united-states self-defense oregon
Would a robot controlled by sentient AI have a right to self-defense?
<p>If someone built a robot controlled by a sentient AI that had a will to live, could the robot use force to defend itself against a person trying to harm (or unplug) it?</p>

<p>No. Oregon does not recognize this as within the scope of its self-defense law justification, except insofar as its owner is allowed to use non-deadly force to protect property.</p>
<p>But, a sentient AI is also not a proper party to a criminal case and can't commit a crime.</p>

<h1>The law does not recognize AI.</h1>
<p>As the law does not recognize AI as people but only as <strong>items</strong> and <strong>property</strong>, the case is actually quite clear cut:</p>
<p>Whoever programmed the AI to trigger a subroutine that is set out to end a human life, did pretty much plant a shotgun with a string on the trigger against a door: whoever opens the door would get a load into the chest.</p>
<p>The fact pattern of a shotgun with a trigger line, a &quot;booby trap&quot;, is the very quintessence of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katko_v._Briney" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Katko v Briney</a>. Briney was sued for premeditated assault, and it is rather clear, that should Katko have died, he'd have been in for premeditated murder.</p>
<p>Applying this to the case as presented: The programmer and/or the owner of the AI might, under the current laws, in for the murder of whoever is culled by the AI because they try to shut it off.</p>
