NYPD seeks way to let guns 'talk' to one another ...


PDA






Foofles
June 5, 2009, 09:25 PM
Well, there's an interesting thought. Here's one article about it: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090605/ap_on_re_us/us_cop_shoots_cop

NEW YORK The New York Police Department is looking into adapting futuristic technology that would allow officers' guns to recognize one another in an effort to avoid the type of friendly fire that left a cop dead last week.
...
One idea involves the use of radio frequency tags that would allow officers to pinpoint where other cops are in the city, Browne said. Another involves tags that would work gun-to-gun and use an infrared sensor: When a weapon is pulled from an officer's holster it would trigger a signal that would be sent to the gun of a nearby officer. The signal may be seen or heard.

What do you guys think? I have mixed feelings. Partly intrigued and can see the usefulness, partly thinking this isn't enough to help, and partially scared for how the technology could be used in the wrong hands.

If you enjoyed reading about "NYPD seeks way to let guns 'talk' to one another ..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Oyeboten
June 5, 2009, 09:59 PM
NYC Police should only have open-carry Batons, on a teather, no 'guns'...it'd cut down on their screw ups far better than infra red or wireless sensors.

It's already illegal for criminals, and virtually all honest people, and anyone else, to have guns in NYC, so, I
I'd say the Police should adopt and follow and demonstrate the same no-guns example also.

christcorp
June 5, 2009, 10:24 PM
That is totally the STUPIDEST Idea I have ever heard of when it comes to guns. The morons who think this crap up is usually some old fart who barely knows how to use email. Or they are someone that has been sold some brainstorm idea from a salesman just trying to make a buck. If it's technology, it CAN AND WILL be hacked. Hell, get the codes; set up a small transceiver; and NO POLICE BULLET CAN SHOOT YOU. In the techno world; which I've been in for more than 30 years as a job, they saying is: "If you build it, they WILL hack it". Same theory with mechanics on a weapon or anything else. Mechanical things WILL break or fail. It's just a matter of when.

CoRoMo
June 5, 2009, 10:31 PM
What do you guys think? I have mixed feelings. Partly intrigued and can see the usefulness,

So... before the LEO can react to the situation he has responded to, he needs to then check on a new fangled techno doodad that he's been issued?

Nope.

Old Fuff
June 5, 2009, 10:35 PM
NYC Police should only have open-carry Batons, on a teather, no 'guns'...

Best idea I've seen in a long time. They could be just like their counterparts in England. :evil:

ants
June 5, 2009, 10:44 PM
They float a completely ridiculous idea on purpose, knowing it will be shot down as completely infeasible.

Which leaves them with only one conclusion after exhausting all other possibilities:
They must disarm all citizens completely. Make all guns illegal in NYC. It's the only way. Sorry, the Mayor will tell his people, but we have no other choice.

Foofles
June 5, 2009, 10:49 PM
Yeah I concur with christcorp and coromo - Firstly yep it'd mean a criminal could have a haven from police, and on the other hand he'd definitely know when a cop was packing, say eg. a sting operation.

And it just seems to put responsibility on tools instead of people, they should be training to communicate effectively to elliminate friendly fire.

It seems totally detrimental to the police's needs.. because, yeah, he'd need to check that gizmo wasting precious time he should be spending shooting the bad guy. And what if it beeps, giving away his position? That'd be great for a hostage situation.

And here's where my imagination takes me - what if NYC decides that this should go on ALL guns, for citizens too. So they can track all guns and gun owners no matter where they are? scary.

I do acknowledge the usefulness of some kind of modern organization, but all patrol cars have computers and all officers have radios and badges, I think they're good there they just need the right training.

tpaw
June 5, 2009, 11:39 PM
Lets be sensible. With over 35,000 police officers in NYC, accidents will happen. It's not the first time and it won't be the last. I'm sure the officer who shot and killed one of his brothers officers wishes he could turn the clock back. He, and the families involved, will have to live with this terrible tragedy until they take it to the grave. My prayers go out to all of them.

Sunray
June 5, 2009, 11:45 PM
"...adapting futuristic technology..." Technology that doesn't exist any more than the technology to put a S/N on a bullet.

vett3v
June 6, 2009, 12:16 AM
Methinks they have watched Judge Dredd too many times.. :)

skeet king
June 6, 2009, 12:22 AM
Like they can't identify the guy wearing all blue standing a couple yards away from them... UGH!!!

Claude Clay
June 6, 2009, 12:26 AM
yet again good reason why i never say 'now i have heard it all'

hard to imagine such a stupid and dangerous [ using a nonexistent technology] idea such as this can even be verbalized.

committee is probably being formed as we talk

skeet king
June 6, 2009, 12:29 AM
Hey clay I love your tag at the bottom about fire lol

Foofles
June 6, 2009, 12:42 AM
Like they can't identify the guy wearing all blue standing a couple yards away from them... UGH!!!

I think the whole spiel started because the other guy was wearing plain clothes... but in any case, NY never ceases to amaze me.

usmarine0352_2005
June 6, 2009, 12:45 AM
I think the whole spiel started because the other guy was wearing plain clothes... but in any case, NY never ceases to amaze me.



Yeah. He was off-duty, not in uniform.



It sounds like he didn't do what he should have (which is whatever the uniformed officer said, drop the gun, hands in the air, whatever) and got shot for it.

Very sad.


This whole space age gun is all crap and hasn't even been invented or close to it yet. They know that.

.

rmmoore
June 6, 2009, 01:56 AM
Hmmmmm. So if I'm in a bad way and need to stick up a liquor store, bowling alley, or bar, it would be best to find one that's full of cops, since they couldn't shoot my ass because it's full of potential friendly-fire, radio tagged, issue sidearms? What a great idea!!! They all look at me with that stupid freaking "Duh, maybe this wasn't such a great idea Bloomberg" as I either walk away, or start shooting them on the way out since I don't want to leave a bunch of LEO's for witness'. ***:banghead:???? Who thinks up this crap?

rmmoore
June 6, 2009, 02:01 AM
Perhaps I read more into the techno-speak than I should have. I thought I read something about the firearm not-firing if it sensed another nearby. My bad, I need another drink :evil: The idea is still crappy. Undercover, narc unit, tactical entry, none of these sound good for a gun beeping or light going off at a rather in-opportune time, if you know what I mean.

SMMAssociates
June 6, 2009, 02:03 AM
Pure junk science, but perhaps the only solution to the incredibly large number of Officers in NYC and the almost certainty that an armed individual is always another LEO or a criminal....

It would probably be simpler and safer (statistically, at least) to disarm the plainclothes and off-duty Officers, as well as any non-LE licensees. That way it is either a uniformed Officer or a criminal....

'Course that won't work either, but it'd be a hell of a lot cheaper.... :evil:

(And you thought micro-stamping was stupid? :barf: )

Regards,

FourTeeFive
June 6, 2009, 05:10 AM
I guess it is a little too much to ask New York's finest to learn to identify their target before shooting...

lechiffre
June 6, 2009, 06:43 AM
so let me see if i understand.


ny wants to make sure no police officer shoots another police officer. they want something in the gun that keeps it from firing if there are other police guns around. so i guess if there are multiple responding officers none of their guns should work. if only the first gun drawn works,i hope that officer does not drop it or become incapacitated.

maybe they should have to radio in to have their guns activated.

no,i don't think i understand.

TOTC
June 6, 2009, 08:09 AM
I'm not a chairborne commando, but I play one on the internet...

room full of undercover police and bad guys in a mexican standoff.

guns start flashing, beeping, screaming "i'm a cop!!"

Cop muzzles cover bad guys,(He's somehow gotten ahold of a police issue weapon or hacked the system to keep himself from being shot.) OK, so he's not exactly stupid as a criminal gun says nope, he's a cop. I won't let you shoot"

But he's a bad guy. Oh , and by the way, there's a fed in the mix whose agency elected not to employ this technology. (He's undercover as one of the bad guys.)

The end result was a majority of the bad guys dead, a cop dead, and the undercover fed was wounded due to the environment.

The maker of the technology applauds that the system 'worked' as described yet innocent people are still dead.

Blakenzy
June 6, 2009, 08:30 AM
They come up with all this nonsense because they just can't admit to the fact that their officers probably need better training, or even worse, that some are the type of moron that shouldn't be trusted with a firearm...

"Oh no, it's not our fine officer's fault, it's the stupid gun that doesn't tell the difference between a good guy and a bad guy!"

rmmoore
June 6, 2009, 10:15 AM
Head is a bit clearer this morning:D If we, as members of the general public, don't CLEARLY identify the bad guy before we defend ourselves, we are SCREWED, big time. And sometimes even if it is clearly, undeniably, self defense, we still are ruined financially and our reputation destroyed for killing the "innocent, non-threatening" attempted murderer or rapist. Soooooo, why should NYPD be treated any different? I realize they have a lot more day-to-day dealings with the low life, so what. They supposedly have more training, and are so good at what they do. I'm saddened at any loss of life, and the lives shattered after a meaningless death, but that doesn't change the fact that the LEO failed to clearly identify his target and determine the lethal threat as required by law (even to him), prior to using deadly force. Period, end of discussion.

This is no different than one of us killing someone who was begging for money in the park and we killed him thinking he was trying to rob us. I realize that it's not exactly the same circumstances, but the legal principles regarding the use of deadly force still apply; i.e establishing the level of threat and subsequent responding force, as well as ensuring you ONLY shoot the threatening person. "But he THOUGHT the cop was a bad guy, and was defending himself". Ahhhh, have we EVER heard that before applied to one of us? I have, and it ended with the shooter in prison for involuntary manslaughter because he DID NOT IDENTIFY the target as a clear threat, even though he was acting in "self defense".

I believe in giving cops the benefit of a doubt, and maybe more "fudge factor" than civilians for SOME things. I'm fairly certain there are facts we don't have, and therefore I'll reserve "final judgement" for someone who HAS all the facts.

rmmoore
June 6, 2009, 10:16 AM
Oh yeah, no matter what the outcome of the particular LEO's case, the techno solution offered is STILL a totally screwed-up idea!!!!!!

rscalzo
June 6, 2009, 10:21 AM
It was not well received by the rank and file of the NYPD.

skeet king
June 6, 2009, 01:30 PM
Of cource it's not the cops fault, it's obviously the gun! And now we need smarter guns or else people may get hurt!

LOL this idea is a joke

CountGlockula
June 6, 2009, 01:32 PM
Save taxpayers' money buy going back to regular police training on "being aware of your target".

ants
June 6, 2009, 01:41 PM
The recent incident they cite involved two officers not in uniform. One just got off duty and saw someone trying to steal his car, and chased the thief down the street with gun drawn. Second officer in plain clotes sees a black guy with a gun chasing another guy down the street, and kills the black guy with the gun.

The technology they propose would not have changed that incident.

withdrawn34
June 6, 2009, 02:43 PM
off duty or plainclothes cops with trackable RFIDs?

It just shows the cluelessness of those who come up with such stupid ideas. What makes you think that the guys who your undercover officers, or even just regular cops, fight against and now are coming after them can't just access the RFID data as well, leading them right to the cop?

You might as well give all violent criminals home addresses, license plates numbers, and 24/7 location data on all the LEOs who were involved in their arrest.

Many LE weapons are also stolen every year. It wouldn't be hard for a criminal to use such a weapon, be deemed "safe," and then be able to take out a bunch of LEOs since they let their guard down. Or... it would not be difficult to spoof the detection either, so that you can pretend to be "safe" when you really aren't.

JCisHe
June 6, 2009, 02:53 PM
I read the article...

A plain clothed off duty officer chased a burglar. At some point three plain clothed detectives tell the off duty officer, now with his service weapon drawn, to stop. The off duty officer, "turned around and was shot."

If the 3 detectives would have said, "stop, this is the police, stop, and put your hands in the air" and the off duty officer would have replied, after dropping the gun, with his hands in the air, "I am an officer." None of this would have happened.

This was a lack of identifying themselves. Without being there, and reading the article, that's what I would say. I would suspend the 3 detectives for failing to identify themselves.

That's my two cents.

Regards,
Beau

Hugo
June 6, 2009, 02:54 PM
All cops nationwide (heck, make it worldwide!) need retraining and constant reminders to immeadiately identify themselves when off duty or not in uniform to other cops in uniform. Everyone can get complacent which sadly happened recently in NYPD incident.

The only thing that would work is having Badges talking to each other using bluetooth cell phone earpieces. Heavily encrypted, designed by "good guy" hackers to be secure from the start. Being NY however they probably won't do that and might sadly botch it as NY (state and City, and NJ too) often does.

Deanimator
June 6, 2009, 02:57 PM
NYC Police should only have open-carry Batons, on a teather, no 'guns'...it'd cut down on their screw ups far better than infra red or wireless sensors.
Actually, a 19th century governor of New York suggested exactly that for the New York state militia. He was opposed to spending money on firearms, ammunition and marksmanship training for them.

rbernie
June 6, 2009, 03:00 PM
Given that RFID tags require no power themselves, I would expect that putting an RFID tag in the shield/badge would be an effective start to providing BFT. The obvious problem is for plainclothes, who really don't need to be beaconing their presence since they have no way to control who is 'pinging' them.

The military has used Blue Force Tracker (BFT) technology for years. It's not built into the weapons; it's in the radios (which is a logic place to put ID transmitters, no?). It also requires active useage - the Bad Guys can't just broadcast a beacon and see who responds a la RFID.

Sebastian the Ibis
June 6, 2009, 03:24 PM
Doesn't it seem like technology just makes politicians dumber.

A t-shirt, would do similarly identify any police officer wearing it. However it would probably cost 1/100th the price and a t-shirt warning can easily be overridden if it falls into the hands of a bad guy.

This RFID/Infra red system would last until the first engagement where policemen approach a suspect from opposite sides, or a terrorist somehow gets ahold of a beeper and goes on a shooting rampage because the police weapons will not work, and no civilians are armed.

Never the less I am sure Shumer and Pelosi will give some contractor hundreds of millions to investigate.

jakemccoy
June 6, 2009, 08:08 PM
You have to think about this technology in the hands of the least qualified, dumbest cop. Obviously, devices can and will fail, right? If you think that all these devices will all be working all the time, then stop reading now.

OK, we've established that at least some devices will fail. We've also established that the least qualified, dumbest cops must depend on these devices. So, imagine the problem there. Do you still not see the problem?

OK, I'll give you a scenario. A dumb cop comes across an undercover cop with a faulty device that doesn't signal the undercover cop is actually a cop. The dumb cop shoots because he thinks the undercover cop is not actually a cop because of the faulty device. Further, the dumb cop has a defense in court: "Per procedure, I made a visual inspection of his device to verify if he was a cop."

tpaw
June 6, 2009, 10:48 PM
ny wants to make sure no police officer shoots another police officer. they want something in the gun that keeps it from firing if there are other police guns around.

It's all just a lot of placating and windbaging. The stars and bars have to say something to quell potential riots, regardless of how ridiculous it sounds. It's summertime you know, and everybody who has no responsibilities looks for any reason to get out of those hot apartment buildings and hit the streets to cause as much damage as possible.
Remember Watts in Calif. and the Harlem riots in NY. With jobs and pensions being lost, and with the economy and government being what it is, people are angry and just look for excuses to cause chaos. Conditions are very ripe right now throughout the entire country.

ants
June 6, 2009, 11:04 PM
Cops shooting each other or anyone else accidentally is a tragedy and they need to work on it.
But it won't contribute to starting riots again.

I hope the dead officer's family is taken care of. These dumb ideas floated at the political level take focus away from the people who really need it.

taprackbang
June 6, 2009, 11:07 PM
partially scared for how the technology could be used in the wrong hands.

+1 for me

tpaw
June 7, 2009, 09:44 AM
Cops shooting each other or anyone else accidentally is a tragedy and they need to work on it.
But it won't contribute to starting riots again.

Lets hope not. As long as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson stay out of it, and don't start with their usual rhetoric.

jon_in_wv
June 22, 2009, 09:52 PM
I only agree with cops being as well armed as citizens. If NY citizens aren't allowed to have guns than neither should the cops.

And the "technology" ideas of the left are a farce. They are an attempt to make weapons and weapon production so expensive that the unwashed masses can't have them anymore. IMO.

SMMAssociates
June 22, 2009, 11:40 PM
With the possible exception of uniforms, and even that can be faked, survival in the furball ("Jackpot" is the local Police version) requires some split second guesses and a knowledge of who's who.... The latter isn't always possible, and in a large PD, even tougher. One suggestion I saw elsewhere (on this same topic) is to have "foreign" Officers (undercover, another district, etc.) come by and meet as many of the other troops as possible.

Most LEO's can spot another one in seconds, with a little chatter, but you don't have that luxury all the time.

If you remember the old "NYPD Blue" series, "I'm on the Job" or some words to that effect, along with hands in the air, was often used. Whether NYPD actually does that, I can't say, but it's not a bad idea. (The PD I hung with - as a rent-a-cop - used to have groveling practice, but that's another story :D.)

(Actually, we never discussed it. Most everybody knew everybody who wasn't working in uniform. 'Bout 250 sworn, but not that many plainclothes. Rentals like me tended to be "around" both ways, and known to everybody we'd likely run into.)

There really is no good solution to this - training, etc., helps, but can't cover every possible situation, lighting issue, and somebody just messing up. Technical solutions don't seem to be viable - just too easy to fake or deactivate. Short of a "heads-up" display of local RFID contacts.... :(

Regards,

If you enjoyed reading about "NYPD seeks way to let guns 'talk' to one another ..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!