japanese for example.
     
    Are America's whites?
  13. I see that now at the NY Times, even the squirrels are being replaced by robots.

    Read More
  14. Liberals had a similar dilemma when drones came out. Many of them were secretly happy that there was always the possibility of losing a pilot or one getting captured as a way of exerting pressure on the government from using military force. The voila, they then had to wait until a drone took out a civilian.

    Read More
  15. snorlax says:
    @Jefferson
    "Militarization of police is here to stay. You don’t have kind neighborhood cops when you no longer have a neighborhood but an empire."

    It's hard to have kind neighborhood cops when on average America's Nonwhites are not as law abiding as Singaporeans and the Japanese for example.

    America does not get a lot of cream of the crop Nonwhites outside of Indians and the Chinese for example.

    We do actually get cream of the crop Africans, but unfortunately only by African standards.

    Read More
  16. Yep says:
    @International Jew
    I wonder why the gunman didn't just shoot the robot and thus disable it.

    I’ve been wondering this too. Hopefully that info will come out eventually.

    Also, compare and contrast how the Dallas PD handled this compared to Orlando PD. They seem to have done a much better job.

    The video of the cop sneaking up behind the gunman is one of the craziest things I’ve ever seen. Really brave on the cop’s part and unbelievable that the gunman ran at the cop after the cop’s bullets bounced off him. I’ve never seen anything like that before.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Did the cop live? He should have double-tapped the perp in the legs and then the head. Anybody seen a reliable timeline?
  17. Would the NYT really rather he still be alive and rambling semi-coherently about his support for the black lives matter movement and desire to kill Whites?

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    >implying it's not PC to advocate murdering whites
  18. rod1963 says:

    Smart move on the part of the police. Since he stated had explosives with him and had on body armor then add in he was probably holed up in a place where snipers couldn’t shoot him, using a EOD robot with a C-4 charge to blow him up was the right thing to do.

    Of course Liberals will whine, since a volatile black body was blown up.

    I’m sure TNC will pen another page of gibberish complaining how bomb bots are inherently racist real soon now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    "Between The Bot and the Sold: The E-Race-Sure of Carbon Based Bodies With Silicon Based Bomb Bots" -- 2017 Pulitzer, by T. Genius Coates
    , @Jefferson
    "I’m sure TNC will pen another page of gibberish complaining how bomb bots are inherently racist real soon now."

    Bomb bots who think they are White. The White bomb bot patriarchy. White bomb bot privilege.
  19. Well, at least where still at the point where humans are the ones pulling the trigger. Can’t wait for the future when Officer T-800 gets called racist for using cold algorithms based on crime statistics when pulling people over or making determinations of which areas to patrol. But I’m sure after some reprogramming his terminator vision can be rigged to read “politically problematic” when scanning certain individuals.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Can’t wait for the future when Officer T-800 gets called racist for using cold algorithms based on crime statistics when pulling people over or making determinations of which areas to patrol."

    Can you imagine a T-800 entering a dangerous Negro housing project, kicking ass, and taking names like the Redneck biker bar scene in Judgment Day.
    https://youtu.be/lYOoWCv_PYE

    The ACLU, Black Lies Matter, SPLC, NAACP, etc would all be livid.
  20. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Steve Sailer
    I paid $6 to see that in 1987 in "Robocop."

    “I’m sure it’s only a glitch.”

    Read More
  21. SPMoore8 says:
    @rod1963
    Smart move on the part of the police. Since he stated had explosives with him and had on body armor then add in he was probably holed up in a place where snipers couldn't shoot him, using a EOD robot with a C-4 charge to blow him up was the right thing to do.

    Of course Liberals will whine, since a volatile black body was blown up.

    I'm sure TNC will pen another page of gibberish complaining how bomb bots are inherently racist real soon now.

    “Between The Bot and the Sold: The E-Race-Sure of Carbon Based Bodies With Silicon Based Bomb Bots” — 2017 Pulitzer, by T. Genius Coates

    Read More
    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @bomag
    Nice.
    , @kaganovitch
    That should be "Bomb bots that think they are silicon based".
  22. kihowi says:

    Emotions are always simple, no matter how sophisticated the bullshit that obfuscates them. People have these “questions” about any action that hampers (non-white) terrorists because they are simply on their side.

    If a nazi tried anything like that, and the police responded with tanks, the NYT’s only question would be why they didn’t use jets.

    Read More
  23. @SPMoore8
    The reason I thought it was funny when you brought the Trolley Problem up last night is because I think it is one of the dumbest issues in ethical theory.

    The problem basically comes down to actual practical conduct in life, and there are two choices:

    1. If you act, you will save the lives of X, but cause the death of Y.
    2. If you do not act, you will witness the death of X, and Y will be also be a witness to the death of X.

    Probably 90% of humans act in ways to maximize the saving of life rather than its destruction, that is a no brainer in practical terms, which is why, outside of professors of philosophy, the Problem is impressive in its dumbness.

    That doesn't mean it can't lead to some interesting real world issues with ethics, to the extent that ethics gets into utilitarianism, or duty-driven ethics, or self-sacrificing ethics, or Golden Rule ethics, or non-reward ethics. But I think it's better to just study the evolution of those teachings than to get focused on the nature of the people tied to the tracks.

    The Trolley Problem is also a trivial simplification for any number of serious "end justifies means" arguments, as well as the fact that we tend to seek to protect people who are nearer and dearer to us than strangers, which is hardly surprising. Again, I am surprised at the extent that this is considered a serious "problem." The more specifications that are prescribed for the problem (e.g., Jesus Christ is on the one track, Hitler on the other) just makes it more unrealistic and therefore silly.

    As to this case: A known killer who had just shot a dozen police officers and threatened to explode bombs all over the city was killed, but instead of threatening the lives of any more police officers, he was killed remotely. I think I'd rather argue about the All Star Game rosters than this.

    I always like the version of the Trolley Problem that tries to get around concerns that maybe pushing a man off a bridge to his death might not stop a runaway trolley by specifying that the man you could choose to push is the size of an NFL offensive lineman?

    Aren’t those guys hard to push? Might he not push back?

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    The Fat Man version of the problem is simply a variant designed to make you feel more guilty if you act, in other words, if you just flick a switch you are more distant, but to actually push someone over is much more hands on. I think the easiest solution is just to stipulate that the Fat Man on the Bridge is Teddy Kennedy driving a Lincoln, and then you have solved a number of problems at once.
    , @StAugustine
    Indeed - the question is really about morality. The real question being asked is, would you sacrifice yourself? Would you sacrifice someone else? Who/whom yet again.
  24. AndrewR says:
    @27 year old
    Would the NYT really rather he still be alive and rambling semi-coherently about his support for the black lives matter movement and desire to kill Whites?

    >implying it’s not PC to advocate murdering whites

    Read More
  25. SPMoore8 says:
    @Steve Sailer
    I always like the version of the Trolley Problem that tries to get around concerns that maybe pushing a man off a bridge to his death might not stop a runaway trolley by specifying that the man you could choose to push is the size of an NFL offensive lineman?

    Aren't those guys hard to push? Might he not push back?

    The Fat Man version of the problem is simply a variant designed to make you feel more guilty if you act, in other words, if you just flick a switch you are more distant, but to actually push someone over is much more hands on. I think the easiest solution is just to stipulate that the Fat Man on the Bridge is Teddy Kennedy driving a Lincoln, and then you have solved a number of problems at once.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brutusale
    The Great White Whale of Hyannisport was driving an Oldsmobile when he went off the bridge at Chappaquiddick.
  26. kihowi says:

    I’ve seen comments seriously invoking Asimov’s Robot Laws, as if a) those remote control cars were actually robots and b) it wasn’t FICTION. People are really goddamn stupid.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker
    Yes!

    Almost everything described as a robot or a drone - isn't. They don't operate independently, they are merely remote controlled machines.

    Edit: I see someone already mentioned this.

  27. Busby says:

    Would we even be having this discussion if …

    A police sniper took the guy out from 150 yards away with a rifle

    A police officer low crawled closer and tossed a fragmentation grenade into the killer’s lap

    All the fancy military style gear, or lack of, doesn’t change the circumstances. The cops have a bad guy cornered and they have to decide how to end it.

    Trolley Problem, bah. How about a real example, the Truman Problem.

    Do I drop atomic bombs and kill Japanese until they surrender? Or do I invade Japan and cause the deaths of a million Japanese and Americans? And how do I explain the finer points of ethical dilemmas to the families of the Americans who die in the invasions, once they learn we had the weapons to end the war in 1945?

    Read More
    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @27 year old
    Or if they chased him to a remote house and then firebombed it and burned him alive like they did to black body (tm) Eric Dorner? Was that considered problematic at the time? I don't remember
    , @SPMoore8
    Yes, the real "Fat Man" problem is not a hypothetical about people tied up on train tracks, it's about real world ethical dilemmas such as the bombing of Nagasaki. And the dynamic is the same: acting, and causing deliberate casualties, and doing nothing, and allowing even greater casualties. At least if you phrase the argument in real world historical terms you can actually come to some meaningful distinctions about the circumstances in which we allow, or validate, the taking of human life, and under what circumstances we do not (e.g., not using nuclear weapons since 1945.)
    , @Dave Pinsen

    Do I drop atomic bombs and kill Japanese until they surrender? Or do I invade Japan and cause the deaths of a million Japanese and Americans?
     
    Dropping atomic bombs on Japan was completely unnecessary, and they idea that it saved American lives (the number of hypothetical American lives kept getting raised over the years) is false. Japan was no threat to anyone by August of 1945. That's not just a hippie sentiment; it's one that was shared by Admirals Nimitz and Halsey, General Curtis LeMay, etc.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#Militarily_unnecessary

    The main reasons Japan surrendered were fear of the Russians invading their home islands after routing them in Manchuria, and our agreement to let them keep their emperor.

    But your Japan analogy actually isn't a bad one in this case. Like Japan in 1945, the suspected terrorist in Dallas (he was, still, technically a suspect at that point, right?) was no longer much of a threat (except to cops who approached him). He didn't have any hostages, and he wasn't on the offensive. He may have been wounded (presumably, at least one of the dozen or so Dallas cops who fired their weapons hit him). Like Japan, time wasn't on his side. Did he have food with him, or water?

    What was the rush to blow him up at that point? Why not cordon off the area and wait him out? Maybe offer him food or water laced with a sedative.
  28. @Busby
    Would we even be having this discussion if ...

    A police sniper took the guy out from 150 yards away with a rifle

    A police officer low crawled closer and tossed a fragmentation grenade into the killer's lap

    All the fancy military style gear, or lack of, doesn't change the circumstances. The cops have a bad guy cornered and they have to decide how to end it.

    Trolley Problem, bah. How about a real example, the Truman Problem.

    Do I drop atomic bombs and kill Japanese until they surrender? Or do I invade Japan and cause the deaths of a million Japanese and Americans? And how do I explain the finer points of ethical dilemmas to the families of the Americans who die in the invasions, once they learn we had the weapons to end the war in 1945?

    Or if they chased him to a remote house and then firebombed it and burned him alive like they did to black body ™ Eric Dorner? Was that considered problematic at the time? I don’t remember

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Dorner was going down no matter what, that was the attitude of the cops pursuing him. Anyone remember how they shot at a mother and daughter delivering the LA Times in their pickup truck which they mistook for Dorner's even though they were not that similar?
    , @Chris Mallory
    I had problems with it when they did it to Dorner. I had problems with it when they did it to Bob Matthews. I had problems with it when they burned out Gordon Kahl. I had problems with it at Waco and in Philly. And I have problems with how they did this.
    , @Dave Pinsen
    I considered it problematic.

    Maybe I'm a bleeding heart by iSteve standards, but I don't think law enforcement should burn people alive, even suspected murderers.

    I also wasn't a fan of Waco.
  29. Jefferson says:
    @rod1963
    Smart move on the part of the police. Since he stated had explosives with him and had on body armor then add in he was probably holed up in a place where snipers couldn't shoot him, using a EOD robot with a C-4 charge to blow him up was the right thing to do.

    Of course Liberals will whine, since a volatile black body was blown up.

    I'm sure TNC will pen another page of gibberish complaining how bomb bots are inherently racist real soon now.

    “I’m sure TNC will pen another page of gibberish complaining how bomb bots are inherently racist real soon now.”

    Bomb bots who think they are White. The White bomb bot patriarchy. White bomb bot privilege.

    Read More
  30. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @27 year old
    Or if they chased him to a remote house and then firebombed it and burned him alive like they did to black body (tm) Eric Dorner? Was that considered problematic at the time? I don't remember

    Dorner was going down no matter what, that was the attitude of the cops pursuing him. Anyone remember how they shot at a mother and daughter delivering the LA Times in their pickup truck which they mistook for Dorner’s even though they were not that similar?

    Read More
  31. SPMoore8 says:
    @Busby
    Would we even be having this discussion if ...

    A police sniper took the guy out from 150 yards away with a rifle

    A police officer low crawled closer and tossed a fragmentation grenade into the killer's lap

    All the fancy military style gear, or lack of, doesn't change the circumstances. The cops have a bad guy cornered and they have to decide how to end it.

    Trolley Problem, bah. How about a real example, the Truman Problem.

    Do I drop atomic bombs and kill Japanese until they surrender? Or do I invade Japan and cause the deaths of a million Japanese and Americans? And how do I explain the finer points of ethical dilemmas to the families of the Americans who die in the invasions, once they learn we had the weapons to end the war in 1945?

    Yes, the real “Fat Man” problem is not a hypothetical about people tied up on train tracks, it’s about real world ethical dilemmas such as the bombing of Nagasaki. And the dynamic is the same: acting, and causing deliberate casualties, and doing nothing, and allowing even greater casualties. At least if you phrase the argument in real world historical terms you can actually come to some meaningful distinctions about the circumstances in which we allow, or validate, the taking of human life, and under what circumstances we do not (e.g., not using nuclear weapons since 1945.)

    Read More
  32. More Dallas insanity http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/an-unfair-tragedy-for-unlucky-dallas-214033

    But today’s Dallas, America’s 9th largest city, seems the unlikeliest of places for the latest American massacre in which a black man gunned down white officers in the midst of a Black Lives Matter protest. Once virulently white, racist and reactionary, today’s Dallas is deeply politically influenced by its large African-American and even bigger Latino populations. Progressive Democrats have controlled local government for 20 years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    There was a headline on Bloomberg TV on Friday that the Dallas PD had implemented all the Obama administration's recommendations for improving relations with the "community" in 2009, and was a model of reform.

    Of course, the suggestion that some radicalized black power terrorist was going to research this stuff before killing cops is daft.
  33. Hacienda says:

    Interesting problem with the railcar. It could occupy 2 – 3 hours of class time. At a private college that’s up to $200 per student. Even in a seminar format with 10 student’s that $2000 for liberal arts F.U. College.

    Spock says the few must sacrifice for the many. Khan says the little men don’t matter. Federation Rules require non-interference. Ferengi asks what makes the most profit. F.U. College knows the answer.

    Read More
  34. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Regarding obsolete military technology:

    Teletank:

    “Teletanks were a series of wireless remotely controlled unmanned tanks produced in the Soviet Union in the 1930s and early 1940s. They saw their first combat use in the Winter War, at the start of World War II. A teletank is controlled by radio from a control tank at a distance of 500–1,500 metres, the two constituting a telemechanical group. Teletanks were used by the Soviet Red Army in the Winter War, fielding at least two teletank battalions at the beginning of the World War II on Eastern Front…

    …Teletanks were equipped with DT machine guns, flamethrowers, smoke canisters, and sometimes a special 200–700 kg time bomb in an armoured box, dropped by the tank near the enemy’s fortifications and used to destroy bunkers up to four levels below ground.[citation needed] Teletanks were also designed to be capable of using chemical weapons…”

    Goliath tracked mine:

    “…The Goliath tracked mine… was a remote controlled German-engineered demolition vehicle, also known as the beetle tank to the Allies.

    Employed by the Wehrmacht during World War II. It carried 60 or 100 kilograms (130 or 220 lb) of high explosives, depending on the model, and was intended to be used for multiple purposes, such as destroying tanks, disrupting dense infantry formations, and demolition of buildings and bridges.

    …The Goliath had 650 metres (2,130 ft) of cable. Each Goliath was disposable, being intended to be blown up with its target. …

    Goliaths were used on all fronts where the Wehrmacht fought, beginning in early 1942…

    Although a total of 7,564 Goliaths were produced, the single-use weapon was not considered a success due to the high unit cost…

    …The Goliath did help lay the foundation for post-war advances in remote-controlled vehicle technologies.”

    German soldiers in April 1944 with a Goliath and the remote control.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    In 1941 the retreating Red Army used remote control to detonate bombs in buildings they knew would be occupied by the Germans. In one building, several hundred soldiers were blown up. After that they learned to case the buildings before occupying them.
  35. @JimB
    Bulletproof exoskeletons aren't too far off. Police could just walk up to an armed assailant and punch his head off.

    I'd pay a dollar to see that.

    Bulletproof exoskeletons aren’t too far off. Police could just walk up to an armed assailant and punch his head off.

    Criminals would just arm themselves with bags of diatomaceous earth. There goes your exoskeleton.

    Read More
  36. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @International Jew
    I wonder why the gunman didn't just shoot the robot and thus disable it.

    I wonder why the gunman didn’t just shoot the robot

    Possibly the robot was disguised as a hooker from Vegas. Or, it was short and harmless looking, barrel shaped, with blinking lights, and making cute noises.

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew
    Or a Roomba! Well, that won't work after the bad guys catch on. They'll have to go with grenades. (Talk about "militarization of the police"...)
  37. cthulhu says:

    Didn’t the police have the guy bottled up? Why not just wait him out? Unless he brought food and water or had a bomb with a deadman switch, eventually he would have been straightforward to capture.

    I have no issues with the remote controlled device or the death by explosives, just wondering what the hurry was.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Louie
    The equation changes when you're a cop killer, from a justice situation, to a revenge situation. I don't blame the cops for this.
    , @gcochran
    If they had wasted time, he might have surrendered, costing the state millions for the trial and life imprisonment.
  38. Louie says:

    The answer to the Trolley Problem is the modern “who, whom?” Are those in danger white? And is the potential victim black? As a white person, I know the answer. Of course, my public answer would differ.

    Read More
  39. Louie says:
    @cthulhu
    Didn't the police have the guy bottled up? Why not just wait him out? Unless he brought food and water or had a bomb with a deadman switch, eventually he would have been straightforward to capture.

    I have no issues with the remote controlled device or the death by explosives, just wondering what the hurry was.

    The equation changes when you’re a cop killer, from a justice situation, to a revenge situation. I don’t blame the cops for this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @cthulhu

    The equation changes when you’re a cop killer, from a justice situation, to a revenge situation. I don’t blame the cops for this.
     
    One of the greatest advances in Western civilization is investing the State with a near monopoly on violence in response to wrongs done: if somebody, say, assaults my spouse and I find out who it is and go beat up that person, then I can go to jail too because I usurped the State's violence monopoly (modulo self defense, etc.). This is a Good Thing because it greatly reduces revenge attacks, honor killings, etc. But it relies on the criminal justice system being fair. When there's a materially different kind of response by the police and/or prosecutors depending on who the victims were, that erodes trust in the system. Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate goes into a good deal of detail on this.

    But I'm not convinced that's what happened here; maybe they thought that he had remote control of IEDs and wanted to take him out?
  40. rod1963 says:

    Speaking of bombs.

    I wondered why the Dems weren’t screaming at AR-15′s. Now I know why, I just heard on FoxNews that the shooter used a ancient Russian SKS to do the killing. It has a non-detachable 10 rd magazine that you feed from the top. It’s not even on par with a AK-47(which he could have done a lot more damage with)

    SKS:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS

    A lot of them are still sold in the U.S. as a cheap carbine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
    Have they shown a picture of his actual rifle? They do make aftermarket stocks that add pistol grips. They also sell detachable magazines that will hold more than 10. Of course the ones I used years ago did work well, they tended to jam. Maybe today's work better. If his was stock, he was probably loading it with stripper clips.
    , @Former Darfur
    Apparently this guy was upholding a Dallas tradition of using crappy weapons to carry out notorious killings.

    Oswald, you will remember, had a Mannlicher Carcano that was probably the worst rifle in any nations' service during WWII. The SKS isn't quite that bad, but it isn't very good. They were dirt cheap for a reason: Chinese built examples are often unsafe to shoot without skilled gunsmithing and are usually inaccurate and balky.
  41. The solution to a deadly problem should not be discussed in terms of overkill . Dead is dead. Had they sent in a pack of attack dogs people would be bemoaning the loss of any dog killed.

    Read More
  42. What if on an agreed upon day a large mass of proud patriotic American men and women wore something red to express solidarity and….. defiance? And if that act grew to more than a one day affair? We do still have freedom of fashion, yes?

    Comes a Trumpening

    Read More
  43. @Yep
    I've been wondering this too. Hopefully that info will come out eventually.

    Also, compare and contrast how the Dallas PD handled this compared to Orlando PD. They seem to have done a much better job.

    The video of the cop sneaking up behind the gunman is one of the craziest things I've ever seen. Really brave on the cop's part and unbelievable that the gunman ran at the cop after the cop's bullets bounced off him. I've never seen anything like that before.

    Did the cop live? He should have double-tapped the perp in the legs and then the head. Anybody seen a reliable timeline?

    Read More
  44. @Anonymous

    I wonder why the gunman didn’t just shoot the robot
     
    Possibly the robot was disguised as a hooker from Vegas. Or, it was short and harmless looking, barrel shaped, with blinking lights, and making cute noises.

    Or a Roomba! Well, that won’t work after the bad guys catch on. They’ll have to go with grenades. (Talk about “militarization of the police”…)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    We need the Miniaturization of the Police.

    I don't know what that actually means, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

    , @Lurker
    A Boomba presumably.
  45. @International Jew
    Or a Roomba! Well, that won't work after the bad guys catch on. They'll have to go with grenades. (Talk about "militarization of the police"...)

    We need the Miniaturization of the Police.

    I don’t know what that actually means, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Olorin
    Raquel Welch in a skin-tight white body suit occurs to me. Hm.

    Also Donald Pleasence being eaten by a neutrophil.
  46. bomag says:
    @SPMoore8
    "Between The Bot and the Sold: The E-Race-Sure of Carbon Based Bodies With Silicon Based Bomb Bots" -- 2017 Pulitzer, by T. Genius Coates

    Nice.

    Read More
  47. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    The bomb robot is just another example of government waste. A simple hand grenade, or two, or three if the need be, would do the job just fine (more reliably, in fact) at 1/100th the cost of the robot (which isn’t actually a robot but a fancy version of radio-controlled toy car from Toys-R-Us but it costs more if it is called a “robot”, so it still costs a lot).

    Back to the whole Dallas shooting. Pick one:
    a) This was the most efficient, best thought-off mass attack executed by a black American.
    b) Our police force is so incompetent that it failed to recognize a single shooter and take appropriate actions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    Back to the whole Dallas shooting. Pick one:
    a) This was the most efficient, best thought-off mass attack executed by a black American.
    b) Our police force is so incompetent that it failed to recognize a single shooter and take appropriate actions.
     
    Kind of a tough situation for the cops. For one thing, I think they assumed the protestors were the target, so part of their efforts were spent dispersing the protestors. And a bunch of the protestors had rifles, which confuses things (the cops deserve some credit for not killing any of those 2A guys). But if you had to pick one, I guess you'd have to go with b).

    There is some new tech that can detect the location of a shooter by analyzing the sound of the shot. That might have come in handy.
  48. @27 year old
    Or if they chased him to a remote house and then firebombed it and burned him alive like they did to black body (tm) Eric Dorner? Was that considered problematic at the time? I don't remember

    I had problems with it when they did it to Dorner. I had problems with it when they did it to Bob Matthews. I had problems with it when they burned out Gordon Kahl. I had problems with it at Waco and in Philly. And I have problems with how they did this.

    Read More
    • Agree: Dave Pinsen
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "I had problems with it when they did it to Dorner."

    I didn't and still don't. If Christopher Dorner was a White man, do you think any Black person would have said it was wrong that LAPD burned him alive? Hell no they wouldn't, they would have said good riddance.

    For me racial tribalism trumps Libertarianism. I don't give a damn about the civil rights of Mulignans because they don't give a damn about the civil rights of my White ass or any other White person.

    You don't see Black Lies Matter shed any tears over White people who are killed by police officers. No hastag 'Say Their Names" from Black Twitter when a White gets killed by a cop.

    Libertarianism is an extremely retarded political ideology to have in a multiracial society. It would make more sense though if we lived in a racially homogeneous society.

  49. @rod1963
    Speaking of bombs.

    I wondered why the Dems weren't screaming at AR-15's. Now I know why, I just heard on FoxNews that the shooter used a ancient Russian SKS to do the killing. It has a non-detachable 10 rd magazine that you feed from the top. It's not even on par with a AK-47(which he could have done a lot more damage with)

    SKS:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS

    A lot of them are still sold in the U.S. as a cheap carbine.

    Have they shown a picture of his actual rifle? They do make aftermarket stocks that add pistol grips. They also sell detachable magazines that will hold more than 10. Of course the ones I used years ago did work well, they tended to jam. Maybe today’s work better. If his was stock, he was probably loading it with stripper clips.

    Read More
  50. Don’t the police, especially SWAT, have tear gas canisters for the suspect and gas masks for themselves?

    I always thought tear gas was the Gold Standard for ending any armed standoff, from the SLA to the Branch Davidians. Of course both of these groups were “burned out” when the tear gas canister set their structures on fire, but the concept is the same.

    Read More
  51. Mr. Anon says:

    Would the police have employed the bomb, if the sniper had not been killing cops, but just ordinary people at the rally? The cops will go to much greater lengths to protect – and avenge – their own, than they will to protect ordinary people.

    Read More
  52. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    SKS:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS

    A lot of these old SKS rifles were brought back from Vietnam as war trophies, which might have created a market for a cheap, solid, simple rifle. Not being fully automatic, they were legal, obviously. You’d see them in family gun cabinets, along with the Japanese Arisakas from WWII and Berthier carbines from WWI. A lot of them must have been Chinese-made versions, because people often called them Chicom ’56s.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boomstick
    SKS's were one of the early Chinese manufactured goods exports to the US in the early 90's. They were being sold for $75 a pop, often with a crate of ammo tossed in; they were the cheaper alternative to the imported semiauto Chinese AKs, which were going for about $200. Around my hometown the farmers started tossing an SKS in the back of the pickup cab instead of a lever action 30-30. One of the odder students at the college I was attending had plans to weld together an anti-aircraft mount with four of them, and I guess put it on the back of his Volkswagen. Not sure if he ever completed that project. Then the small arms imports were banned as a retaliation for some Chinese misdeed and the great Norinco era ended.

    Ironically the import ban helped form the domestic AR-15 industry. AR-15s had sold at a higher price point, but with cheap Chinese arms imports eliminated the domestically produced AR suddenly became price competitive. It was a pretty good case study for protectionism, really.

    The forbidden fruit effect of the 1994 assault weapon ban kicked in and suddenly everyone wanted the rifles the government didn't want you to have. The AR-15 was the poster boy for what Diane Feinstein disapproved of, with predictable results. These days AR-15s constitute about 25% of all new firearms sold in the US. Barack Obama is the greatest boon for the small arms industry since WW2.

    The current rumor is that the Dallas shooter used a converted Saiga-12 shotgun. The Saiga is an AK in shotgun form. With some home gunsmithing the shooter apparently converted it to 5.45X39 with 30 round detachable mags, essentially a AK-74 with some sort of low power scope on it.

  53. NickG says:

    town police chief said he was about to have his bomb robot

    I served in the UK military in Northern Ireland in the early 80s. The remote controlled bomb-disposal robot was called ‘Wheelbarrow’, and looked like a small tank chassis. On top of this was a camera and remote control arm, together with a remotely fireable shotgun. This was used by the bomb disposal specialist guy – callsign Felix – and was amongst various bits of kit they carried around in their specialist vehicles. I’ve seen it deployed a number of times.

    I see there is even a Wikipedia Article.

    Typically Wheelbarrow was used to approach suspected car-bombs and look for explosives, it can open locked car doors and boots (trunks) – using the shotgun on the lock. Wheelbarrow has gone through various iterations. It would be simple enough to attach an explosive device, such as a Claymore mine to Wheelbarrow, giving it an offensive capability. I have little doubt this or something very much like it was used to kill the Dallas shooter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    Did it suffer from the (original) Daleks' Achille's heel. Easily outwitted by using a short flight of stairs, or a ladder? Never mind scaffolding.
  54. iSteveFan says:
    @International Jew
    I see trouble down the pike if these robots kill too many people of color.

    I see trouble down the pike if these robots kill too many people of color.

    Well didn’t we just have a post last month about computer programs, search engines, etc., having built-in racist tendencies since they are mostly written by white guys. They used examples like doing Google searches for gorillas and getting images of blacks.

    Well if those programs are racists, and these bots start to kill too many people of color, ….

    Read More
  55. Taco says:
    @Steve Sailer
    I paid $6 to see that in 1987 in "Robocop."

    Did movie tickets really cost $6 in 1987?

    I remember they were $7 when I was in high school in the late 1990s.

    Had to be more like $4 in 1987, right?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I don't remember the ticket price I paid, but I saw "Robocop" in 1987 at an expensive new theater on the near north side of Chicago, in the 1000 block a few blocks inland from the John Hancock Bldg., so it was close to the maximum for movie tickets back then. Westwood theaters in 1982 were $5, so I guessed it was $6.
    , @Brutusale
    In one of Dan Jenkins' novels, a rich guy character stated that a movie ticket always costs the same as a martini in the Bar Room at 21 in NYC. It seems to track pretty well through the years.
  56. Lurker says:
    @kihowi
    I've seen comments seriously invoking Asimov's Robot Laws, as if a) those remote control cars were actually robots and b) it wasn't FICTION. People are really goddamn stupid.

    Yes!

    Almost everything described as a robot or a drone – isn’t. They don’t operate independently, they are merely remote controlled machines.

    Edit: I see someone already mentioned this.

    Read More
  57. Lurker says:
    @International Jew
    Or a Roomba! Well, that won't work after the bad guys catch on. They'll have to go with grenades. (Talk about "militarization of the police"...)

    A Boomba presumably.

    Read More
  58. cthulhu says:
    @Louie
    The equation changes when you're a cop killer, from a justice situation, to a revenge situation. I don't blame the cops for this.

    The equation changes when you’re a cop killer, from a justice situation, to a revenge situation. I don’t blame the cops for this.

    One of the greatest advances in Western civilization is investing the State with a near monopoly on violence in response to wrongs done: if somebody, say, assaults my spouse and I find out who it is and go beat up that person, then I can go to jail too because I usurped the State’s violence monopoly (modulo self defense, etc.). This is a Good Thing because it greatly reduces revenge attacks, honor killings, etc. But it relies on the criminal justice system being fair. When there’s a materially different kind of response by the police and/or prosecutors depending on who the victims were, that erodes trust in the system. Steven Pinker’s The Blank Slate goes into a good deal of detail on this.

    But I’m not convinced that’s what happened here; maybe they thought that he had remote control of IEDs and wanted to take him out?

    Read More
  59. matt says:

    I for one welcome our new exploding death robocop mechanized suicide bomber overlords. What could there possibly be to worry about?

    (Also, you still don’t get the point of the trolly problem. It would be better to stop mentioning it.)

    Read More
  60. matt says:

    There are a lot of comments here that confuse two questions; namely, (1) given that they apparently had access to it, was it necessary for the police to use their exploding death robot in Dallas on the night of July 7th?; and (2) as a general rule, should police departments be allowed to have exploding death robots?

    These are independent questions. For example, suppose I have in my possession a Man-Portable-Air-Defense-System, and for some reason, I find myself in an extremely rare circumstance (a total fluke) in which it is absolutely necessary to use the MANPADS. There are two questions:

    (3) Given that I have the weapon, should I use my MANPADS in this scenario?

    (4) Should civilians like myself be allowed to have MANPADS in the first place?

    The answer to (3), by stipulaton, is “Yes”. The answer to (4) is quite obviously no, notwithstanding the extremely rare hypothetical scenario that I found myself in in this example.

    Similarly, it seems clear that the Dallas police had every right to use their exploding death robot in their extremely rare situation, given that they had it. On the other hand, police departments should not be allowed to have exploding killer death robots, for all sorts of reasons that I hope aren’t necessary to articulate, and notwithstanding extremely rare scenarios like the one we saw in Dallas recently.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Federalist
    They used a bomb disposal robot, which have been around for quite a while as Steve discussed. It's just a remote controlled vehicle with cameras and a simple mechanical arm. It can carry an explosive that is used to destroy the bomb (a bomb to blow up a bomb). Unless the police used some other, more powerful explosive to kill the shooter, the police didn't have anything unusual. The innovation was in how the robot was used. The police had a bomb disposal robot but used it as a killer death robot. I think the answer is that the police should certainly be allowed to have bomb disposal robots. You argued (correctly in my opinion) that the police had every right to use it in this particular extremely rare situation.
  61. @Taco
    Did movie tickets really cost $6 in 1987?

    I remember they were $7 when I was in high school in the late 1990s.

    Had to be more like $4 in 1987, right?

    I don’t remember the ticket price I paid, but I saw “Robocop” in 1987 at an expensive new theater on the near north side of Chicago, in the 1000 block a few blocks inland from the John Hancock Bldg., so it was close to the maximum for movie tickets back then. Westwood theaters in 1982 were $5, so I guessed it was $6.

    Read More
  62. @anonymous
    Regarding obsolete military technology:

    Teletank:


    "Teletanks were a series of wireless remotely controlled unmanned tanks produced in the Soviet Union in the 1930s and early 1940s. They saw their first combat use in the Winter War, at the start of World War II. A teletank is controlled by radio from a control tank at a distance of 500–1,500 metres, the two constituting a telemechanical group. Teletanks were used by the Soviet Red Army in the Winter War, fielding at least two teletank battalions at the beginning of the World War II on Eastern Front...

    ...Teletanks were equipped with DT machine guns, flamethrowers, smoke canisters, and sometimes a special 200–700 kg time bomb in an armoured box, dropped by the tank near the enemy's fortifications and used to destroy bunkers up to four levels below ground.[citation needed] Teletanks were also designed to be capable of using chemical weapons..."

     

    Goliath tracked mine:


    "...The Goliath tracked mine... was a remote controlled German-engineered demolition vehicle, also known as the beetle tank to the Allies.

    Employed by the Wehrmacht during World War II. It carried 60 or 100 kilograms (130 or 220 lb) of high explosives, depending on the model, and was intended to be used for multiple purposes, such as destroying tanks, disrupting dense infantry formations, and demolition of buildings and bridges.

    ...The Goliath had 650 metres (2,130 ft) of cable. Each Goliath was disposable, being intended to be blown up with its target. ...

    Goliaths were used on all fronts where the Wehrmacht fought, beginning in early 1942...

    Although a total of 7,564 Goliaths were produced, the single-use weapon was not considered a success due to the high unit cost...

    ...The Goliath did help lay the foundation for post-war advances in remote-controlled vehicle technologies."

     

    German soldiers in April 1944 with a Goliath and the remote control.

    In 1941 the retreating Red Army used remote control to detonate bombs in buildings they knew would be occupied by the Germans. In one building, several hundred soldiers were blown up. After that they learned to case the buildings before occupying them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    The bad guys in Iraq did that too. Killed some of our guys.
  63. The AA Dallas police chief has an interesting background.

    Described by those who know him as ‘introspective, intense and sometimes abrasive commander’, Brown was named police chief in 2010.
    Seven weeks into his new position, his son and namesake shot dead a Lancaster police officer and another man, before being fatally shot more than a dozen times. It was Father’s Day.
    David Brown Jr, who was 27 at the time, had struggled with drugs and suffered with bipolar disorder.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3681815/Dallas-Police-Chief-David-Brown-Sr-lost-former-police-partner-younger-brother-son-gun-violence.html#ixzz4DzGTsbJv

    It is ironic that he presides over this case since his own son is a cop-killer.

    I too am disturbed by police with bombs.

    If they were able to speak to him then it was possible for a sniper to get close enough to shoot.
    Furthermore they destroyed a $100,000 robot and did untold damage to the parking garage and its contents.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    It would have been bad if the whole parking garage collapsed, like in Philadelphia in 1985.
  64. tbraton says:

    “When I was under suspicion of being an IRA terrorist attempting to blow up former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in 1999, the small town police chief said he was about to have his bomb robot throw the dense package addressed to me in the Chesapeake Bay, when he decided to give me a call and see if I could explain. After about 5 minutes, I managed to persuade him that the mysterious package was a new set of business cards I’d had a discount printer do up in a rush and Fed Ex to me care of the hotel holding the conference.”

    Likely story. Did you also tell him that you looked remarkably like the doctor who sent that crazy guy to the mental asylum? I’ll bet you left that juicy item out of your account.

    Read More
  65. @jesse helms think-alike
    The AA Dallas police chief has an interesting background.

    Described by those who know him as 'introspective, intense and sometimes abrasive commander', Brown was named police chief in 2010.
    Seven weeks into his new position, his son and namesake shot dead a Lancaster police officer and another man, before being fatally shot more than a dozen times. It was Father's Day.
    David Brown Jr, who was 27 at the time, had struggled with drugs and suffered with bipolar disorder.


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3681815/Dallas-Police-Chief-David-Brown-Sr-lost-former-police-partner-younger-brother-son-gun-violence.html#ixzz4DzGTsbJv

    It is ironic that he presides over this case since his own son is a cop-killer.

    I too am disturbed by police with bombs.

    If they were able to speak to him then it was possible for a sniper to get close enough to shoot.
    Furthermore they destroyed a $100,000 robot and did untold damage to the parking garage and its contents.

    It would have been bad if the whole parking garage collapsed, like in Philadelphia in 1985.

    Read More
  66. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Busby
    Would we even be having this discussion if ...

    A police sniper took the guy out from 150 yards away with a rifle

    A police officer low crawled closer and tossed a fragmentation grenade into the killer's lap

    All the fancy military style gear, or lack of, doesn't change the circumstances. The cops have a bad guy cornered and they have to decide how to end it.

    Trolley Problem, bah. How about a real example, the Truman Problem.

    Do I drop atomic bombs and kill Japanese until they surrender? Or do I invade Japan and cause the deaths of a million Japanese and Americans? And how do I explain the finer points of ethical dilemmas to the families of the Americans who die in the invasions, once they learn we had the weapons to end the war in 1945?

    Do I drop atomic bombs and kill Japanese until they surrender? Or do I invade Japan and cause the deaths of a million Japanese and Americans?

    Dropping atomic bombs on Japan was completely unnecessary, and they idea that it saved American lives (the number of hypothetical American lives kept getting raised over the years) is false. Japan was no threat to anyone by August of 1945. That’s not just a hippie sentiment; it’s one that was shared by Admirals Nimitz and Halsey, General Curtis LeMay, etc.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#Militarily_unnecessary

    The main reasons Japan surrendered were fear of the Russians invading their home islands after routing them in Manchuria, and our agreement to let them keep their emperor.

    But your Japan analogy actually isn’t a bad one in this case. Like Japan in 1945, the suspected terrorist in Dallas (he was, still, technically a suspect at that point, right?) was no longer much of a threat (except to cops who approached him). He didn’t have any hostages, and he wasn’t on the offensive. He may have been wounded (presumably, at least one of the dozen or so Dallas cops who fired their weapons hit him). Like Japan, time wasn’t on his side. Did he have food with him, or water?

    What was the rush to blow him up at that point? Why not cordon off the area and wait him out? Maybe offer him food or water laced with a sedative.

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    My late father was the luckiest SOB of the war. About a decade ago, my brother was given a box from my Aunt with all his bric-a-brac including his USAAC military records which I ended up with. He finished his training and received his orders to ship out August 15th, 1945, the same day Japan announced their surrender. He was headed to Saipan the following week to fight as a tail gunner on a B-29.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson

    Dropping atomic bombs on Japan was completely unnecessary
     
    Right, because they were just looking for someone to surrender to. Except that on Saipan it didn't work out that way. Nor would it have worked out that way in Japan.

    It is true that we could have just waited. We had destroyed enough of their infrastructure so that they could not supply food to their population. And we could have kept pounding them with conventional weapons. So we could have conventionally bombed or starved most of them to death. Probably twenty million could have been sufficient, but maybe we could have waited for more. WTH, with just a two year hiatus we could have starved at least thirty million to death. Maybe it would have been 35 or 38 million - just the subsistence farmers left.

    But then we would violate the deontological ethics Christianity has saddled us with. Truman knew this.

    Why don't you?
  67. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @27 year old
    Or if they chased him to a remote house and then firebombed it and burned him alive like they did to black body (tm) Eric Dorner? Was that considered problematic at the time? I don't remember

    I considered it problematic.

    Maybe I’m a bleeding heart by iSteve standards, but I don’t think law enforcement should burn people alive, even suspected murderers.

    I also wasn’t a fan of Waco.

    Read More
  68. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @415 reasons
    More Dallas insanity http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/an-unfair-tragedy-for-unlucky-dallas-214033

    But today’s Dallas, America’s 9th largest city, seems the unlikeliest of places for the latest American massacre in which a black man gunned down white officers in the midst of a Black Lives Matter protest. Once virulently white, racist and reactionary, today’s Dallas is deeply politically influenced by its large African-American and even bigger Latino populations. Progressive Democrats have controlled local government for 20 years.

     

    There was a headline on Bloomberg TV on Friday that the Dallas PD had implemented all the Obama administration’s recommendations for improving relations with the “community” in 2009, and was a model of reform.

    Of course, the suggestion that some radicalized black power terrorist was going to research this stuff before killing cops is daft.

    Read More
  69. Boomstick says:
    @anonymous
    SKS:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS

    A lot of these old SKS rifles were brought back from Vietnam as war trophies, which might have created a market for a cheap, solid, simple rifle. Not being fully automatic, they were legal, obviously. You'd see them in family gun cabinets, along with the Japanese Arisakas from WWII and Berthier carbines from WWI. A lot of them must have been Chinese-made versions, because people often called them Chicom '56s.

    SKS’s were one of the early Chinese manufactured goods exports to the US in the early 90′s. They were being sold for $75 a pop, often with a crate of ammo tossed in; they were the cheaper alternative to the imported semiauto Chinese AKs, which were going for about $200. Around my hometown the farmers started tossing an SKS in the back of the pickup cab instead of a lever action 30-30. One of the odder students at the college I was attending had plans to weld together an anti-aircraft mount with four of them, and I guess put it on the back of his Volkswagen. Not sure if he ever completed that project. Then the small arms imports were banned as a retaliation for some Chinese misdeed and the great Norinco era ended.

    Ironically the import ban helped form the domestic AR-15 industry. AR-15s had sold at a higher price point, but with cheap Chinese arms imports eliminated the domestically produced AR suddenly became price competitive. It was a pretty good case study for protectionism, really.

    The forbidden fruit effect of the 1994 assault weapon ban kicked in and suddenly everyone wanted the rifles the government didn’t want you to have. The AR-15 was the poster boy for what Diane Feinstein disapproved of, with predictable results. These days AR-15s constitute about 25% of all new firearms sold in the US. Barack Obama is the greatest boon for the small arms industry since WW2.

    The current rumor is that the Dallas shooter used a converted Saiga-12 shotgun. The Saiga is an AK in shotgun form. With some home gunsmithing the shooter apparently converted it to 5.45X39 with 30 round detachable mags, essentially a AK-74 with some sort of low power scope on it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The most deplorable one

    The current rumor is that the Dallas shooter used a converted Saiga-12 shotgun. The Saiga is an AK in shotgun form. With some home gunsmithing the shooter apparently converted it to 5.45X39 with 30 round detachable mags, essentially a AK-74 with some sort of low power scope on it.
     
    There is no need for that as the Saiga comes in 7.62x51 (almost 308[1]), 7.62x39, 5.45x39 and 12 Gauge.

    [1] 7.62x51 is the NATO round. Essentially the same bullet, higher chamber pressures.
  70. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    The bomb robot is just another example of government waste. A simple hand grenade, or two, or three if the need be, would do the job just fine (more reliably, in fact) at 1/100th the cost of the robot (which isn't actually a robot but a fancy version of radio-controlled toy car from Toys-R-Us but it costs more if it is called a "robot", so it still costs a lot).

    Back to the whole Dallas shooting. Pick one:
    a) This was the most efficient, best thought-off mass attack executed by a black American.
    b) Our police force is so incompetent that it failed to recognize a single shooter and take appropriate actions.

    Back to the whole Dallas shooting. Pick one:
    a) This was the most efficient, best thought-off mass attack executed by a black American.
    b) Our police force is so incompetent that it failed to recognize a single shooter and take appropriate actions.

    Kind of a tough situation for the cops. For one thing, I think they assumed the protestors were the target, so part of their efforts were spent dispersing the protestors. And a bunch of the protestors had rifles, which confuses things (the cops deserve some credit for not killing any of those 2A guys). But if you had to pick one, I guess you’d have to go with b).

    There is some new tech that can detect the location of a shooter by analyzing the sound of the shot. That might have come in handy.

    Read More
  71. @Dave Pinsen
    I considered it problematic.

    Maybe I'm a bleeding heart by iSteve standards, but I don't think law enforcement should burn people alive, even suspected murderers.

    I also wasn't a fan of Waco.

    I also wasn’t a fan of Waco.

    You may find this comment of interest.

    Read More
  72. multiple news reports including the NYTimes are now saying that the gunman used an SKS rifle and a pistol. The SKS is a curious choice for a sniper rifle. It fires the same 7.62×39 round as the AK47 The only thing it has going for it is that it’s cheaper (less than $300) than an AR15 or even any AK47 variant. The standard rifle is limited to a fixed(non-removable) ten rounds magazine but can be modified with a larger capacity fixed magazine or even modified to accept detachable magazines. It is not considered particularly accurate or reliable as these things go.

    This is reminiscent of an incident in Israel in 2002.. A Palestinian sniper with an WWII-era 8mm Mauser bolt action rifle killed 10 Israeli soldiers and civilians at a West bank checkpoint. He fired 25 of the 30 rounds he possessed and only quit his attack when his rifle blew up after the 25th shot

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadi_al-Haramiya_sniper_attack

    Read More
    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    The media use the term sniper quite loosely. The military uses it to denote a long range marksman. The media tends to use it to describe anyone who fires with a long gun from a position of concealment. The SKS is a reasonably good carbine of its type and the 7.62x39mm round an effective anti-personnel round within 300 meters. I suspect at the range the killer was operating it could punch through any reasonable police body armor. Speed of reloading and large capacity magazines are highly overrated. A competent hand with a .450-500 Martini-Henry single-shot breach loading rifle of the Zulu wars can get off 10-12 aimed shots a minute. A practiced hand with a SMLE can achieve nearly semi-automatic rates of fire.

    Insofar as the Mauser is concerned, I'm surprised that it blew up--it must have been poorly maintained. There are 75-year old examples of such rifles that are still shooting quite well.

    The quality of the marksman matters much more than the weapon used, within broad limitations.
    , @Olorin
    "Sniper rifle" is a nonsense term. As DH notes, a longarm fired from concealment is the common use of it. In the M$M, "sniper rifle," like "assault rifle," is a Scary Name trigger.

    The SKS this guy was using is referred to here and there as Russian, but I'd bet it was Norinco.

    Still, if it WERE Russian, that would be a hoot. It was the Clinton Administration that shut off Norinco (modern SKS) importation and switched on a trade agreement involving importation of historic ex-Soviet SKSes from Russia. This was turned back off in 1996 when somebody got peeved at somebody something something.

    A lot of SKSes were bought and sold in the early Age of Obama and for pretty cheap, as was x 39 milsurp at the time.

    I've known law-abiding blacks who bought them for the expected Zombie Wars in and around Tacoma/Lakewood/South Seattle. Idea being organized neighborhood defense of the LA/Korean shopkeeper sort. We have a good number of black Army and Chair Force vets (real vets, not reservists) in Pugetopolis. Since home invasions in black neighborhoods tend to be done by plural numbers of chemically enhanced males, tucking away a guerrilla combat arm makes sense.

    However the laws and rules about what features which particular SKS can have, and what models, are pretty esoteric these past 20 years. Hugo, Nebula, and Sturgeon perennial runner-up William Sanders at SFF.net used to have a great piece on all of this (SKS history, importation, features, use), but it's been scrubbed from the site and apparently his own pages.

    Back when I used to backpack the Sangre de Cristos and thereabouts, the SKS was a common rifle among the Navajo for various reasons and known in some places as the Cowboy Carbine. Good varmint rifle, also good hunting rifle, and inexpensive ammo. Compact frame carried easily in a saddle or thigh holster. They are IME excellent rifles, comfortable to shoot, especially for smaller framed people, reasonably accurate, and by now there's a ton of accessories for them.

    Still, I'm not convinced Shooty McDallas used an SKS, though admittedly haven't dug into that.

    My initial reaction to the sudden appearance of that factoid, framed as it was, is that the NYT's content cabal was instructed to push the SKS story as an entree into arguing that, see, it's not just ASSAULT RIFLES, it's also those terrible Historic Guns that are the problem. Why, why, why, after all, those goyim overthrew Empire with BLACK POWDER and SNAKE FLAGS!

  73. dearieme says:

    Why do people use euphemisms such as “take down” when they mean “kill”?

    It’s worse that the absurd “passed away” for “died”. The latter is just a silly genteelism; the former is presumably propaganda of some kind.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Why do people use euphemisms such as “take down” when they mean “kill”?
     
    Because sometimes the euphemism is apropos. In answer to Steve’s headline question from April 26, the Dallas Police seem to have pioneered a way: The suspect was subdued and taken into custody, technically speaking. I agree with some other commenters that this may be a ‘problematic’ development in some respects.
  74. Jefferson says:
    @Senator Brundlefly
    Well, at least where still at the point where humans are the ones pulling the trigger. Can't wait for the future when Officer T-800 gets called racist for using cold algorithms based on crime statistics when pulling people over or making determinations of which areas to patrol. But I'm sure after some reprogramming his terminator vision can be rigged to read "politically problematic" when scanning certain individuals.

    “Can’t wait for the future when Officer T-800 gets called racist for using cold algorithms based on crime statistics when pulling people over or making determinations of which areas to patrol.”

    Can you imagine a T-800 entering a dangerous Negro housing project, kicking ass, and taking names like the Redneck biker bar scene in Judgment Day.

    The ACLU, Black Lies Matter, SPLC, NAACP, etc would all be livid.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    “F this boooshiiit! All up in here, killin’ black babies’ bodies, and too cheap to send in a T-1000? Got-damn disrespeck! That’s what it is!”
    , @Truth



    Can you imagine a T-800 entering a dangerous Negro housing project, kicking ass, and taking names like the Redneck biker bar scene in Judgment Day.
     
    No. But then I'm not pimply-faced 14 year old, so there is that.

    In any event, playtime is over. The reason they "used" a "bomb robot" is simply to put it in your lexicon so that you will get used to, and comfortable with, police using these tactics in the future; and believe me, I mean the NEAR future.

    They may, or may not have detonated such a device, but if they did, it was in an empty room. Why, because they didn't want to kill the actual shooter (if there was such a thing), because CIA agents take too long to train to actually blow one up with a bomb.

    So, ask yourself, how do you know that this "Micah" gentleman actually shot any police officers? Well, Ill tell you how you know; BECAUSE THEY TOLD YOU SO!

    Now, even having told you so, they did not trust you to get it on your own so they had to play dress-up black Barbie just to make sure you got it.

    Hey racists; he has military training (Insert military photo).

    Hey racists, he is a black nationalist (Insert dashiki photo).

    Hey racists, he's in cahoots with other black troublemakers (Insert Professor Griff photo).

    Now guys, this would concern me a bit if I were you, they used to just give you the coloring book, now because of their frustration with you being unable to stay between the lines, they actually strap you down to the chair, and guide your hand while you use it!
  75. @dearieme
    Why do people use euphemisms such as "take down" when they mean "kill"?

    It's worse that the absurd "passed away" for "died". The latter is just a silly genteelism; the former is presumably propaganda of some kind.

    Why do people use euphemisms such as “take down” when they mean “kill”?

    Because sometimes the euphemism is apropos. In answer to Steve’s headline question from April 26, the Dallas Police seem to have pioneered a way: The suspect was subdued and taken into custody, technically speaking. I agree with some other commenters that this may be a ‘problematic’ development in some respects.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dearieme
    "Because sometimes the euphemism is apropos." Well it wasn't here: he was most definitely killed, not tripped up, pushed over, rugby-tackled, or dragged underwater by his fishing line.
  76. @Jefferson
    "Can’t wait for the future when Officer T-800 gets called racist for using cold algorithms based on crime statistics when pulling people over or making determinations of which areas to patrol."

    Can you imagine a T-800 entering a dangerous Negro housing project, kicking ass, and taking names like the Redneck biker bar scene in Judgment Day.
    https://youtu.be/lYOoWCv_PYE

    The ACLU, Black Lies Matter, SPLC, NAACP, etc would all be livid.

    “F this boooshiiit! All up in here, killin’ black babies’ bodies, and too cheap to send in a T-1000? Got-damn disrespeck! That’s what it is!”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Eh, maybe I’ve commented too much on this thread. Steve, you can kill this comment and the T-1000 one.
  77. dearieme says:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Why do people use euphemisms such as “take down” when they mean “kill”?
     
    Because sometimes the euphemism is apropos. In answer to Steve’s headline question from April 26, the Dallas Police seem to have pioneered a way: The suspect was subdued and taken into custody, technically speaking. I agree with some other commenters that this may be a ‘problematic’ development in some respects.

    “Because sometimes the euphemism is apropos.” Well it wasn’t here: he was most definitely killed, not tripped up, pushed over, rugby-tackled, or dragged underwater by his fishing line.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Couldn’t resist zinging ya! But this guy, yeah—they really settled his hash.
  78. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    “F this boooshiiit! All up in here, killin’ black babies’ bodies, and too cheap to send in a T-1000? Got-damn disrespeck! That’s what it is!”

    Eh, maybe I’ve commented too much on this thread. Steve, you can kill this comment and the T-1000 one.

    Read More
  79. @Prof. Woland
    In 1941 the retreating Red Army used remote control to detonate bombs in buildings they knew would be occupied by the Germans. In one building, several hundred soldiers were blown up. After that they learned to case the buildings before occupying them.

    The bad guys in Iraq did that too. Killed some of our guys.

    Read More
  80. Truth says:
    @Jefferson
    "Militarization of police is here to stay. You don’t have kind neighborhood cops when you no longer have a neighborhood but an empire."

    It's hard to have kind neighborhood cops when on average America's Nonwhites are not as law abiding as Singaporeans and the Japanese for example.

    America does not get a lot of cream of the crop Nonwhites outside of Indians and the Chinese for example.

    It’s hard to have kind neighborhood cops when on average America’s Nonwhites are not as law abiding as Singaporeans and the Japanese for example.

    Are America’s whites?

    Read More
  81. Truth says:
    @Jefferson
    "Can’t wait for the future when Officer T-800 gets called racist for using cold algorithms based on crime statistics when pulling people over or making determinations of which areas to patrol."

    Can you imagine a T-800 entering a dangerous Negro housing project, kicking ass, and taking names like the Redneck biker bar scene in Judgment Day.
    https://youtu.be/lYOoWCv_PYE

    The ACLU, Black Lies Matter, SPLC, NAACP, etc would all be livid.

    Can you imagine a T-800 entering a dangerous Negro housing project, kicking ass, and taking names like the Redneck biker bar scene in Judgment Day.

    No. But then I’m not pimply-faced 14 year old, so there is that.

    In any event, playtime is over. The reason they “used” a “bomb robot” is simply to put it in your lexicon so that you will get used to, and comfortable with, police using these tactics in the future; and believe me, I mean the NEAR future.

    They may, or may not have detonated such a device, but if they did, it was in an empty room. Why, because they didn’t want to kill the actual shooter (if there was such a thing), because CIA agents take too long to train to actually blow one up with a bomb.

    So, ask yourself, how do you know that this “Micah” gentleman actually shot any police officers? Well, Ill tell you how you know; BECAUSE THEY TOLD YOU SO!

    Now, even having told you so, they did not trust you to get it on your own so they had to play dress-up black Barbie just to make sure you got it.

    Hey racists; he has military training (Insert military photo).

    Hey racists, he is a black nationalist (Insert dashiki photo).

    Hey racists, he’s in cahoots with other black troublemakers (Insert Professor Griff photo).

    Now guys, this would concern me a bit if I were you, they used to just give you the coloring book, now because of their frustration with you being unable to stay between the lines, they actually strap you down to the chair, and guide your hand while you use it!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
    The wife had Faux News on yesterday and I caught a bit of the coverage. They were saying that the bomb "obliterated the shooters body to the point that it would be impossible to do drug/substance testing on the remains".
    , @Jefferson
    Hey Negro Truth if this was a set up by the government, they would have used a Right Wing White supremacist who is wearing a "Make America Great Again" cap and he would be shooting at your people, not White cops.

    Let me guess, since you are Black you believe Micah Johnson was a government plant but not Dylann Roof. Dylann was just a plain crazy evil racist Cracka correct?

    You have to be on crack if you believe The U.S government set this up to make your Negro race look bad.

    The U.S government is pro-Black, not pro-White.

  82. dearieme says:

    The procedure the police should use is obvious. Having cornered the wretch, they should phone O and say “Mr President, we have a little local difficulty here with the son you never had. Please come and sort it out for us.”

    That should do the trick.

    Read More
  83. @Truth



    Can you imagine a T-800 entering a dangerous Negro housing project, kicking ass, and taking names like the Redneck biker bar scene in Judgment Day.
     
    No. But then I'm not pimply-faced 14 year old, so there is that.

    In any event, playtime is over. The reason they "used" a "bomb robot" is simply to put it in your lexicon so that you will get used to, and comfortable with, police using these tactics in the future; and believe me, I mean the NEAR future.

    They may, or may not have detonated such a device, but if they did, it was in an empty room. Why, because they didn't want to kill the actual shooter (if there was such a thing), because CIA agents take too long to train to actually blow one up with a bomb.

    So, ask yourself, how do you know that this "Micah" gentleman actually shot any police officers? Well, Ill tell you how you know; BECAUSE THEY TOLD YOU SO!

    Now, even having told you so, they did not trust you to get it on your own so they had to play dress-up black Barbie just to make sure you got it.

    Hey racists; he has military training (Insert military photo).

    Hey racists, he is a black nationalist (Insert dashiki photo).

    Hey racists, he's in cahoots with other black troublemakers (Insert Professor Griff photo).

    Now guys, this would concern me a bit if I were you, they used to just give you the coloring book, now because of their frustration with you being unable to stay between the lines, they actually strap you down to the chair, and guide your hand while you use it!

    The wife had Faux News on yesterday and I caught a bit of the coverage. They were saying that the bomb “obliterated the shooters body to the point that it would be impossible to do drug/substance testing on the remains”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    Yes of course they did, they same way the killed "the most wanted criminal in the history of America" and dumped his body off the side of a ship!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm81LSKJC2k

    Oh, and by the way, what happened to the other the other three shooters with him? (see above clip.)
  84. Clyde says:
    @Steve Sailer
    I paid $6 to see that in 1987 in "Robocop."

    I paid $6 to see that in 1987 in “Robocop.”

    The movie theater was packed the day I saw it in 1987. Decent scifi movie. I am liking the third season of “The Last Ship” that is on the boob toob now. The guy who plays the Chinese Prime Minister is very good at evil.

    Read More
  85. @jesse helms think-alike
    multiple news reports including the NYTimes are now saying that the gunman used an SKS rifle and a pistol. The SKS is a curious choice for a sniper rifle. It fires the same 7.62x39 round as the AK47 The only thing it has going for it is that it's cheaper (less than $300) than an AR15 or even any AK47 variant. The standard rifle is limited to a fixed(non-removable) ten rounds magazine but can be modified with a larger capacity fixed magazine or even modified to accept detachable magazines. It is not considered particularly accurate or reliable as these things go.

    This is reminiscent of an incident in Israel in 2002.. A Palestinian sniper with an WWII-era 8mm Mauser bolt action rifle killed 10 Israeli soldiers and civilians at a West bank checkpoint. He fired 25 of the 30 rounds he possessed and only quit his attack when his rifle blew up after the 25th shot

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadi_al-Haramiya_sniper_attack

    The media use the term sniper quite loosely. The military uses it to denote a long range marksman. The media tends to use it to describe anyone who fires with a long gun from a position of concealment. The SKS is a reasonably good carbine of its type and the 7.62x39mm round an effective anti-personnel round within 300 meters. I suspect at the range the killer was operating it could punch through any reasonable police body armor. Speed of reloading and large capacity magazines are highly overrated. A competent hand with a .450-500 Martini-Henry single-shot breach loading rifle of the Zulu wars can get off 10-12 aimed shots a minute. A practiced hand with a SMLE can achieve nearly semi-automatic rates of fire.

    Insofar as the Mauser is concerned, I’m surprised that it blew up–it must have been poorly maintained. There are 75-year old examples of such rifles that are still shooting quite well.

    The quality of the marksman matters much more than the weapon used, within broad limitations.

    Read More
  86. @SPMoore8
    "Between The Bot and the Sold: The E-Race-Sure of Carbon Based Bodies With Silicon Based Bomb Bots" -- 2017 Pulitzer, by T. Genius Coates

    That should be “Bomb bots that think they are silicon based”.

    Read More
  87. @dearieme
    "Because sometimes the euphemism is apropos." Well it wasn't here: he was most definitely killed, not tripped up, pushed over, rugby-tackled, or dragged underwater by his fishing line.

    Couldn’t resist zinging ya! But this guy, yeah—they really settled his hash.

    Read More
  88. Truth says:
    @Chris Mallory
    The wife had Faux News on yesterday and I caught a bit of the coverage. They were saying that the bomb "obliterated the shooters body to the point that it would be impossible to do drug/substance testing on the remains".

    Yes of course they did, they same way the killed “the most wanted criminal in the history of America” and dumped his body off the side of a ship!

    Oh, and by the way, what happened to the other the other three shooters with him? (see above clip.)

    Read More
  89. @matt
    There are a lot of comments here that confuse two questions; namely, (1) given that they apparently had access to it, was it necessary for the police to use their exploding death robot in Dallas on the night of July 7th?; and (2) as a general rule, should police departments be allowed to have exploding death robots?

    These are independent questions. For example, suppose I have in my possession a Man-Portable-Air-Defense-System, and for some reason, I find myself in an extremely rare circumstance (a total fluke) in which it is absolutely necessary to use the MANPADS. There are two questions:

    (3) Given that I have the weapon, should I use my MANPADS in this scenario?

    (4) Should civilians like myself be allowed to have MANPADS in the first place?

    The answer to (3), by stipulaton, is "Yes". The answer to (4) is quite obviously no, notwithstanding the extremely rare hypothetical scenario that I found myself in in this example.

    Similarly, it seems clear that the Dallas police had every right to use their exploding death robot in their extremely rare situation, given that they had it. On the other hand, police departments should not be allowed to have exploding killer death robots, for all sorts of reasons that I hope aren't necessary to articulate, and notwithstanding extremely rare scenarios like the one we saw in Dallas recently.

    They used a bomb disposal robot, which have been around for quite a while as Steve discussed. It’s just a remote controlled vehicle with cameras and a simple mechanical arm. It can carry an explosive that is used to destroy the bomb (a bomb to blow up a bomb). Unless the police used some other, more powerful explosive to kill the shooter, the police didn’t have anything unusual. The innovation was in how the robot was used. The police had a bomb disposal robot but used it as a killer death robot. I think the answer is that the police should certainly be allowed to have bomb disposal robots. You argued (correctly in my opinion) that the police had every right to use it in this particular extremely rare situation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @matt
    Suppose I have devised a way to concoct an anti-aircraft weapon out of my toaster and other common household items. Suppose further that I find myself in an extremely rare situation in which I find it completely necessary to use this concocted weapon to shoot down a flying vehicle.

    (1) Should I use my concocted weapon in this scenario?

    By hypothesis, yes.

    (2) Should I, notwithstanding the extremely rare scenario I just found myself in, be allowed to create an anti-aircraft weapon out of my toaster and other common household items?

    Hell no, and if it wasn't already illegal it should be now.

  90. @Dave Pinsen

    Do I drop atomic bombs and kill Japanese until they surrender? Or do I invade Japan and cause the deaths of a million Japanese and Americans?
     
    Dropping atomic bombs on Japan was completely unnecessary, and they idea that it saved American lives (the number of hypothetical American lives kept getting raised over the years) is false. Japan was no threat to anyone by August of 1945. That's not just a hippie sentiment; it's one that was shared by Admirals Nimitz and Halsey, General Curtis LeMay, etc.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#Militarily_unnecessary

    The main reasons Japan surrendered were fear of the Russians invading their home islands after routing them in Manchuria, and our agreement to let them keep their emperor.

    But your Japan analogy actually isn't a bad one in this case. Like Japan in 1945, the suspected terrorist in Dallas (he was, still, technically a suspect at that point, right?) was no longer much of a threat (except to cops who approached him). He didn't have any hostages, and he wasn't on the offensive. He may have been wounded (presumably, at least one of the dozen or so Dallas cops who fired their weapons hit him). Like Japan, time wasn't on his side. Did he have food with him, or water?

    What was the rush to blow him up at that point? Why not cordon off the area and wait him out? Maybe offer him food or water laced with a sedative.

    My late father was the luckiest SOB of the war. About a decade ago, my brother was given a box from my Aunt with all his bric-a-brac including his USAAC military records which I ended up with. He finished his training and received his orders to ship out August 15th, 1945, the same day Japan announced their surrender. He was headed to Saipan the following week to fight as a tail gunner on a B-29.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    A friend of my parents was in a similar cohort. Was in the Navy and ended up serving in the occupation of Japan. He said the only structures standing in Tokyo when he got there were the bank vaults.
  91. meh says:

    Robot bombs go way back.

    Goliath tracked mine, German, WWII:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goliath_tracked_mine

    Kettering Bug, American, WWI:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kettering_Bug

    Read More
    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    Not forgetting that the good ole V-weapons were already halfway there, sort of dumb drones. Didn't half spoil breakfast in Chiswick.


    Perhaps the Dallas PD ought to kit themselves out with MANPADs and LAHATs? Keeps officers out of harms way.

  92. Jefferson says:
    @Truth



    Can you imagine a T-800 entering a dangerous Negro housing project, kicking ass, and taking names like the Redneck biker bar scene in Judgment Day.
     
    No. But then I'm not pimply-faced 14 year old, so there is that.

    In any event, playtime is over. The reason they "used" a "bomb robot" is simply to put it in your lexicon so that you will get used to, and comfortable with, police using these tactics in the future; and believe me, I mean the NEAR future.

    They may, or may not have detonated such a device, but if they did, it was in an empty room. Why, because they didn't want to kill the actual shooter (if there was such a thing), because CIA agents take too long to train to actually blow one up with a bomb.

    So, ask yourself, how do you know that this "Micah" gentleman actually shot any police officers? Well, Ill tell you how you know; BECAUSE THEY TOLD YOU SO!

    Now, even having told you so, they did not trust you to get it on your own so they had to play dress-up black Barbie just to make sure you got it.

    Hey racists; he has military training (Insert military photo).

    Hey racists, he is a black nationalist (Insert dashiki photo).

    Hey racists, he's in cahoots with other black troublemakers (Insert Professor Griff photo).

    Now guys, this would concern me a bit if I were you, they used to just give you the coloring book, now because of their frustration with you being unable to stay between the lines, they actually strap you down to the chair, and guide your hand while you use it!

    Hey Negro Truth if this was a set up by the government, they would have used a Right Wing White supremacist who is wearing a “Make America Great Again” cap and he would be shooting at your people, not White cops.

    Let me guess, since you are Black you believe Micah Johnson was a government plant but not Dylann Roof. Dylann was just a plain crazy evil racist Cracka correct?

    You have to be on crack if you believe The U.S government set this up to make your Negro race look bad.

    The U.S government is pro-Black, not pro-White.

    Read More
  93. Jefferson says:
    @Chris Mallory
    I had problems with it when they did it to Dorner. I had problems with it when they did it to Bob Matthews. I had problems with it when they burned out Gordon Kahl. I had problems with it at Waco and in Philly. And I have problems with how they did this.

    “I had problems with it when they did it to Dorner.”

    I didn’t and still don’t. If Christopher Dorner was a White man, do you think any Black person would have said it was wrong that LAPD burned him alive? Hell no they wouldn’t, they would have said good riddance.

    For me racial tribalism trumps Libertarianism. I don’t give a damn about the civil rights of Mulignans because they don’t give a damn about the civil rights of my White ass or any other White person.

    You don’t see Black Lies Matter shed any tears over White people who are killed by police officers. No hastag ‘Say Their Names” from Black Twitter when a White gets killed by a cop.

    Libertarianism is an extremely retarded political ideology to have in a multiracial society. It would make more sense though if we lived in a racially homogeneous society.

    Read More
  94. gcochran says:
    @cthulhu
    Didn't the police have the guy bottled up? Why not just wait him out? Unless he brought food and water or had a bomb with a deadman switch, eventually he would have been straightforward to capture.

    I have no issues with the remote controlled device or the death by explosives, just wondering what the hurry was.

    If they had wasted time, he might have surrendered, costing the state millions for the trial and life imprisonment.

    Read More
    • Agree: MEH 0910
    • Replies: @cthulhu
    Maybe the company that made the robot should start a new product line - call it the Jack Ruby model.
    , @Brutusale
    We could fight 'em with conventional weapons...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7vtWB4owdE

  95. cthulhu says:
    @gcochran
    If they had wasted time, he might have surrendered, costing the state millions for the trial and life imprisonment.

    Maybe the company that made the robot should start a new product line – call it the Jack Ruby model.

    Read More
  96. @Jefferson
    "But the decision ignited a debate about the increasing militarization of police and the remote-controlled use of force, and raised the specter of a new era of policing."

    Would The New York Times still be worried about increased militarization if the robot had killed a White Christian Donald Trump supporter who was gunning down members of Mulignan Lies Matter instead of White cops?

    The NYT are just upset because another one of Barack Hussein Obama's sons bit the dust. I am quite confident The NYT wish law enforcement had used a robot to kill Dylann Roof. The NYT has never been Libertarian when it comes to White lives and our civil rights. The NYT is only Libertarian when it comes to Blacks, Muslims, and other Nonwhite lives.

    The NYT are cafeteria Libertarians. You never see them write negative articles about collge campuses shitting all over the 1st amendment.

    I like that term, “Cafeteria Libertarianism.” I think it captures something that bothers me about both this situation, Ferguson, and NSA. In all these cases, liberals use the language of libertarianism to defend their preferred groups-minorities. Whenever I see these arguments, I feel mixed. On the one hand, I know the left is being disingenuous. The examples they use inevitably suffer Narrative Collapse and if the injustices were real and happened to their political enemies, they would cheer it. On the other hand, because they use libertarian arguments, I see the kernel of truth hiding within.

    As a libertarian, I’m concerned about the militarization of the police. It inverts the relationship of citizen and state, turning the public and its public servants into domestic animals and their zoo keepers. But what other option do we have when cities descend into CVS burning anarchy?

    I hate the NSA’s mass collection of data about us, destroying the 4th amendment. There are times where I think commenting here is a bad idea because I’m leaving evidence of political incorrectness that our government can take note of. But I see the other side too. When radical jihadists are living among us, ready to attack marathons and gay clubs, why shouldn’t we take note when people frequent radical material?

    As a libertarian, I’m concerned when we use technology to remotely destroy people. I mean, look at SWAT teams, originally created for rare and dangerous situations, now used liberally for no-knock warrant serving, another knife in the back of the 4th amendment. This bomb robot is just the beginning of something that will escalate similarly. When the elites can take us out in such a sanitized manner, of course they’ll take it. But in this specific situation, what option do we have? The use of the robot was perfectly reasonable, saving officer’s lives. But now there’s a precedent for it to be a routine tactic.

    That’s the thing about multiculturalism, it produces results that make nascent authoritarianism seem understandable and reasonable. A boot in the door, ready to come closer to stamp on our faces forever. For when a people lack a culture to unify them and develop a common moral schema of the world, when their neighbors speak a different tongue and think things should be run in a fundamentally different way, when we can suppose nothing about each other and thus eye each other with suspicion, what other means do we have to keep things together than blunt, ugly, force? How can we afford such luxuries as civil liberties? That’s why despite it being arguably unlibertarian to do so, I’ve grown to hate multiculturalism.

    Read More
  97. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @Boomstick
    SKS's were one of the early Chinese manufactured goods exports to the US in the early 90's. They were being sold for $75 a pop, often with a crate of ammo tossed in; they were the cheaper alternative to the imported semiauto Chinese AKs, which were going for about $200. Around my hometown the farmers started tossing an SKS in the back of the pickup cab instead of a lever action 30-30. One of the odder students at the college I was attending had plans to weld together an anti-aircraft mount with four of them, and I guess put it on the back of his Volkswagen. Not sure if he ever completed that project. Then the small arms imports were banned as a retaliation for some Chinese misdeed and the great Norinco era ended.

    Ironically the import ban helped form the domestic AR-15 industry. AR-15s had sold at a higher price point, but with cheap Chinese arms imports eliminated the domestically produced AR suddenly became price competitive. It was a pretty good case study for protectionism, really.

    The forbidden fruit effect of the 1994 assault weapon ban kicked in and suddenly everyone wanted the rifles the government didn't want you to have. The AR-15 was the poster boy for what Diane Feinstein disapproved of, with predictable results. These days AR-15s constitute about 25% of all new firearms sold in the US. Barack Obama is the greatest boon for the small arms industry since WW2.

    The current rumor is that the Dallas shooter used a converted Saiga-12 shotgun. The Saiga is an AK in shotgun form. With some home gunsmithing the shooter apparently converted it to 5.45X39 with 30 round detachable mags, essentially a AK-74 with some sort of low power scope on it.

    The current rumor is that the Dallas shooter used a converted Saiga-12 shotgun. The Saiga is an AK in shotgun form. With some home gunsmithing the shooter apparently converted it to 5.45X39 with 30 round detachable mags, essentially a AK-74 with some sort of low power scope on it.

    There is no need for that as the Saiga comes in 7.62×51 (almost 308[1]), 7.62×39, 5.45×39 and 12 Gauge.

    [1] 7.62×51 is the NATO round. Essentially the same bullet, higher chamber pressures.

    Read More
  98. @SPMoore8
    The reason I thought it was funny when you brought the Trolley Problem up last night is because I think it is one of the dumbest issues in ethical theory.

    The problem basically comes down to actual practical conduct in life, and there are two choices:

    1. If you act, you will save the lives of X, but cause the death of Y.
    2. If you do not act, you will witness the death of X, and Y will be also be a witness to the death of X.

    Probably 90% of humans act in ways to maximize the saving of life rather than its destruction, that is a no brainer in practical terms, which is why, outside of professors of philosophy, the Problem is impressive in its dumbness.

    That doesn't mean it can't lead to some interesting real world issues with ethics, to the extent that ethics gets into utilitarianism, or duty-driven ethics, or self-sacrificing ethics, or Golden Rule ethics, or non-reward ethics. But I think it's better to just study the evolution of those teachings than to get focused on the nature of the people tied to the tracks.

    The Trolley Problem is also a trivial simplification for any number of serious "end justifies means" arguments, as well as the fact that we tend to seek to protect people who are nearer and dearer to us than strangers, which is hardly surprising. Again, I am surprised at the extent that this is considered a serious "problem." The more specifications that are prescribed for the problem (e.g., Jesus Christ is on the one track, Hitler on the other) just makes it more unrealistic and therefore silly.

    As to this case: A known killer who had just shot a dozen police officers and threatened to explode bombs all over the city was killed, but instead of threatening the lives of any more police officers, he was killed remotely. I think I'd rather argue about the All Star Game rosters than this.

    1. If you act, you will save the lives of X, but cause the death of Y.
    2. If you do not act, you will witness the death of X, and Y will be also be a witness to the death of X.

    Exactly. Would you rather be the calculating murderer of an hypothetically innocent party who’d had an accident (1.), or a cowardly and horrified bystander (2.) grieving for those poor simpletons who’d somehow contrived to get themselves, en masse, in such an unlikely fix?
    That random trolley-car is not who we are.
    The ancients called it “Fate”, or “Doom”, and not to be trifled with.
    In fact, this “problem” is so ethically gnarly, I’d have to light up my pipe and consider the options, if confronted with it in real life. Maybe order a brandy, for the incipient shock. Possibly take notes, for future reference.

    Read More
  99. @meh
    Robot bombs go way back.

    Goliath tracked mine, German, WWII:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goliath_tracked_mine

    Kettering Bug, American, WWI:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kettering_Bug

    Not forgetting that the good ole V-weapons were already halfway there, sort of dumb drones. Didn’t half spoil breakfast in Chiswick.

    Perhaps the Dallas PD ought to kit themselves out with MANPADs and LAHATs? Keeps officers out of harms way.

    Read More
  100. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Prof. Woland
    My late father was the luckiest SOB of the war. About a decade ago, my brother was given a box from my Aunt with all his bric-a-brac including his USAAC military records which I ended up with. He finished his training and received his orders to ship out August 15th, 1945, the same day Japan announced their surrender. He was headed to Saipan the following week to fight as a tail gunner on a B-29.

    A friend of my parents was in a similar cohort. Was in the Navy and ended up serving in the occupation of Japan. He said the only structures standing in Tokyo when he got there were the bank vaults.

    Read More
  101. @NickG

    town police chief said he was about to have his bomb robot
     
    I served in the UK military in Northern Ireland in the early 80s. The remote controlled bomb-disposal robot was called 'Wheelbarrow', and looked like a small tank chassis. On top of this was a camera and remote control arm, together with a remotely fireable shotgun. This was used by the bomb disposal specialist guy - callsign Felix - and was amongst various bits of kit they carried around in their specialist vehicles. I've seen it deployed a number of times.

    I see there is even a Wikipedia Article.

    Typically Wheelbarrow was used to approach suspected car-bombs and look for explosives, it can open locked car doors and boots (trunks) - using the shotgun on the lock. Wheelbarrow has gone through various iterations. It would be simple enough to attach an explosive device, such as a Claymore mine to Wheelbarrow, giving it an offensive capability. I have little doubt this or something very much like it was used to kill the Dallas shooter.

    Did it suffer from the (original) Daleks’ Achille’s heel. Easily outwitted by using a short flight of stairs, or a ladder? Never mind scaffolding.

    Read More
  102. MEH 0910 says:
    @Truth
    Yes of course they did, they same way the killed "the most wanted criminal in the history of America" and dumped his body off the side of a ship!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm81LSKJC2k

    Oh, and by the way, what happened to the other the other three shooters with him? (see above clip.)

    Read More
  103. EdwardM says:

    One of my first thoughts after seeing the news about Dallas was that this bombing robot is a bit dystopian.

    When the Dallas police chief was recounting events, he used the word “suspect” about a hundred times. And the media reports also use this word incessantly. Everyone understands the presumption of innocence, in our system, but this is just lazy or silly reporting. Is one merely a “suspect” even if he admits the crime, as long as he hasn’t been convicted?

    More importantly, do police use bombs to remote-detonate people who are merely “suspects”?

    Read More
  104. @EdwardM
    One of my first thoughts after seeing the news about Dallas was that this bombing robot is a bit dystopian.

    When the Dallas police chief was recounting events, he used the word "suspect" about a hundred times. And the media reports also use this word incessantly. Everyone understands the presumption of innocence, in our system, but this is just lazy or silly reporting. Is one merely a "suspect" even if he admits the crime, as long as he hasn't been convicted?

    More importantly, do police use bombs to remote-detonate people who are merely "suspects"?

    Police forces have used snipers for decades.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Generally, to save the lives of hostages. Not the case in Dallas.
    , @matt
    Among other things, a sniper rifle has a rather more circumscribed range of destructive impact than an exploding death robot.
  105. @Dave Pinsen

    Do I drop atomic bombs and kill Japanese until they surrender? Or do I invade Japan and cause the deaths of a million Japanese and Americans?
     
    Dropping atomic bombs on Japan was completely unnecessary, and they idea that it saved American lives (the number of hypothetical American lives kept getting raised over the years) is false. Japan was no threat to anyone by August of 1945. That's not just a hippie sentiment; it's one that was shared by Admirals Nimitz and Halsey, General Curtis LeMay, etc.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#Militarily_unnecessary

    The main reasons Japan surrendered were fear of the Russians invading their home islands after routing them in Manchuria, and our agreement to let them keep their emperor.

    But your Japan analogy actually isn't a bad one in this case. Like Japan in 1945, the suspected terrorist in Dallas (he was, still, technically a suspect at that point, right?) was no longer much of a threat (except to cops who approached him). He didn't have any hostages, and he wasn't on the offensive. He may have been wounded (presumably, at least one of the dozen or so Dallas cops who fired their weapons hit him). Like Japan, time wasn't on his side. Did he have food with him, or water?

    What was the rush to blow him up at that point? Why not cordon off the area and wait him out? Maybe offer him food or water laced with a sedative.

    Dropping atomic bombs on Japan was completely unnecessary

    Right, because they were just looking for someone to surrender to. Except that on Saipan it didn’t work out that way. Nor would it have worked out that way in Japan.

    It is true that we could have just waited. We had destroyed enough of their infrastructure so that they could not supply food to their population. And we could have kept pounding them with conventional weapons. So we could have conventionally bombed or starved most of them to death. Probably twenty million could have been sufficient, but maybe we could have waited for more. WTH, with just a two year hiatus we could have starved at least thirty million to death. Maybe it would have been 35 or 38 million – just the subsistence farmers left.

    But then we would violate the deontological ethics Christianity has saddled us with. Truman knew this.

    Why don’t you?

    Read More
  106. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Steve Sailer
    Police forces have used snipers for decades.

    Generally, to save the lives of hostages. Not the case in Dallas.

    Read More
  107. @Steve Sailer
    I always like the version of the Trolley Problem that tries to get around concerns that maybe pushing a man off a bridge to his death might not stop a runaway trolley by specifying that the man you could choose to push is the size of an NFL offensive lineman?

    Aren't those guys hard to push? Might he not push back?

    Indeed – the question is really about morality. The real question being asked is, would you sacrifice yourself? Would you sacrifice someone else? Who/whom yet again.

    Read More
  108. Olorin says:
    @Steve Sailer
    We need the Miniaturization of the Police.

    I don't know what that actually means, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

    Raquel Welch in a skin-tight white body suit occurs to me. Hm.

    Also Donald Pleasence being eaten by a neutrophil.

    Read More
  109. matt says:
    @Federalist
    They used a bomb disposal robot, which have been around for quite a while as Steve discussed. It's just a remote controlled vehicle with cameras and a simple mechanical arm. It can carry an explosive that is used to destroy the bomb (a bomb to blow up a bomb). Unless the police used some other, more powerful explosive to kill the shooter, the police didn't have anything unusual. The innovation was in how the robot was used. The police had a bomb disposal robot but used it as a killer death robot. I think the answer is that the police should certainly be allowed to have bomb disposal robots. You argued (correctly in my opinion) that the police had every right to use it in this particular extremely rare situation.

    Suppose I have devised a way to concoct an anti-aircraft weapon out of my toaster and other common household items. Suppose further that I find myself in an extremely rare situation in which I find it completely necessary to use this concocted weapon to shoot down a flying vehicle.

    (1) Should I use my concocted weapon in this scenario?

    By hypothesis, yes.

    (2) Should I, notwithstanding the extremely rare scenario I just found myself in, be allowed to create an anti-aircraft weapon out of my toaster and other common household items?

    Hell no, and if it wasn’t already illegal it should be now.

    Read More
  110. matt says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Police forces have used snipers for decades.

    Among other things, a sniper rifle has a rather more circumscribed range of destructive impact than an exploding death robot.

    Read More
  111. @rod1963
    Speaking of bombs.

    I wondered why the Dems weren't screaming at AR-15's. Now I know why, I just heard on FoxNews that the shooter used a ancient Russian SKS to do the killing. It has a non-detachable 10 rd magazine that you feed from the top. It's not even on par with a AK-47(which he could have done a lot more damage with)

    SKS:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS

    A lot of them are still sold in the U.S. as a cheap carbine.

    Apparently this guy was upholding a Dallas tradition of using crappy weapons to carry out notorious killings.

    Oswald, you will remember, had a Mannlicher Carcano that was probably the worst rifle in any nations’ service during WWII. The SKS isn’t quite that bad, but it isn’t very good. They were dirt cheap for a reason: Chinese built examples are often unsafe to shoot without skilled gunsmithing and are usually inaccurate and balky.

    Read More
  112. Brutusale says:
    @SPMoore8
    The Fat Man version of the problem is simply a variant designed to make you feel more guilty if you act, in other words, if you just flick a switch you are more distant, but to actually push someone over is much more hands on. I think the easiest solution is just to stipulate that the Fat Man on the Bridge is Teddy Kennedy driving a Lincoln, and then you have solved a number of problems at once.

    The Great White Whale of Hyannisport was driving an Oldsmobile when he went off the bridge at Chappaquiddick.

    Read More
  113. Brutusale says:
    @Taco
    Did movie tickets really cost $6 in 1987?

    I remember they were $7 when I was in high school in the late 1990s.

    Had to be more like $4 in 1987, right?

    In one of Dan Jenkins’ novels, a rich guy character stated that a movie ticket always costs the same as a martini in the Bar Room at 21 in NYC. It seems to track pretty well through the years.

    Read More
  114. SPMoore8 says:
    @Brutusale
    The Great White Whale of Hyannisport was driving an Oldsmobile when he went off the bridge at Chappaquiddick.

    Thanks. An Oldsmobile Delmont 88.

    Read More
  115. Brutusale says:
    @gcochran
    If they had wasted time, he might have surrendered, costing the state millions for the trial and life imprisonment.

    We could fight ‘em with conventional weapons…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7vtWB4owdE

    Read More
  116. Olorin says:
    @jesse helms think-alike
    multiple news reports including the NYTimes are now saying that the gunman used an SKS rifle and a pistol. The SKS is a curious choice for a sniper rifle. It fires the same 7.62x39 round as the AK47 The only thing it has going for it is that it's cheaper (less than $300) than an AR15 or even any AK47 variant. The standard rifle is limited to a fixed(non-removable) ten rounds magazine but can be modified with a larger capacity fixed magazine or even modified to accept detachable magazines. It is not considered particularly accurate or reliable as these things go.

    This is reminiscent of an incident in Israel in 2002.. A Palestinian sniper with an WWII-era 8mm Mauser bolt action rifle killed 10 Israeli soldiers and civilians at a West bank checkpoint. He fired 25 of the 30 rounds he possessed and only quit his attack when his rifle blew up after the 25th shot

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadi_al-Haramiya_sniper_attack

    “Sniper rifle” is a nonsense term. As DH notes, a longarm fired from concealment is the common use of it. In the M$M, “sniper rifle,” like “assault rifle,” is a Scary Name trigger.

    The SKS this guy was using is referred to here and there as Russian, but I’d bet it was Norinco.

    Still, if it WERE Russian, that would be a hoot. It was the Clinton Administration that shut off Norinco (modern SKS) importation and switched on a trade agreement involving importation of historic ex-Soviet SKSes from Russia. This was turned back off in 1996 when somebody got peeved at somebody something something.

    A lot of SKSes were bought and sold in the early Age of Obama and for pretty cheap, as was x 39 milsurp at the time.

    I’ve known law-abiding blacks who bought them for the expected Zombie Wars in and around Tacoma/Lakewood/South Seattle. Idea being organized neighborhood defense of the LA/Korean shopkeeper sort. We have a good number of black Army and Chair Force vets (real vets, not reservists) in Pugetopolis. Since home invasions in black neighborhoods tend to be done by plural numbers of chemically enhanced males, tucking away a guerrilla combat arm makes sense.

    However the laws and rules about what features which particular SKS can have, and what models, are pretty esoteric these past 20 years. Hugo, Nebula, and Sturgeon perennial runner-up William Sanders at SFF.net used to have a great piece on all of this (SKS history, importation, features, use), but it’s been scrubbed from the site and apparently his own pages.

    Back when I used to backpack the Sangre de Cristos and thereabouts, the SKS was a common rifle among the Navajo for various reasons and known in some places as the Cowboy Carbine. Good varmint rifle, also good hunting rifle, and inexpensive ammo. Compact frame carried easily in a saddle or thigh holster. They are IME excellent rifles, comfortable to shoot, especially for smaller framed people, reasonably accurate, and by now there’s a ton of accessories for them.

    Still, I’m not convinced Shooty McDallas used an SKS, though admittedly haven’t dug into that.

    My initial reaction to the sudden appearance of that factoid, framed as it was, is that the NYT’s content cabal was instructed to push the SKS story as an entree into arguing that, see, it’s not just ASSAULT RIFLES, it’s also those terrible Historic Guns that are the problem. Why, why, why, after all, those goyim overthrew Empire with BLACK POWDER and SNAKE FLAGS!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Olorin
    Hate to reply to myself...but as I wrote above:

    My initial reaction to the sudden appearance of that factoid, framed as it was, is that the NYT’s content cabal was instructed to push the SKS story as an entree into arguing that, see, it’s not just ASSAULT RIFLES, it’s also those terrible Historic Guns that are the problem.
     
    Found this just this morning:

    Dallas shooting rifle: a "curio or relic," but still deadly
    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dallas-guman-shooting-micah-johnson-sks-rifle/

    Seems to have been posted the same day I commented the above, though I hadn't seen it at the time.

    Now they're saying that Shooty McDallas used an Izzy-Saiga AK-74. BAD HISTORIC GUN!

    God's garters, but not only do we deserve better, we deserve a less predictable and idiotically obsessive-compulsive (((elite))). The ones we have aren't even interesting anymore. They're like that oddball uncle who spends all of Thanksgiving dinner talking about Chem Trails as an offshoot of MK-ULTRA or the Cat Lady who runs Germany and wants more cats.

  117. Olorin says:
    @Olorin
    "Sniper rifle" is a nonsense term. As DH notes, a longarm fired from concealment is the common use of it. In the M$M, "sniper rifle," like "assault rifle," is a Scary Name trigger.

    The SKS this guy was using is referred to here and there as Russian, but I'd bet it was Norinco.

    Still, if it WERE Russian, that would be a hoot. It was the Clinton Administration that shut off Norinco (modern SKS) importation and switched on a trade agreement involving importation of historic ex-Soviet SKSes from Russia. This was turned back off in 1996 when somebody got peeved at somebody something something.

    A lot of SKSes were bought and sold in the early Age of Obama and for pretty cheap, as was x 39 milsurp at the time.

    I've known law-abiding blacks who bought them for the expected Zombie Wars in and around Tacoma/Lakewood/South Seattle. Idea being organized neighborhood defense of the LA/Korean shopkeeper sort. We have a good number of black Army and Chair Force vets (real vets, not reservists) in Pugetopolis. Since home invasions in black neighborhoods tend to be done by plural numbers of chemically enhanced males, tucking away a guerrilla combat arm makes sense.

    However the laws and rules about what features which particular SKS can have, and what models, are pretty esoteric these past 20 years. Hugo, Nebula, and Sturgeon perennial runner-up William Sanders at SFF.net used to have a great piece on all of this (SKS history, importation, features, use), but it's been scrubbed from the site and apparently his own pages.

    Back when I used to backpack the Sangre de Cristos and thereabouts, the SKS was a common rifle among the Navajo for various reasons and known in some places as the Cowboy Carbine. Good varmint rifle, also good hunting rifle, and inexpensive ammo. Compact frame carried easily in a saddle or thigh holster. They are IME excellent rifles, comfortable to shoot, especially for smaller framed people, reasonably accurate, and by now there's a ton of accessories for them.

    Still, I'm not convinced Shooty McDallas used an SKS, though admittedly haven't dug into that.

    My initial reaction to the sudden appearance of that factoid, framed as it was, is that the NYT's content cabal was instructed to push the SKS story as an entree into arguing that, see, it's not just ASSAULT RIFLES, it's also those terrible Historic Guns that are the problem. Why, why, why, after all, those goyim overthrew Empire with BLACK POWDER and SNAKE FLAGS!

    Hate to reply to myself…but as I wrote above:

    My initial reaction to the sudden appearance of that factoid, framed as it was, is that the NYT’s content cabal was instructed to push the SKS story as an entree into arguing that, see, it’s not just ASSAULT RIFLES, it’s also those terrible Historic Guns that are the problem.

    Found this just this morning:

    Dallas shooting rifle: a “curio or relic,” but still deadly

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dallas-guman-shooting-micah-johnson-sks-rifle/

    Seems to have been posted the same day I commented the above, though I hadn’t seen it at the time.

    Now they’re saying that Shooty McDallas used an Izzy-Saiga AK-74. BAD HISTORIC GUN!

    God’s garters, but not only do we deserve better, we deserve a less predictable and idiotically obsessive-compulsive (((elite))). The ones we have aren’t even interesting anymore. They’re like that oddball uncle who spends all of Thanksgiving dinner talking about Chem Trails as an offshoot of MK-ULTRA or the Cat Lady who runs Germany and wants more cats.

    Read More

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation
Confederate Flag Day, State Capitol, Raleigh, N.C. -- March 3, 2007
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored