Name: TED】ステファン・コールマン非殺傷兵器の道徳的危険性 (【TED】Stephen Coleman: The moral dangers of non-lethal weapons)
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T05:57:01.000Z
Duration: 17 min 33 s
Description: VoiceTubeの動画で発音を聞きながら英語表現を覚えよう！学べる英語：

is some of the problems that the military of the Western world --

Australia, United States, U.K. and so on --

that they're dealing with in the modern world at this time.

that we've sent Australian military personnel to in recent years,

we've got obvious things like Iraq and Afghanistan,

but you've also got things like East Timor

that we're actually sending military personnel to these days

that we're asking the military personnel to do in these situations

are ones that, in their own countries, in Australia, the United States and so on,

would actually be done by police officers.

And so there's a bunch of problems that come up

for military personnel in these situations,

because they're doing things that they haven't really been trained for,

that those who do them in their own countries

If Australia had to send a thousand people tomorrow

we don't have a thousand police officers hanging around

and we do have a thousand soldiers that could go.

So when we have to send someone, we send the military --

and, heck, they're used to going off and doing these things

But they aren't trained in the same way that police officers are

and they're certainly not equipped in the same way police officers are.

And so this has raised a bunch of problems for them

when we're sending military personnel to do these sorts of jobs,

we ought to be equipping them differently,

and in particular, whether we ought to be giving them access

to some of the sorts of non-lethal weapons that police have.

Since they're doing some of these same jobs,

maybe they should have some of those things.

where you'd think those things would be really useful.

So for example, when you've got military checkpoints.

If people are approaching these checkpoints

and the military personnel there are unsure

and they say, "Well is this a suicide bomber or not?

Have they got something hidden under their clothing? What's going to happen?"

They don't know whether this person's hostile or not.

If this person doesn't follow directions,

then they would say, "Well we can use them in that sort of situation.

This photo is actually from one of the missions

where perhaps they know someone who's hostile,

where they've got someone shooting at them

or doing something else that's clearly hostile, throwing rocks, whatever.

But if they respond, there's a range of other people around,

who are innocent people who might also get hurt --

be collateral damage that the military often doesn't want to talk about.

So again, they would say, "Well if we have access to non-lethal weapons,

and know that if we hit anyone else around the place,

at least, again, we're not going to kill them."

since we're putting so many robots in the field,

where they're actually going to be sending robots out in the field that are autonomous.

They're going to make their own decisions about who to shoot and who not to shoot

if we're going to send robots out and allow them to do this,

maybe it would be a good idea, again, with these things

if they were armed with non-lethal weapons

so that if the robot makes a bad decision and shoots the wrong person,

again, they haven't actually killed them.

Now there's a whole range of different sorts of non-lethal weapons,

some of which are obviously available now,

字幕リスト動画再生

TED】ステファン・コールマン非殺傷兵器の道徳的危険性 (【TED】Stephen Coleman: The moral dangers of non-lethal weapons)

situation

people

person

force