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 over 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 a easy discussion.”
SFPD introduced a revision to its policy to never allow its robots to use force against people. The revised draft policy reads as follows: "Robots will only be used as a deadly force option when risk of loss of life to members of the public or officers are imminent or outweigh any other force option available to the SFPD."
Get top local stories in Philly delivered to you every morning. >Sign up for NBC Philadelphia's News Headlines newsletter.
SFPD robots are nothing new. The department has 17 robots, 12 of which are functional, and they have had them for years. The revised draft policy has been prompted by a new California law requiring every municipality to create an inventory and define the authorized uses of all military grade equipment.
National Pubic Radio reported the original draft of SFPD's policy was silent on robots. The draft policy responding to the law initially read: "Robots shall not be used as a use of force against any person." That line in the draft proposal was crossed out and returned with the revised draft policy.
The proposed draft policy says only assigned operators who have completed the proper training will be allowed to operate the robots, and they will be used by tactical or special operations.
In an email to NPR, SFPD said it "does not own or operate robots outfitted with lethal force options and the department has no plans to outfit robots with any type of firearm. … No policy can anticipate every conceivable situation or exceptional circumstance which officers may face. The SFPD must be prepared, and have the ability, to respond proportionally."
The revised policy sparked a debate, with one side saying robots can offer a tactical solution instead of risking an officer’s life or possibly the public’s safety, while the other side says we need to take a step back and define our relationship with technology first before allowing robots to have more scope.
Supervisor Rafael Mandelman sits on the committee that drafted the policy for the potential use of a robot for lethal force.
"It has to be an extraordinary, exigent circumstance," Mandelman said. "We're thinking about a threat of mass casualties, like a sniper on a roof or where police themselves have no good way of getting to the threat."
The most notable incident where a police department used a robot to neutralize a threat was in 2016 in Dallas. Police equipped a remote-controlled robot with a bomb to kill a sniper in an elevated parking structure.
San Francisco Police Assistant Chief David Lazar described the limitations of their current equipment: "These are not autonomous robots. No one is tapping in - these are trained officers that would use a robot."
One other major Bay Area police department already considered permitting using robots with lethal force back in September. But Oakland police ultimately decided against it.
