Australian man killed by suicide robot An elderly Australian man apparently shot himself dead Tuesday, using an elaborate suicide robot of his own construction, according to media reports. The 81-year-old man who lived alone in Burleigh Heads left a note detailing his macabre machinations, as well as his grievances over his relatives demanding he be committed to a …
The self-same thing was invented and executed (pun intended) in New Zealand around 25-30 years ago.
In that case the bloke chained himself in a frame with 22 rifle and arranged a timer delay triggered by when he pulled a plug out of the wall. He then spent a significant amount of time unable to move and waiting till the timer triggered.
NZ has always been an unrecognised leader in the world - look at how the publicity machine of the Wright Brothers stole rightful recognition from Richard Pierce for the world's first powered manned flight: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Pearse
Lazy? He went to the trouble of building a ROBOT to kill him, instead of just pulling the trigger himself...
Seriously, though, it really isn't that funny for those close to him.
Other icons I could have used: IT?; Joke Alert!; Skull and Crossbones; Coat.
But I picked Billy G because I reckon that part of it is due to insanity from using Windows...
As an Aussie myself, I feel a certain obligation to defend the poor old guy.
Australian nursing homes over the last few years have been highlighted to be in a rather poor state of affairs (and I feel a sense of shame over it). The staff treat the residents with disrespect and abuse, the ones who are no longer able to take care of their own toilet needs are often left for hours on end sitting in bed in their own waste. There have even been deaths from outbreaks of diarrhea from poor food preparation in nursing homes.
Needless to say that the nursing home system here is in a piss-poor state and is in dire need of an overhaul.
Then there is the family, they really need to take a long hard look at themselves. The gentleman in question would have spent many many years working hard to provide for them, only to be told in his later years by the ingrates that he isn't wanted and is being put in one of the afore mentioned nursing homes while they sell off his home and all his belongings, presumably to cash-in on property prices.
Personally, if it was me, the "robot" I built wouldn't have been for outdoors use. I would have mounted a collection of guns under the kitchen table for the next time I invited the ingrates over for dinner.
Mines the one with the frag grenades and "Death To Ingrates" on the back!
How many of you clowns felt the need to point out that this guy was not a Darwin Award Candidate? I thought this place attracted a slightly higher IQ calibre of poster but apparently not.
This guy ensured that his passing would generate quite a splash by the method of his self-dispatch which was probably the idea. I expect he'd have got a small paragraph in the back of the local free advertising paper if he'd just put the gun to his temple. Instead he's ensured that a lot of idiots on a website have wasted an inordinate amount of time pointlessly discussing him.
Another interesting means of dispatch is the home-made guillotine. I particularly remember hearing of a case a few years back but if you Google there have actually been lots of instances of such Heath Robinson-esque farewells to the cruel world.
it makes sense that early adopters would use robots to perform the most grisly of tasks in society.
It's food for thought. Anyone who commercializes robots with the ability to manipulate weapons will have to deal with the issues around them being used for negative purposes (suicide, murder, robbery).
On the other hand, it probably points out a good market. If it's okay to sell guns, I suppose there's nothing wrong with selling more intelligent weapons (robots with guns). I'm not sure if there are laws around remote control firing mechanisms. (although a trigger is remote control, depending on your point of view).
It's possible that the rise of the machines will come from individual citizens, as opposed to corporations or governments. ....gotta run, the bots are nagging
me...
Lots of people take themselves out using, say, a shotgun in the kitchen and cause all sorts of messy and expensive damage.
This bloke builds a deathbot (why is he nursing home fodder if he can build a deathbot?), and politely sets it up in his driveway and plinks a .22-- the bullet probably did not even exit and ding the garage door!
A little hosing off the driveway and house is ready to sell.
Oz ought to give him a posthumous award for cleverness and saving the taxpayers' money.
Why not just hold the pistol up to your head and pull the trigger, if you're so eager to leave? How could you even ensure that the thing would aim properly and do the job, instead of just maiming you or wounding you?
This doesn't make a whole lot of sense. How come there isn't a big question mark icon for those of use who are confused?
More than adequate for despatching some[thing|one].
Even when fired from a pistol with a lower muzzle velocity than from the typical .22 rifle.
I've personally despatched a number of animals quickly and humanely at a variety of distances with a .22 rifle and if someone pointed a .22 rifle or pistol at me I would certainly consider my life was in danger.
Lots of people have died believing the myth that "it's ONLY a .22"
Now:
"...set the controls to /up yours, Asimov/" Definitely one of the best lines I've read lately.
>Apart from pistols, Oz has absolutely draconian gun laws.
Actually pistols are even more heavily controlled than rifles in au.
Your average citizen has two options for licensing a firearm, open and club. An open license lets you carry it with you as long as you have a legitimate reason ("going to the club after work" or "visiting a mate with a property" would be ok), a club license lets you carry it between home, a gunsmith and a licensed club, that's it. Pistols are only allowed on a club license.
As a side note, I think "draconian" is a bit harsh. I have two rifles and while I had to jump through a couple of hoops to get them it wasn't a massive hassle for someone who has a legitimate need. Contrary to some peoples' claims it does help keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Our house was broken into last year, I grabbed my maglite and went to see what was going on. I never even considered the possibility that they would be armed with anything more than a knife, certainly there are crims with guns, but the junkies going around stealing dvd players don't have them.
(Yes, I am aware that my "side note" is longer than my actual reply)
What you have written is correct but it only supports the original statement, laws are draconian other than for pistols. ie you can have a rifle for the back yard or someone elses back yard (draconian), pistols are club only (not draconian). I think draconian applies perfectly ie its not a massive hassle for someone who can state a legitimate need. therefore its easy, and the law is almost pointless, hence draconian.
> you can have a rifle for the back yard or someone elses back yard (draconian), pistols are club only (not draconian)
Definitions of draconian on the Web:
* (drah COE nee-un) adj, 1. Designating a law or code of extreme severity. 2. Harsh, rigorous.
I would have said that strictly limiting who could buy something and telling them exactly where you are allowed to carry it (pistol) was more severe and rigorous than just saying "OK but prove you need it first and you will have to wait a few weeks" (rifle)
"I think draconian applies perfectly"
I believe the previous AC is a member of a law enforcement body and has their agenda in mind.
"Except for pistols" - In the UK, standard pistols are PROHIBITED entirely. Oz is much more reasonable about them.
I have seen OZ statistics showing a recent boom in private gun ownership. Violent gun crime has remained level for decades.
The only possible change is that there has not been another Port Moresby. Incidentally Port Moresby involved ILLEGAL weapon possession.
I am British and bow to any Aussie's better knowledge though.
Jerry remembers a machine from 25-30 years ago. Might be the one I saw at the Medical School at Auckland University , 30 years ago.
Constructed and used by an bloke who worked there, and used a .22 cal. rifle.
It was thought he must have taken several weeks to make it. Quite a good design, with a timer , and after taking some drugs to make him go bye-bye, he locked himself in to/ on to the device and the rest is history.
Opinion was that he wanted to be remembered, perhaps the same applies to this Australian chap.
Sad thought that suicide is a matter for hilarity among supposed adults.
PS. Jerry - Re Richard Pierce and the Wright Bros. Richard's plane had no means of control , the Wright machine had wing warping, and Richard's bouncing across a paddock and into a hedge was not controlled , sustained flight.
The Yanks did do it first.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
