No one in the neighborhood ever learned exactly why it happened, but suddenly the local police department and the sheriff’s office decided to open up a can of whipass on my neighbor. He lives at the opposite end of the block, and while we have never actually met, we knew each other well enough to wave as we drove down the block.
Suddenly, just before dusk, the house was surrounded by law enforcement cars. And I do mean surrounded, since the cars went all around the block, shutting down a major thoroughfare. My neighbor’s wife came out the front door to see what was going on and was immediately taken behind a line of cars while officers demanded to know where her husband was. No matter how many times she told the collected officers that he wasn’t home, they refused to believe her. Eventually, she was locked in the backseat of one of the squad cars and ignored.
More official cars came. The sheriff’s office parked an armored personnel carrier in front of the house and the swat team was deployed, with one officer stationed on the roof of the house across the street as a sniper. All the while, an officer with a bullhorn implored the man in the house to come out.
After a couple of futile hours, the sheriff’s office sent a tracked robot in through the back door while the police department sent a similar robot through the front door….And then nothing happened for a very long time (The entire standoff took up over five hours!). Eventually, one of the officers stationed near my driveway confided to me that only after both robots were inside the house was it discovered that both devices were controlled by identical radio frequencies and that the mixed transmissions had caused both devices to lock up, refusing any further instructions.
Eventually, officers did finally search the house, discovering that the wife had been telling the truth all along—there was no one in the house. The small army of law enforcement officers left and as far as I know, the story never even made it to the local paper. Two days later, as I drove by, I waved to the neighbor as he replaced his front door.
The events of that night have piqued my interest in how the police might use robots better and more efficiently. Law enforcement is obviously using them as mobile cameras (like they did in my unfortunate neighbor’s house) and we’ve all seen on the news the various ways that bomb squads have utilized robots, but other than that, I don’t see a lot more that such wheeled robots can do for police departments using today’s technology. There are a lot of robots being used as security guards in warehouses and parking lots, but most of their actions are not really appropriate for police departments.
Aerial robots, or drones, however, have an incredible future in law enforcement. I will confess that every time I thought of a ‘new’ way that these flying robots might be used, as soon as I searched the internet, I found that there was a small pilot program—pun intended—somewhere already implementing a vastly improved version of ‘my’ idea. Such programs are rare today, but I suspect that in the very near future they will be common.
A few years ago, my truck broke down in one of the few remaining remote areas in New Mexico in which there was no cell phone reception. Since I was on an interstate, I pulled way off the road, raised the truck’s hood, tied a flag to it, and settled down with a good book while I waited for the highway patrol to find me. That wait was over 10 hours, because the state police had been diverted by an emergency that had delayed their usual patrols. But, if we have robot vacuum cleaners that can plug themselves in to recharge, why can’t we have drones monitor stretches of highway, watching for immobile vehicles? The drone could fly for 50 miles then land to recharge, while a freshly recharged replacement takes its place. A remote dispatcher could monitor the flights of several dozen such drones, responding to emergencies much quicker than having to wait for a phone call.
There are a couple of intersections in this town that so routinely have crashes that it almost makes sense to keep a parked ambulance on hand. Failing that, how about a tethered drone that hovers well over the intersection, with cameras that monitor the traffic? Since it is tethered, it wouldn’t need periodic recharging. Perhaps the presence of a monitored camera might just provide a little deterrence for reckless drivers,
I live in New Mexico and the county that I live in is slightly more than 3,800 square miles—an area almost half the size of Rhode Island. Out of that 3,800 square miles, more than 85% of it is made up of mountains, deep ravines, and a lot of desert out there, where people frequently get lost. While the County’s Search and Rescue Team does a fantastic job, a lot more of that ground could be quickly—and safely—searched by drones with thermal as well as visual imaging.
The technology to do this exists now, and the cost of two such sophisticated drones would be well under the price of a single squad car. In addition, while the use of drones would not completely eliminate the use of police helicopters, it would dramatically reduce both the number of helicopters needed and the cost of operating them. In Los Angeles, the cost of purchasing, maintaining, and operating a police helicopter is well over a million dollars a year for each of their 17 helicopters. Ignoring the high purchase price and the high maintenance cost, the fuel cost alone of operating just one of those helicopters for a month would purchase four high-tech drones. A quick survey found at least a dozen deaths among US law enforcement personnel from helicopter crashes in 2022 alone. Deployment of drones instead of helicopters as “first first responders” could very well decrease that death toll—the human cost.
I’m willing to bet—pardon me—a doughnut that before too long there will be more police drones than police dogs.
Very good suggestions for the use of available technology. But why invest in sensible, non-lethal tech when you have an Armored Personnel Carrier? Further, saving the costs of a large fleet of helicopters would likely face stiff resistance from those who's jobs would be affected. Still, thanks for the commentary. May sanity prevail!
ReplyDeleteThe trouble with your idea, Mark is the same as any idea that involves change of procedure by a government agency. I sat on the Tyler Disabilities Review Board (TDIRB). We were facing a budget shortfall at the city while facing the impact of the ADA on the city transit system. Our gang of disability advocates, social service people, people with disabilities and nonprofit directors puzzled over the massive cost of extending bus service to disabled Tylerites who lived out of hobbling range from the bus stop.
ReplyDeleteFirst, we looked at on-demand accessible buses - a massive cost in purchase and maintenance.
Second, we looked at hiring cabs on a case by case basis. Trouble was the city has a fundamental allergic reaction to working with private for-profit providers even when it saves the city money.
Third, the TDIRB like the Grinch, puzzled and puzzled till our puzzlers were sore over the problem. Finally a guy in a motorized wheel chair who risked his life getting to the bus stop by motoring down the street (which had no sidewalk). Everyone agreed that if we did a survey of folks with disabilities the city could install sidewalks or paint bicycle lanes in neighborhoods where actual disabled people live, allowing those with electric wheelchairs and ambulatory people with disabilities to get to the bus stops safely. The problem could be solved without having to buy a bunch of expensive accessible buses. A city worker who was at the meeting and interrupted.
"It won't work," he said flatly.
"Why not?" I asked.
"Because it makes too much sense," he returned.
After spending a few more years navigating the halls of government, I think I identified the problem. It applied also to your drone idea. Had we pursued the idea we could have built a system that grew with community needs. A single small accessible bus could serve folks we hadn't built sidewalks or painted lanes for yet while the system expanded organically. The real trouble is that unless the city spent massive amounts on buying buses and fuel, the city leaders' sons, brother-in-laws, uncles, aunts and brothers and sisters wouldn't make money from city expenditures and kickbacks to city leaders would be problematic. If you buy police drones, think of the millions in kickbacks from helicopter sellers city officials would miss out on.
It's a pity we can't seem to elect honest folk to public office.
It's no so much that power corrupts, but as Frank Herbert put it, "Power attracts the corruptible." Which is why communism and socialist utopias won't work. Too much power in the hands of the leader class. I suspect it will take the Second Coming to solve that problem.