Remotely controlled non-lethal weapon systems in the context of law enforcement

  • 1 Institute of Metal Science, Equipment and Technologies with Hydro- and Aerodynamic Centre ”Acad. Angel Balevski” at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (IMSETHAC-BAS), Sofia, Bulgaria


Unmanned weapon systems with one or another degree of autonomy are widely discussed in the last years. The increasing use of drones in the law enforcement of some countries attracts considerable attention with regard of potential human rights violations. Although both non-lethal weapons and remotely controlled systems can save lives and provide indisputable tactical advantages, the introduction of non-lethal armed robotic systems into law enforcement is being viewed with skepticism and concerns. The purpose of this article is to explore why society is concerned about these systems and to what extent such concerns are grounded.



  1. Amnesty International. UN: Ban killer robots before their use in policing puts lives at risk. Meeting of the UN‟s Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, Geneva, 16 April 2015.
  2. Amnesty International. Autonomous Weapons Systems: Five Key Human Rights Issues for Consideration. 2015.
  3. Melzer, N. Human Rights Implications of the Usage of Drones and Unmanned Robots in Warfare. EU Directorate-General For External Policies, May 2013.
  4. Heyns, C. Autonomous weapons systems and human rights law. Presentation at the informal expert meeting organized by the state parties to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons 13–16 May 2014, Geneva, Switzerland.$file/Heyns_LAWS_otherlegal_2014.pdf
  5. Crowley, M. Tear Gassing by Remote Control: The development and promotion of remotely operated means of delivering or dispersing riot control agents. Report of University of Bradford and Omega Research Foundation, December 2015.
  6. Crowley, M. The use of riot control agents in law enforcement, in: Casey-Maslen, S. (ed.), Weapons Under International Human Rights Law, Cambridge University Press, UK, 2014, pp 334-356.
  7. The Israeli Companies at Milopol: Beit Alfa Technologies. Israel Defence, 11 November 2013.
  8. McNulty, J. Remotely Controlled Non-Lethal Weapons Applications. NDIA 16th Annual Security Technology Symposium, Williamsburg, 2000.
  9. Goldberg, A. and J. Casali. Non-Lethal Acoustical Weapons: Overview and Auditory/Nonauditory Risks. 2014.
  10. LRAD.;
  11. Rogoway, T. Are 'Pain Ray' Cannons The Next Must Have Toy For Commando Cops? 22 August 2014.
  13. Eshel, T. RiotBot - Armed For Close Combat. Defense Update, 19 Oct. 2010.
  14. McLain, J. Full-Auto Teddy Bear: Non-Lethal Automatons and Lethal Human Teaming to Increase Overall „Lethality‟ in Complex Urban Environments. Small Wars Journal.
  15. International Civil Aviation Organization. Circular 328 AN/190: Unmanned Aircraft Systems. ICAO, 2011.
  16. Bowden, M. How the Predator Drone Changed the Character of War, Smithsonian Magazine, November 2013,
  17. Valdovinos, M., J. Specht and J. Zeunik. Law Enforcement & Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Guidelines to Enhance Community Trust. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2016.
  18. GALLUP. In U.S., 65% Support Drone Attacks on Terrorists Abroad. 25 March 2013.
  19. Spallanzzani, N. For When the Sky is not the Limit: NonLethal Drone Use by Law Enforcement. Seton Hall Legislative Journal, Vol. 41, issue 2, 2017, pp 443-466.
  20. Connecticut would be the first state to allow armed police drones. REUTERS, 31 March 2017.
  21. Entous, A. Special Report: How the White House learned to love the drone, Reuters, 18 May 2010, referred to in Alston, The CIA and Targeted Killings Beyond Borders, N 132.
  22. Hambling, D. No, Taser-Firing Cop Drones Aren't Coming For You,10 September 2015.
  23. Israeli Drone Supplies New Non-Lethal Response to Riots. IHLS, 16 May 2018.
  24. Porter, A. Law Enforcement‟s Use of Weaponized Drones: Today and Tomorrow. Saint Louis University School of Law, Vol. 61:351, 2017, pp 351-370.
  26. Boyle, M. The legal and ethical implications of drone warfare, The International Journal of Human Rights, 19:2, 2015, pp 105-126, DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2014.991210
  27. Falk, O. Permissibility of Targeted Killing. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 37:4, pp 295-321, DOI: 10.1080/1057610X. 2014.879380
  28. Joh, E. Policing Police Robots. UCLA Law Review, Vol. 64, 2016, pp 516-543.

Article full text

Download PDF