Advocates raise privacy, safety concerns as NYPD and other departments put robots on patrol
In 2014, the creators of Knightscope told USA TODAY they wanted to create a fleet of robots that would cruise through shopping malls, corporate campuses and other public spaces, collecting data and alerting law enforcement when they spot trouble.
Nearly 10 years later, one of the public safety technology company's 5-foot-2-inch, 400-pound robots is working the graveyard shift, patrolling the Times Square subway station for the country's largest police department alongside a human New York Police Department officer.
Former Texas police officer and Knightscope co-founder Stacey Stephens said just under a dozen departments now use the Knightscope 5, or K5, and success stories from its deployment in the private sector are attracting the attention of other law enforcement agencies.
"Police departments are actually starting to take notice," Stephens said.
Experts including Matthew Guariglia, a senior policy analyst at the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, said like the rise of gunshot detection or facial recognition technology, it's possible "we are going to see a lot more robots as the next big trend."
Police have used other types of robots for decades for tasks like bomb disposal and surveillance. Law enforcement officials say the new generation of autonomous robots like the K5 can gather vital information, help assess dangerous situations and even limit the need for the use of force by keeping officers out of harm's way.
Law enforcement's growing use of devices like the K5 and the robotic dogs produced by Boston Dynamics has been criticized by communities and privacy advocates concerned about the technology's efficacy, increased surveillance, the potential for weaponization and the lack of clear laws and policies governing its use.
"We need to ask questions of our departments about, you know, what these robots really do, what information they detect. And if these robots are going to be the thing that summons armed police to a situation, how and when do they do that?" Guariglia said.
Change agents:This robot wants to police you
What do police use robots for?
Police have historically used robots on the ground for dealing with dangerous situations like bomb disposal and aircraft including drones for surveillance for work such as a search and rescue mission, according to Ryan Calo, a professor at the University of Washington who has researched law and emerging technology. Calo said some of this technology was originally developed for the military and later adopted by police.
Law enforcement agencies acquired nearly 1,000 robots through a federal program that routes surplus military equipment to police departments, the Center for the Study of the Drone at Bard College reported in 2016. More than 1,400 police departments use drones in some form, according to data collected by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
More recently, robotics companies have targeted police and first responders as customers and departments have begun using robots like K5 and Spot to surveil areas alone or with an officer. Boston Dynamics said it has made more than 1,000 Spots and a "handful" are now used for public safety. The company said its robots have been used by law enforcement in Houston; St. Petersburg, Florida; and Los Angeles to provide visuals in cases involving barricaded suspects.
"I do absolutely believe that robotics and technology like this are going to become much, much more commonplace and much more frequently used, and the reason for it is because it does allow for gathering of information and intelligence so that decision makers, officers, whomever can make better decisions," said Thor Eells, executive director of the National Tactical Officers Association.
But law enforcement's use of robots in certain situations has been denounced. In 2021, officials in Honolulu faced criticism for using about $150,000 in federal pandemic relief money to buy a Spot and use the robot to scan body temperatures at a shelter where homeless people could quarantine and get tested for COVID-19.
Last year, Department of Homeland Security officials also drew backlash after announcing they hoped to equip 100-pound, four-legged robots developed by Philadelphia-based Ghost Robotics, with cameras and sensors to assist Border Patrol agents in detecting illegal activity.
"People have a visceral reaction to robots, and we see this time and again," Calo said.
Do police robots reduce crime?
Mayor Eric Adams said the K5 patrolling the Times Square subway station will record video that can be used in case of an emergency or a crime and has a button citizens can use to report incidents. Adams said the city is leasing K5 for about $9 per hour, or less than minimum wage.
But advocates including Albert Fox Cahn, the executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, questioned why the new technology is necessary.
"It's expensive. It's creepy. It's not clear how they'll do any good," said Cahn. "We've seen a number of different robots being put forward, and before we get into civil rights concerns or privacy considerations, it's not clear what problems they're trying to solve."
Knightscope says on its website that technology like its robots are "known to be effective in reducing crime," citing data from the City of Huntington Park Police Department in California that showed a decrease in crime reports, calls for service and citations and an uptick in arrests in the year after the agency began using a K5.
But Andrew Ferguson, a law professor at American University, said there's not enough data to determine how effective the robots are at preventing crime. He said the devices are likely an example of "security theater," meaning a public safety measure that is highly visible that does little to impact crime.
"The problem with security theater is that there's an opportunity cost of the money spent on a robot is not money spent on the underlying issues of why people commit crime in our society," Ferguson said.
Robots are a symbol of increased surveillance
Big cities like New York are already heavily surveilled. When asked about privacy concerns, Stephens, the Knightscope co-founder, said "there's absolutely nothing that we do that's outside of what's been done for decades."
The advantage of the K5, Stephens said, is that it provides higher-quality footage than most stationary surveillance cameras, and the "physical presence, so it's more in your face."
That's part of what worries Ferguson. He agreed that adding a small number of robots may not practically change how much people are surveilled, but their presence normalizes increased police surveillance.
"I don't think it's even being purchased for its effectiveness," he said. "It's being purchased for the symbolism that you are under surveillance New Yorkers."
Another concern, Ferguson said, is the potential for upgrades to the device. Adams has said the robot will not record audio or use facial recognition.
But Cahn said there is no binding policy banning police from using facial recognition software on the images collected by the robots and expressed concern that the technology "is going to be used discriminatorily." The use of facial recognition software by law enforcement contributes to greater racial disparity in arrests, according to a 2023 study.
"We see a pattern that police will use their technology in the same biased ways that they've used all their other resources," Cahn said.
Are more 'killer' police robots in our future?
Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst for the ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project, said his biggest concern is that police robots could be weaponized.
"There are good reasons to think that (weaponizing robots) would add to the already high levels of abuse that we already see from law enforcement across the country," he said. "When things get too easy to do, they tend to be over done. I think that use of force by a robot would very much be in that category."
In 2016, police in Dallas rigged a bomb-disposal robot with explosives and used it to kill an armed man suspected of fatally shooting five officers. The officers involved were not charged and the killing, believed to be a first for an American police department, sparked a wave of concern that police around the country could increasingly use armed robots to inflict deadly force.
That concern was renewed last year when the San Francisco Police Department sought approval of a policy that would allow police to use remote-controlled robots capable of deadly force "when risk of loss of life to members of the public or officers is imminent and outweighs any other force option available." The Board of Supervisors initially approved the policy, but reversed course amid national public backlash.
Eells, of the National Tactical Officers Association, acknowledged that police can use robots as weapons in certain situations. But, he said using robots gives officers more information and greater distance from dangerous situations, which could mitigate the need for using force. He said the issue is "very, very misunderstood, it's grossly misrepresented and distorted."
"The use of a robotic doesn't absolve the human accountability," he added.
Robots that kill:San Francisco will allow police to deploy robots that kill 'in extreme circumstances'
Last year, Boston Dynamics and five other companies signed an open letter against weaponization of their general purpose robots. Stephens, of Knightscope, said producing armed robots is "just not something that we feel like is the right thing to do."
"This is not Terminator or Robocop. These are passive devices," he said.
Boston Dynamics is also sponsoring a bill introduced in Massachusetts banning the sale and use of weapons-mounted robotic devices. If passed, the bill would the first legislation of its kind in the country, according to the ACLU. Meanwhile, advocacy groups like Stop Killer Robots are pushing for international restrictions or bans on autonomous weapons systems.
Calo said more police departments and communities need to be proactive about creating clear policies and laws governing when and how robots are used.
"I really think that police should be holding hands with city councils and communities, because it's really up to us whether we want robots in our midst for this purpose," he said. "And it shouldn't be something that's just done to keep up with the with the Joneses, with other departments or to look contemporary."
Contributing: Marco della Cava, Mike Snider, Cristine Fernando, Itzel Luna, USA TODAY; The Associated Press