TASER 10parts diagram

Even where police have remote control over armed drones and robots, the grave dangers to human rights are far too great. Police routinely over-deploy powerful new technologies in already over-policed Black, Latinx, and immigrant communities.  Police also use them too often as part of the United State’s immigration enforcement regime, and to monitor protests and other First Amendment-protected activities. We can expect more of the same with any armed robots.

This version now has a 1000-lumen strobe ability in warning mode to help with de-escalation and may prevent a discharge due to the ability to disorientate before activation. It retains the ability to cross-connect with the correct probes to provide the best NMI. It will only deliver the exact charge no matter how many probes are used, with a max of four being utilised to assist with effective probe placement.

TASER 10civilian

Mission creep is very real. Time and time again, technologies given to police to use only in the most extreme circumstances make their way onto streets during protests or to respond to petty crime. For example, cell site simulators (often called “Stingrays”) were developed for use in foreign battlefields, brought home in the name of fighting “terrorism,” then used by law enforcement to catch immigrants and a man who stole $57 worth of food. Likewise, police have targeted BLM protesters with face surveillance and Amazon Ring doorbell cameras.

Whether controlled by an artificial intelligence or a remote human operator, armed police robots and drones pose an unacceptable threat to civilians. It’s exponentially harder to remove a technology from the hands of police than prevent it from being purchased and deployed in the first place. That’s why now is the time to push for legislation to ban police deployment of these technologies. The ongoing revolution in the field of robotics requires us to act now to prevent a new era of police violence.

Tasergun

But police technologies malfunction all the time. For example, false positives are frequently generated by face recognition technology, audio gunshot detection, and automatic license plate readers. When this happens, the technology deploys armed police to a situation where they may not be needed, often leading to wrongful arrests and excessive force, especially against people of color erroneously identified as criminal suspects. If the malfunctioning police technology were armed and autonomous, that would create a far more dangerous situation for innocent civilians.

Official traffic signs at guaranteed best prices. Ships in 1 day, direct from US's largest traffic sign supplier.

Autonomous armed police robots might become one more way for police to skirt or redirect the blame for wrongdoing and avoid making any actual changes to how police function. Debate might bog down in whether to tweak the artificial intelligence guiding a killer robot’s decision making. Further, technology deployed by police is usually created and maintained by private corporations. A transparent investigation into a wrongful killing by an autonomous machine might be blocked by assertions of the company’s supposed need for trade secrecy in its proprietary technology, or by finger-pointing between police and the company. Meanwhile, nothing would be done to make people on the streets any safer.

Supports up to 3 buttons. Maximum 256 characters. change-button ... Example request to send an interactive reply buttons message with an image header, body text, ...

Nov 6, 2024 — Enhancing Safety, Accountability, and Public Trust · The presence of body cameras reduces citizen violence and fatality rates. · Officers wearing ...

In 2020, the Turkish military deployed Kargu, a fully autonomous armed drone, to hunt down and attack Libyan battlefield adversaries. Autonomous armed drones have also been deployed (though not necessarily used to attack people) by the Turkish military in Syria, and by the Azerbaijani military in Armenia. While we have yet to see autonomous armed robots or drones deployed in a domestic law enforcement context, wartime tools used abroad often find their way home.

VR capability is also being developed so that training with a VR headset can allow any user to link a T10 device with a VR capability. All the activity can be logged and kept, developing competence with the device. This saves money on cartridge probes in training and will enable officers to retain and build on technical ability anywhere they can use a headset without needing additional instructional staff. Other cartridges will also be available, training, hook and loop, and inert, which are used in practical training sessions.

We are moving quickly towards arming such robots and letting autonomous artificial intelligence determine whether or not to pull the trigger.

Young people have a right to speak and access information online. Legislatures should remember that protecting kids' online safety shouldn't require sweeping online surveillance and censorship.EFF reminded the New York Attorney General of this important fact in comments responding to the state's recently passed Stop Addictive Feeds Exploitation (SAFE)...

The T10 device now has a maximum effective range of 13.72 metres (45 feet), almost double the distance of previous models. If the working environment allows, this ability to work at a greater distance will provide officers with more time, space, and distance to de-escalate and resolve conflicts in a way they didn't have before, making it safer for all involved.

The first Taser I was issued with on Armed Response Vehicle in 2005 was the M26 and I was supplied with four cartridges (eight probes overall). Having an increased ability to load two more probes isn't that significant. Still, it will undoubtedly start a conversation. It's now easier to re-engage in situations, as the officer can focus solely on that person to re-assess and reduce risk overall instead of thinking about a reload and losing focus.

A safety upgrade feature includes onboard sensors that can pair with specific holsters to show when the device was drawn or replaced from the holster and the ability to switch on local body worn video (BWV).

One of the most noticeable changes is officers can deploy up to 10 individually targeted probes without needing to reload cartridges. With previous versions, it was one cartridge with two probes, which, if needed and depending on the model, required a cartridge change or only had a two-discharge option before reloading to re-engage.

On an initial look at the new device, it has the same distinctive yellow and black casing that is familiar to many users around the globe. But the deeper changes that make this version stand out from its predecessors will make policing safer.

California’s 2024 legislative session has officially adjourned, and it’s time to reflect on the wins and losses that have shaped Californians’ digital rights landscape this year.EFF monitored nearly 100 bills in the state this session alone, addressing a broad range of issues related to privacy, free speech, and innovation. These...

Concrete Anchor has a 15/17mm thread and is used to create a tie point in existing rock and concrete. These tie points are load bearing and used for ...

Big Tech is borrowing a page from Big Tobacco's playbook to wage war on your privacy, according to Jake Snow of the ACLU of Northern California. We agree. In the 1990s, the tobacco industry attempted to use federal law to override a broad swath of existing state laws and...

Further, hackers will inevitably try to commandeer armed police robots. They already have succeeded at taking control of police surveillance cameras. The last thing we need are foreign governments or organized criminals seizing command of armed police robots and aiming them at innocent people.

Moreover, armed police robots would probably increase the frequency of excessive force against suspects and bystanders. A police officer on the scene generally will have better information about unfolding dangers and opportunities to de-escalate, compared to an officer miles away looking at a laptop screen. Moreover, a remote officer might have less empathy for the human target of mechanical violence.

... standard of work health and safety than the code. An inspector may refer to ... Immediate access should be provided to emergency shower equipment in workplaces ...

When a company makes a promise, the public should be able to rely on it. Today, nearly every person in the U.S. is a customer of either Amazon or Google—and many of us are customers of both technology giants. Both of these companies have made public ...

When, inevitably, a robot unjustifiably injures or kills someone--who would be held responsible? Holding police accountable for wrongfully killing civilians is already hard enough. In the case of a bad automated decision, who gets held responsible? The person who wrote the algorithm? The police department that deployed the robot?

'Game Changer' – two words that I feel sum up the latest iteration in the development and evolution of the next generation of TASER. Axon held its worldwide launch on the 25 January 2023 with live demonstrations on stage to show how effective this new device, the TASER 10, is. Don't worry if you are wondering where T8 and nine have gone, they haven't – this new device was potentially due to be called the T8, but for a reason you'll see below, it's been born as the T10.

TASER 10Release date

Police car cameras for air-tight evidence. Experience airtight evidence gathering and video capture with Panasonic police vehicle cameras.

When you consider there is a duty in international law to provide less harmful methods of managing situations, as well as the UK law to use reasonable, necessary, and proportionate uses of force, the ability of the new T10 provides several de-escalations opportunities in terms of improved distance, strobe lighting and an ability to select the best area for NMI. This product is a game changer.

The familiar arcing sound that we have all been trained to acknowledge has gone and is replaced by a new digital sci-fi sound that will quickly become synonymous with T10 for police officers and the public. Think back to every sci-fi film you've watched and the sounds when the futuristic weapons are charged up and ready for use, and you are already getting close to what it sounds like.

Police currently deploy many different kinds of moving and task-performing technologies. These include flying drones, remote control bomb-defusing robots, and autonomous patrol robots. While these different devices serve different functions and operate differently, none of them--absolutely none of them--should be armed with any kind of weapon.

MIT Professor and cofounder of the Future of Life Institute Max Tegmark told Wired that AI weapons should be “stigmatized and banned like biological weapons.” We agree.  Although its mission is much more expansive than the concerns of this blog post,  you can learn more about what activists have been doing around this issue by visiting the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots.

Corporate Address. Executive Security Services 10365 SE Sunnyside Rd, #340. Clackamas, OR 97015. Mailing Address. Executive Security Services PO Box 272

AxonTASER 10

In our stun gun vs Taser comparison, PDN Contributor Barret Kendrick of Bearco Training discusses how these less-lethal weapons work.

According to a Wired report earlier this year, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in 2020 hosted a test of autonomous robots to see how quickly they could react in a combat simulation and how much human guidance they would need. News of this test comes only weeks after the federal government’s National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence recommended the United States not sign international agreements banning autonomous weapons. “It is neither feasible nor currently in the interests of the United States,” asserts the report, “to pursue a global prohibition of AI-enabled and autonomous weapon systems.”

So activists, politicians, and technologists need to step in now, before it is too late. We cannot allow a time lag between the development of this technology and the creation of policies to let police buy, deploy, or use armed robots. Rather, we must ban police from arming robots, whether in the air or on the ground, whether automated or remotely-controlled, whether lethal or less lethal, and in any other yet unimagined configuration.

Today, scientists are developing an AI-enhanced autonomous drone, designed to find people during natural disasters by locating their screams. How long until police use this technology to find protesters shouting chants? What if these autonomous drones were armed? We need a clear red line now: no armed police drones, period.

TASER7

Armed police robots are especially menacing at protests. The capabilities of police to conduct crowd control by force are already too great. Just look at how the New York City Police Department has had to pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars to settle a civil lawsuit concerning police using a Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD) punitively against protestors. Police must never deploy taser-equipped robots or pepper spray spewing drones against a crowd. Armed robots would discourage people from attending protests. We must de-militarize our police, not further militarize them.

Whether they’re armed with a taser, a gun, or pepper spray, autonomous robots would make split-second decisions about taking a life, or inflicting serious injury, based on a set of computer programs.

TASER 10video

Mar 15, 2021 — Maybe it's because yellow lights indicate caution that some drivers think that yield signs are yellow. While it's true that yield signs used to ...

Five minutes from TPC Scottsdale, our hotel is surrounded by outdoor attractions. We're within 30 minutes of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport, several hiking trails, ...

There are already law enforcement robots and drones of all shapes, sizes, and levels of autonomy patrolling the United States as we speak. From autonomous Knightscope robots prowling for “suspicious behavior” and collecting images of license plates and phone identifying information, to Boston Dynamic robotic dogs accompanying police on calls in New York or checking the temperature of unhoused people in Honolulu, to predator surveillance drones flying over BLM protests in Minneapolis.

TASER 10for sale

The U.S. government has become increasingly reliant on armed drones abroad. Many police departments seem to purchase every expensive new toy that hits the market. The Dallas police have already killed someone by strapping a bomb to a remote-controlled bomb-disarming robot.

It’s no longer science fiction or unreasonable paranoia. Now, it needs to be said: No, police must not be arming land-based robots or aerial drones. That’s true whether these mobile devices are remote controlled by a person or autonomously controlled by artificial intelligence, and whether the weapons are maximally lethal (like bullets) or less lethal (like tear gas).

We need a flat-out ban on armed police robots, even if their use might at first appear reasonable in uncommon circumstances. In Dallas in 2016, police strapped a bomb to an explosive-diffusing robot in order to kill a gunman hiding inside a parking garage who had already killed five police officers and shot seven others. Normalizing armed police robots poses too great a threat to the public to allow their use even in extenuating circumstances. Police have proven time and time again that technologies meant only for the most extreme circumstances inevitably become commonplace, even at protests.

This post was written by Gowri Nayar, an EFF legal intern. Imagine driving to get your nails done with your family and all of a sudden, you are pulled over by police officers for allegedly driving a stolen car. You are dragged out of the car and detained at gun...

The initial trigger squeeze discharges a single probe without electrical output and is aimed where the user requires it to be, based on the threat and risk, to obtain a good connection point. The second trigger squeeze discharges a second probe, again considering all of the circumstances to create neuromuscular incapacitation (NMI). It’s the user who now decides on probe placement and the angle of spread, which negates having to work out if either probe, but in particular the lower probe, will connect often in times of increased risk and danger.

Having tried this device, I know it's accurate at the max distance, and it felt like you had more time to plan your decisions properly and take in a fuller picture. It's intuitive to use, feels balanced, and as good as it is to use a greater distance, the ability to decide where to place the probes for NMI is equally as good in close quarters, small rooms, or vehicles for example.