US police to throw big balls in criminals' faces Next month, 100 US police departments will start deploying a new, ball-shaped camera that can be thrown into dangerous areas to scout out life-threatening situations. Youtube Video The system, dubbed Explorer Tactical, is a camera contained in a rubberized ball the size of a grapefruit, with six recessed lenses feeding data …
Bouncing grapefruit: $2500
Mirror-onna-stick: $20
I wonder what the life expectancy of the ball is, i.e. how many times it can be used before it becomes unreliable?
Also, once police start using them as standard, what countermeasures crims will start to deploy against it? Off the top of my head: soot, oil or glue on the floor, smoke or steam in the air, or simply the suspect disguising himself as an item of furniture by putting a sheet over his head, should suffice in most circs.
But none of that really matters. The cops get a nice new toy to play with, the local politicians who pay their bills get to subsidise an American business that they've doubtless bought shares in, and everyone's happy.
If I were a cop, I'd be worried about why the ad emphasises "single-officer use". Am I to be expected to go into situations like that shown without backup, even from a single partner, now?
The obvious one is a WiFi jammer, put out enough noise and they won't get to see the image. For added fun, but beyond the average perp, might be a spoof device so that the image received is not the one from the ball. Given its roots as a humanitarian device, I wonder how good its security is. If all else fails, a baseball bat might be adequate countermeasure, either to return the ball if it comes in high enough, or simply to just squash it. The physical methods will probably work until the police had had training in how and where to throw it.
On the other side, if it's a bit bouncy, one could send it round corners, harder to do with a mirror on a stick. And if you think of the latest Star Wars robot, BB8, you could make a mobile version.
"I wonder what the life expectancy of the ball is, i.e. how many times it can be used before it becomes unreliable?"
Once (physically), if it goes up against someone with a shotgun.
Once (practically), if it goes up against anyone with enough sense to toss a cover over it (shirts will do nicely, thanks)
I guess SWAT was tired of looking like their were an occupation force in the US when they would break Grandma's door down due to some POS mom's basement twerp having a laugh. *Throws ball. Ah shit Matlock's on the TV and I see Luby's coupons (sorry southwest joke), false alarm.
What a terrible video, totally unrealistic.
Like all US Cops he was clearly supposed to shoot the "perp" once he dropped his weapon, but maybe he couldn't because he wasn't running away or maybe he were going to easy on him because he was white and just beat him up with his nightstick!
"Bounce Imaging CEO Francisco Aguilar says he got the idea for the device after hearing about the problems rescuers in the 2010 Haitian earthquake were having finding survivors in the rubble of ruined buildings"
And slightly more recent, there's also this - that's the one I remembered, which is why I searched and found the one above.
They could halve the cost of these.... for every one bought buy a black ball of similar size. As soon as crooks know what they are they'll know the cops know where they're hiding and either come out or give up. If every other one of these thrown in a room was a fake it would have the same effect.
I wonder how much a flash grenade costs in comparison.
I wonder how much a flash grenade costs in comparison.
Cost of Explorer Tactical: $2,495
Cost of flash bang grenade: up to $2.6 million
Seems like a pretty good deal all around. Even so, this is hardly a new concept with other models costing substantially less. Having stated that, I would prefer to use the i-Ball which makes up for its name by allowing users to fire it from a grenade launcher.
You stop this thing from rolling/bouncing and transmitting and it's not going to be of much use.
Thankfully, no hardened criminal wants to be seen wearing a coat, so they won't have anything to throw over the device. Phew, dodged that one...
The video is unrealistic in that it suggests an single officer would now be safe enough to go into such situations on their own, but it's possible that this is merely an attempt to avoid the issue that it only supports one viewport instead of being hooked up into a tactical net that also allows recording.
On the plus side, it will help with the dumber ones, disorganised crime, so to speak, but I personally don't think that's where the danger comes from (so it would be hard to justify the purchase).
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
