Philosophical Question for you?

Let's say, for a quick second, that robo-cops are a thing.

There are officers of the law that are part human and part robot.

One of these officers is attacked by an offender with a switchblade. The officer is stabbed 42 times in the neck and chest region. The officer ends up surviving.

Now, as a prosecutor (that's you), what do you go after the offender for?

Would it be attempted murder?

Or

Malicious destruction of property?

Is it attempted murder because you consider the officer to be human? Or is it malicious destruction of property because you consider the officer to be robotic?

There's probably no right or wrong answer here but I'm curious as to your thoughts on it.

Does it matter what percentage of the officer is human or is it a One Drop Rule kind of situation for you?

  • It'd be malicious destruction of property
    33% (4)11% (2)20% (6)Vote
  • It'd be attempted murder
    67% (8)89% (16)80% (24)Vote
And you are? I'm a GirlI'm a Guy

0|0
6|9

Most Helpful Guy

  • That would really depend on whether the officer in question was their own entity. It has been argued in some jurisdictions, that if someone was to hit or kick a police horse or dog, then it should be assaulting a police officer, whereby such a claim would be refuted due to the fact that the animal could not be classed as a police officer, or as being a 'person to whom such powers could be bestowed'.
    If a cyborg was to be given police powers and would also be perceived to be 'a person', then a criminal charge of harm, whether that be assault, attempted murder or otherwise could be proffered.
    If we were to take modern technology up a few notches and slightly into the future, whereby a police officer who had sustained severe injuries, and was required to have prosthetic mechanical limbs, that police officer would still be a person, even if they had to have neural chips implanted to control their limbs, as this would not render them any less of a person.
    I suppose, making reference to sci-fi movies, this is what would make the difference between a 'robo-cop' and the T-1000.

    0|0
    0|0

Most Helpful Girl

  • I would prosecute him for: The attempted murder of a Law Enforcement Officer.

    So regardless of what or who the robo cop is, he is still a Cop... protecting law abiding citizens and trying to ensure the safety of members of the public.

    I would seek the same justice for the Robo Cop as i would anyone else.

    0|0
    0|0

What Guys Said 8

  • "RoboCops" aren't sentient, they are 100% machine, it's just that part of that machine contains donated to science after death organic parts. RoboCop doesn't even have full control of his actions.

    The movie play's off his humanity and makes RoboCop a sentient being again with all his old memories, this is what made it a good movie at the time. In this case it could be attempted murder except that there was no way for the accused to know and by all reasonable assumption it was a robot he was attacking, so it gets muddy. With no intent to murder how can you prove it wasn't just destruction of property?

    I know pretty much nothing about Law so this is a blind guess.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Augmented people like that will soon become more and more common and you can bet that they will demand to be treated equally like the rest of us. Feminism was the movement of the later part of the 20th century while the aigmented will be having their own movement in the later part of the 21st century.

    0|0
    0|0
  • If I wear a smart watch, does that make me a property? No. Then why should getting bionic improvements make me one? It doesn't matter if its part robot, the core will always be human therefore it's an attempted murder.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Neither, there is no legal precedence to rule from so it comes down to how the courts rule. Each attorney arguing, and a judge and/or jury deciding. My feeling is that the intention was to stop the officers life it will be attempted murder.

    0|0
    0|0
  • If he were 100% robotic, A... if he were an actor with a robocop uniform on... B hahaha 8)
    Oh my goodness an accident happened on the scene :o :-(

    0|0
    0|0
  • You put a very premature baby in an incubator. Someone comes along and deliberately smashes the incubator. You get changed with attempted murder and child endangerment.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Probably both. The parts of the cyborg is going to be somebody's property. Whether it's the government or some private security corporation.

    0|0
    0|0
  • I don't think physicality has anything to do with being human.
    Your consciousness is what makes you human, whether it is installed in a vessel of meat or electronics isn't very relevant.

    0|0
    0|0

What Girls Said 5

  • I'd say it's still attempted homicide. The robo-cops are still part human after all, and I assume the attacker knew that.

    0|0
    0|0
  • If they are part human then it is attempted murder.

    0|0
    0|0
  • They are still human and not owned by anyone.

    0|0
    0|0
  • It isn't a human and we do not prosecute people for murder when they kill animals.

    0|0
    0|0
  • if he's part human then he's still human (of sorts), so ofc the murder

    0|0
    0|0
Loading...