SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — San Francisco supervisors voted Tuesday to put the brakes on a controversial policy that would have let police use robots for deadly force, reversing course just days after their approval of the plan generated fierce pushback and warnings about the militarization and automation of policing.

The Board of Supervisors unanimously voted to explicitly ban the use of robots in such a fashion for now. But they sent the issue back to a committee for further discussion and could vote in the future to let police use robots in a lethal manner in limited cases.

The board voted last week to allow the use of deadly robots in extreme circumstances. The police department said it had no plans to arm the robots with guns but wanted the ability to put explosives on them and use then to contact, incapacitate or disorient dangerous or armed suspects when lives are at risk.

The initial vote thrust the famously liberal city into the center of a debate about the future of technology and policing, with some saying arming robots was a step too close to something one would see in a dystopian science fiction movie. Though robot technology for policing has become more widely available, departments across the country have rarely used it to confront or kill suspects.

Three supervisors who rejected the policy from the beginning joined dozens of protesters Monday outside City Hall to urge the board to change course. They chanted and held signs with phrases like “We all saw that movie… No Killer Robots.”

Supervisor Dean Preston was among them, and on Tuesday he told his colleagues the public hadn’t been given enough time to voice their concerns about such a pressing issue.

“The people of San Francisco have spoken loud and clear: There is no place for killer police robots in our city,” he said in a statement after the vote. “We should be working on ways to decrease the use of force by local law enforcement, not giving them new tools to kill people.”

The vote was the result of a new state law that requires police departments to inventory equipment including certain guns, grenades, armored vehicles and battering rams and to seek explicit approval for their use. So far, only San Francisco and Oakland have discussed lethal robots as part of that law. Oakland police wanted to arm robots with shotguns but backed down in the face of public opposition, instead opting for pepper spray.

Some San Francisco officials wanted to proceed with allowing robots to use deadly force in certain cases, arguing nothing substantive had changed to warrant a reversal. But the vote to advance the broader police equipment policy — including the ban on lethal robots — passed unanimously.

It still allows police to use robots to check out potentially dangerous scenes so that officers can stay back.

“Having robots that have eyes and ears and can remove bombs, which happens from time to time, is something that we want the police department to do while we continue to have this very controversial discussion,” said Supervisor Aaron Peskin, who brought forward last week’s motion around the use of robots.

The new policy needs another vote to take effect.

The post Amid outcry, San Francisco pauses on ‘killer police robots’ | WTAJ appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Supervisors in San Francisco voted Tuesday to give city police the ability to use potentially lethal, remote-controlled robots in emergency situations — following an emotionally charged debate that reflected divisions on the politically liberal board over support for law enforcement .

The vote was 8-3, with the majority agreeing to grant police the option despite strong objections from civil liberties and other police oversight groups. Opponents said the authority would lead to the further militarization of a police force already too aggressive with poor and minority communities.

Supervisor Connie Chan, a member of the committee that forwarded the proposal to the full board, said she understood concerns about use of force but that “according to state law, we are required to approve the use of these equipments. So here we are, and it’s definitely not an easy discussion.”

The San Francisco Police Department said it does not have pre-armed robots and has no plans to arm robots with guns. But the department could deploy robots equipped with explosive charges “to contact, incapacitate, or disorient violent, armed, or dangerous suspect” when lives are at stake, SFPD spokesperson Allison Maxie said in a statement.

“Robots equipped in this manner would only be used in extreme circumstances to save or prevent further loss of innocent lives,” she said.

Supervisors amended the proposal Tuesday to specify that officers could use robots only after using alternative force or de-escalation tactics, or concluding they would not be able to subdue the suspect through those alternative means. Only a limited number of high-ranking officers could authorize use of robots as a deadly force option.

San Francisco police currently have a dozen functioning ground robots used to assess bombs or provide eyes in low visibility situations, the department says. They were acquired between 2010 and 2017, and not once have they been used to deliver an explosive device, police officials said.

But explicit authorization was required after a new California law went into effect this year requiring police and sheriffs departments to inventory military-grade equipment and seek approval for their use.

The state law was authored last year by San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu while he was an assembly member. It is aimed at giving the public a forum and voice in the acquisition and use of military-grade weapons that have a negative effect on communities, according to the legislation.

A federal program has long dispensed grenade launchers, camouflage uniforms, bayonets, armored vehicles and other surplus military equipment to help local law enforcement.

In 2017, then-President Donald Trump signed an order reviving the Pentagon program after his predecessor, Barack Obama, curtailed it in 2015, triggered in part by outrage over the use of military gear during protests in Ferguson, Missouri, after the shooting death of Michael Brown.

San Francisco police said late Tuesday that no robots were obtained from military surplus, but some were purchased with federal grant money.

Like many places around the US, San Francisco is trying to balance public safety with treasured civilian rights such as privacy and the ability to live free of excessive police oversight. In September, supervisors agreed to a trial run allowing police to access in real time private surveillance camera feeds in certain circumstances.

Debate on Tuesday ran more than two hours with members on both sides accusing the other of reckless fear mongering.

Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, who voted in favor of the policy authorization, said he was troubled by rhetoric painting the police department as untrustworthy and dangerous.

“I think there’s larger questions raised when progressives and progressive policies start looking to the public like they are anti-police,” he said. “I think that is bad for progressives. I think it’s bad for this Board of Supervisors. I think it’s bad for Democrats nationally.”

Board President Shamann Walton, who voted against the proposal, pushed back, saying it made him not anti-police, but “pro people of color.”

“We continuously are being asked to do things in the name of increasing weaponry and opportunities for negative interaction between the police department and people of color,” he said. “This is just one of those things.”

The San Francisco Public Defender’s office sent a letter Monday to the board saying that granting police “the ability to kill community members remotely” goes against the city’s progressive values. The office wanted the board to reinstate language barring police from using robots against any person in an act of force.

On the other side of the San Francisco Bay, the Oakland Police Department dropped a similar proposal after public backlash.

The first time a robot was used to deliver explosives in the US was in 2016, when Dallas police sent in an armed robot that killed a holed-up sniper who had killed five officers in an ambush.

Copyright 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

The post San Francisco will permit police to deploy robots that kill appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

SAN FRANCISCO — San Francisco supervisors voted Tuesday to put the brakes on a controversial policy that would let police use robots for deadly force.

The Board of Supervisors unanimously voted to explicitly ban the use of robots in such fashion for now. But they sent the issue back to a committee for further discussion and could allow it in limited cases at another time.

It’s a reversal from last week’s vote allowing the use of robots in limited cases. The police said they had no plans to arm the robots with guns but wanted the ability to put explosives on them in extraordinary circumstances.

Last week’s approval generated pushback and criticism about the potential to deploy robots that can kill people.

Some supervisors said they felt the public did not have enough time to engage in the discussion about whether robots could be used to kill people before the board first voted last week.

The vote was the result of a new state law that requires police departments to inventory military-grade equipment and seek approval for its use.

The approved policy does give the police power to use robots for situational awareness, such as going first into a dangerous situation so police can stay back.

The post San Francisco police cannot use lethal robots for now appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Supervisors in San Francisco held a heated debate Tuesday over whether to give city police the ability to use potentially lethal, remote-controlled robots in emergency situations, with both sides accusing the other of reckless fearmongering.

Police oversight groups are urging the 11-member Board of Supervisors to reject the idea, saying it would lead to further militarization of a police force already too aggressive with poor and minority communities. They said the parameters under which use would be allowed are too vague.

The San Francisco Police Department said it does not have pre-armed robots and has no plans to arm robots with guns. But the department could deploy robots equipped with explosive charges “to contact, incapacitate, or disorient violent, armed, or dangerous suspect” when lives are at stake, SFPD spokesperson Allison Maxie said in a statement.

“Robots equipped in this manner would only be used in extreme circumstances to save or prevent further loss of innocent lives,” she said.

The proposed policy does not lay out specifics for how the weapons can and cannot be equipped, leaving open the option to arm them. “Robots will only be used as a deadly force option when risk of loss of life to members of the public or officers is imminent and outweighs any other force option available to SFPD,” it says.

The city’s board members are staunch Democrats who favor gun control, reproductive freedoms and civil rights protections, but they are deeply divided on support for law enforcement.

Several supervisors said it shocked them that a city accustomed to protesting the use of military drones would entertain the idea of ​​allowing a robot to possibly kill a person. But others said police were making a reasonable request and were only carving out permission in case of catastrophe.

“Everything that was said in this hearing, I don’t see how a robot being armed with certain weaponry would save lives,” said Shamann Walton, president of the Board of Supervisors.

The vote comes under a new California law that requires police and sheriffs departments to inventory military-grade equipment and seek approval for their use. San Francisco police currently have a dozen functioning ground robots used to assess bombs or provide eyes in low visibility situations, the department says. They were acquired between 2010 and 2017.

The state law was authored last year by San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu while he was an assembly member. It is aimed at giving the public a forum and voice in the acquisition and use of military-grade weapons that have a negative effect on communities, according to the legislation.

San Francisco police did not immediately respond to a question about how the robots were acquired, but a federal program has dispensed grenade launchers, camouflage uniforms, bayonets, armored vehicles and other surplus military equipment to help local law enforcement.

In 2017, then-President Donald Trump signed an order reviving the Pentagon program after his predecessor, Barack Obama, curtailed it in 2015, triggered in part by outrage over the use of military gear during protests in Ferguson, Missouri, after the shooting death of Michael Brown.

The first time a robot was used to deliver explosives in the US was in 2016, when Dallas police sent in an armed robot that killed a holed-up sniper who had killed five officers in an ambush.

Like many places around the US, San Francisco is trying to balance public safety with treasured civilian rights such as privacy and the ability to live free of excessive police oversight. In September, supervisors agreed to a trial run allowing police to access in real time private surveillance camera feeds in certain circumstances.

The San Francisco Public Defender’s office sent a letter Monday to the board saying that granting police “the ability to kill community members remotely” goes against the city’s progressive values. The office would like the board to reinstate language barring police from using robots against any person in an act of force.

On the other side of the San Francisco Bay, the Oakland Police Department dropped a similar proposal after public backlash.

The post San Francisco debates letting police deploy robots that kill appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Supervisors in San Francisco voted Tuesday to give city police the ability to use potentially lethal, remote-controlled robots in emergency situations — following an emotionally charged debate that reflected divisions on the politically liberal board over support for law enforcement.

The vote was 8-3, with the majority agreeing to grant police the option despite strong objections from civil liberties and other police oversight groups. Opponents said the authority would lead to the further militarization of a police force already too aggressive with poor and minority communities.

Supervisor Connie Chan, a member of the committee that forwarded the proposal to the full board, said she understood concerns about use of force but that “according to state law, we are required to approve the use of these equipments. So here we are, and it’s definitely not an easy discussion.”

The San Francisco Police Department said it does not have pre-armed robots and has no plans to arm robots with guns. But the department could deploy robots equipped with explosive charges “to contact, incapacitate, or disorient violent, armed, or dangerous suspect” when lives are at stake, SFPD spokesperson Allison Maxie said in a statement.

“Robots equipped in this manner would only be used in extreme circumstances to save or prevent further loss of innocent lives,” she said.

Supervisors amended the proposal Tuesday to specify that officers could use robots only after using alternative force or de-escalation tactics, or concluding they would not be able to subdue the suspect through those alternative means. Only a limited number of high-ranking officers could authorize use of robots as a deadly force option.

San Francisco police currently have a dozen functioning ground robots used to assess bombs or provide eyes in low visibility situations, the department says. They were acquired between 2010 and 2017, and not once have they been used to deliver an explosive device, police officials said.

But explicit authorization was required after a new California law went into effect this year requiring police and sheriffs departments to inventory military-grade equipment and seek approval for their use.

The state law was authored last year by San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu while he was an assembly member. It is aimed at giving the public a forum and voice in the acquisition and use of military-grade weapons that have a negative effect on communities, according to the legislation.

A federal program has long dispensed grenade launchers, camouflage uniforms, bayonets, armored vehicles and other surplus military equipment to help local law enforcement.

In 2017, then-President Donald Trump signed an order reviving the Pentagon program after his predecessor, Barack Obama, curtailed it in 2015, triggered in part by outrage over the use of military gear during protests in Ferguson, Missouri, after the shooting death of Michael Brown.

San Francisco police said late Tuesday that no robots were obtained from military surplus, but some were purchased with federal grant money.

Like many places around the US, San Francisco is trying to balance public safety with treasured civilian rights such as privacy and the ability to live free of excessive police oversight. In September, supervisors agreed to a trial run allowing police to access in real time private surveillance camera feeds in certain circumstances.

Debate on Tuesday ran more than two hours with members on both sides accusing the other of reckless fear mongering.

Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, who voted in favor of the policy authorization, said he was troubled by rhetoric painting the police department as untrustworthy and dangerous.

“I think there’s larger questions raised when progressives and progressive policies start looking to the public like they are anti-police,” he said. “I think that is bad for progressives. I think it’s bad for this Board of Supervisors. I think it’s bad for Democrats nationally.”

Board President Shamann Walton, who voted against the proposal, pushed back, saying it made him not anti-police, but “pro people of color.”

“We continuously are being asked to do things in the name of increasing weaponry and opportunities for negative interaction between the police department and people of color,” he said. “This is just one of those things.”

The San Francisco Public Defender’s office sent a letter Monday to the board saying that granting police “the ability to kill community members remotely” goes against the city’s progressive values. The office wanted the board to reinstate language barring police from using robots against any person in an act of force.

On the other side of the San Francisco Bay, the Oakland Police Department dropped a similar proposal after public backlash.

The first time a robot was used to deliver explosives in the US was in 2016, when Dallas police sent in an armed robot that killed a holed-up sniper who had killed five officers in an ambush.

Copyright © The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Follow @ktar923

The post San Francisco will permit police to deploy robots that kill appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Supervisors in San Francisco voted Tuesday to give city police the ability to use potentially lethal, remote-controlled robots in emergency situations — following an emotionally charged debate that reflected divisions on the politically liberal board over support for law enforcement.

The vote was 8-3, with the majority agreeing to grant police the option despite strong objections from civil liberties and other police oversight groups. Opponents said the authority would lead to the further militarization of a police force already too aggressive with poor and minority communities.

SF police ‘killer robots’ motion passes

Supervisor Connie Chan, a member of the committee that forwarded the proposal to the full board, said she understood concerns about use of force but that “according to state law, we are required to approve the use of these equipments. So here we are, and it’s definitely not an easy discussion.”

The San Francisco Police Department said it does not have pre-armed robots and has no plans to arm robots with guns. But the department could deploy robots equipped with explosive charges “to contact, incapacitate, or disorient violent, armed, or dangerous suspect” when lives are at stake, SFPD spokesperson Allison Maxie said in a statement.

“Robots equipped in this manner would only be used in extreme circumstances to save or prevent further loss of innocent lives,” she said.

Supervisors amended the proposal Tuesday to specify that officers could use robots only after using alternative force or de-escalation tactics, or concluding they would not be able to subdue the suspect through those alternative means. Only a limited number of high-ranking officers could authorize use of robots as a deadly force option.

San Francisco police currently have a dozen functioning ground robots used to assess bombs or provide eyes in low visibility situations, the department says. They were acquired between 2010 and 2017, and not once have they been used to deliver an explosive device, police officials said.

But explicit authorization was required after a new California law went into effect this year requiring police and sheriffs departments to inventory military-grade equipment and seek approval for their use.

The state law was authored last year by San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu while he was an assembly member. It is aimed at giving the public a forum and voice in the acquisition and use of military-grade weapons that have a negative effect on communities, according to the legislation.

A federal program has long dispensed grenade launchers, camouflage uniforms, bayonets, armored vehicles and other surplus military equipment to help local law enforcement.

Air marshals rerouted to southern border amid migrant surge

In 2017, then-President Donald Trump signed an order reviving the Pentagon program after his predecessor, Barack Obama, curtailed it in 2015, triggered in part by outrage over the use of military gear during protests in Ferguson, Missouri, after the shooting death of Michael Brown.

San Francisco police said late Tuesday that no robots were obtained from military surplus, but some were purchased with federal grant money.

Like many places around the US, San Francisco is trying to balance public safety with treasured civilian rights such as privacy and the ability to live free of excessive police oversight. In September, supervisors agreed to a trial run allowing police to access in real time private surveillance camera feeds in certain circumstances.

Debate on Tuesday ran more than two hours with members on both sides accusing the other of reckless fear mongering.

Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, who voted in favor of the policy authorization, said he was troubled by rhetoric painting the police department as untrustworthy and dangerous.

“I think there’s larger questions raised when progressives and progressive policies start looking to the public like they are anti-police,” he said. “I think that is bad for progressives. I think it’s bad for this Board of Supervisors. I think it’s bad for Democrats nationally.”

Board President Shamann Walton, who voted against the proposal, pushed back, saying it made him not anti-police, but “pro people of color.”

“We continuously are being asked to do things in the name of increasing weaponry and opportunities for negative interaction between the police department and people of color,” he said. “This is just one of those things.”

The San Francisco Public Defender’s office sent a letter Monday to the board saying that granting police “the ability to kill community members remotely” goes against the city’s progressive values. The office wanted the board to reinstate language barring police from using robots against any person in an act of force.

On the other side of the San Francisco Bay, the Oakland Police Department dropped a similar proposal after public backlash.

The first time a robot was used to deliver explosives in the US was in 2016, when Dallas police sent in an armed robot that killed a holed-up sniper who had killed five officers in an ambush.

Close modal

Suggest a correction

Suggest a correction

The post San Francisco will enable police to deploy robots that kill appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

It’s the sort of sight you’d only see in San Francisco. You’re chilling on the Marina Green with your friends, sipping a Philz Coffee and shivering in the fog, when all of a sudden, a robot with a smiling face rolls up to your group. “2 cookies for $7,” reads the text on its side. And they’re not just any cookies: They’re those really trendy ones from that new bakery you just heard about. You want to hate it, but you also really want to try those cookies.

This is the scene portrayed in a TikTok I came across recently, soundtracked to a jaunty indie rock song. And it wasn’t just a one-off: These robots have also been spotted hawking cookies and other treats in Dolores Park, Golden Gate Park and the Embarcadero.

@kailynowak robot cookie machines will take over the world #sanfrancisco #fyp #marina ♬ Love You So – The King Khan & BBQ Show

The company behind the entering robots is called Tortoise, a Mountain View-based robot delivery company that recently pivoted to “Mobile Smart Stores,” or “the world’s first robotic remote-controlled store-on-wheels,” as it claims.

“We had a remote control grocery delivery robot, and we were deploying that in a bunch of different markets,” said Tortoise co-founder Dmitry Shevelenko. “We saw the same thing happening again and again — whenever the robot would be parked, people would walk up to it and talk to the robot and interact with it.”

He said that when the company asked people what they were expecting from the robot, people thought they could buy something from it.

“As is often the case, your customers are a lot wiser than you are,” Shevelenko said. “We kind of took the insight to heart.”

A Tortoise “Mobile Smart Store” prowls around Dolores Park.

Courtesy of Tortoise

It only took one modification to turn the grocery delivery robots into miniature mobile stores: installing a tap-to-pay card reader in the top of the container lid. People who want to buy something just tap their card, the lid unlocks and they grab their box of cookies from inside. All the while, the robot’s remote controller, who can be stationed halfway across the world, is watching the transaction and playing audio messages to guide the consumer.

For those wondering what’s stopping people from robbing the robots, the fact that it requires your credit card information before the container unlocks discourages most people from taking more than their fair share. Plus, it has a camera prominently displayed (a not-so-subtle reminder that we are literally always being surveyed).

“We’ve done hundreds of transactions, and there hasn’t been a single person who’s taken more than one box,” Shevelenko said.

While Tortoise is based in the Bay Area, its launch is worldwide: Robots will soon also be popping up in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, London, Denver, Dallas, San Diego, Santa Cruz, South Carolina and Missouri, hawking everything from headphones to truffles.

A customer retrieves a box of Bake Sum pastries from a Tortoise robot.

Courtesy of Tortoise

Bake Sum, an Oakland bakery selling Asian American-inspired pastries, was one of Tortoise’s first customers. Owner Joyce Tang is a friend of Shevelenko’s — they used to work at Facebook together — so she was happy to give Tortoise a try for its fee of 10% of gross sales.

“Pastries don’t require refrigeration or heating to transit, and that makes it a lot easier for the kind of logistics required in a mobile smart store,” Tang said. “So it was kind of an easy, natural fit.”

Over the past few weeks, Bake Sum has sent its robot into San Francisco parks to sell cookies. Every time the bakery has used it, Tang said, it’s sold out.

“It’s actually a great way for us to widen the market a little bit and get a little bit more exposure in areas that we don’t normally get to,” Tang explained. “So I think it’s fun, and it makes it a lot more convenient to get our pastries, given we’re only open so many hours a day and you have to come to Oakland most of the time.”

A tortoise robot stationed in front of Bake Sum, a bakery located at 3249 Grand Ave., Oakland.

Courtesy of Tortoise

Tang has also tried stationing the robot in front of Bake Sum after its normal business hours to sell pastry boxes. Since the bakery has quite limited hours — it’s only open Friday to Monday until 1 pm — it allows them to drum up more business after hours in a time of labor crisis.

“I think while the business environment is still kind of weird and evolving, Tortoise definitely gives us a lot more flexibility to be able to pull off another sales channel without a crazy amount of overhead,” Tang said.

These are certainly not the first robots to pop up in Bay Area businesses — over the past few years, we’ve seen robots waiting tables, robots giving manicures and robots delivering food. As robots have begun to infiltrate more and more of our everyday life, particularly during the pandemic, fear that they are taking jobs from humans grows more palpable.

Kiwibot, a robot food delivery startup based in Berkeley, responded to these fears in a 2020 SFGATE interview by arguing that it was actually creating jobs: Its bots, like Tortoise, are not autonomous, so an actual human must be employed to navigate them. But these companies tend to outsource that labor to countries with cheaper labor — Kiwibot employs remote workers in Colombia, and Tortoise’s are based in Mexico City.

A customer retrieves a box of Bake Sum pastries from a Tortoise robot.

Courtesy of Tortoise

San Francisco hasn’t exactly been hospitable to delivery robots. In 2017, the city strictly limited the number of delivery robots allowed in the city and banned them from most sidewalks.

This is partially why Tortoise made the shift from delivery robots to “Mobile Smart Stores”: A business doesn’t need a permit to park a robot in front of its own private property. As for the park sales, that’s not strictly legal. But Shevelenko says that element is not their business model — the focus is more on stationing the robots in front of businesses — and putting the robots in parks was more just for testing purposes.

“The thing that just obviously we want to be cognizant of is in some of those cases, you’d need a mobile vending permit. … We don’t want to run afoul of any of those,” Shevelenko said. “So I think it’s a question for merchants that are using us in the Bay Area. Wherever they’re getting permits, that’s where they’ll be deploying their robots.”

Tang says she’d love for her cookie-selling robot, which she’s named Leonardo, to make more appearances in San Francisco parks or elsewhere. She’s even considering making an Instagram account for Leonardo so people know where to find it. The use of robots in restaurants has always been of interest to her, she said.

“That’s always been in the back of my mind, but with the way that small businesses work, I’ll never have enough time or resources or energy to dedicate to mechanize my workflow like this,” Tang said. “So it’s kind of the perfect partnership that Dmitry gets to focus on what he’s good at, and I get to focus on making the pastries themselves. And it enables us to reach more people together than we could have otherwise done alone.”

The post Deal with-vending robots are popping up in San Francisco parks appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.