Member-only story
Responding to Critics of the Bully Drone ™
Given the tenor of the discussion around the Bully Drone™ and other personal defense drone systems, you might expect this piece to be one of contrition.
It will not be.
The Bully Drone™ as you may know is programmed only to intercede in the event of an algorithmically likely “aggression effort.”
Some critics have taken issue with the Bully Drone’s™ patented clamp-brand bruising technology. These critics don’t seem to understand that the clamp-brand bruising mechanism is a safety feature. It simultaneously clamp-brands the aggressive party with a time-stamp and brief description of the attempted aggressive act — while also holding the aggressive party in the clamp long enough for the victim to get to safety.
The Bully Drone™ also saves a video recording of the attempted act as well as the initiation of the clamp-branding. The bruise, while painful, is specifically designed to last no longer than 10 days, which is plenty of time for the offending party to document a complaint for review. Note that such a complaint automatically sends video footage of the aggression effort to the local police. So the clamp-branding and the video files are simultaneously proof for and against the hostile party. For that reason, less than 1% of all clamp-brandings have ever resulted in police action.
