68 Resource book on the use of force and firearms in law enforcement The development of less-lethal means of force has expanded rapidly worldwide, mostly at the initiative of the corporate sector that saw great commercial potential in their development and retail. The downside of the proliferation is that it is difficult to keep track of all weapons available and conduct in-depth research. Also, the development and use of new tools is ever more dictated by industry interests, rather than by the needs of law enforcement, which is an undesirable trend that has led to the militarization of police units in several countries.151 The State should be in control of the types of equipment its agents use and for what purpose. The United Nations Human Rights Council has recommended that States conduct thorough, independent and scientific testing of less-lethal weapons for crowd control, for example, and that the results of such testing should inform national and internal regulations.152 Ultimately, State needs should guide, rather than follow, what the industry should develop. USE OF UNMANNED SYSTEMS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT The United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary killingsa has examined the use of increasingly autonomous weapons in law enforcement, and the possibilities that increasing depersonalization of the use of force—through unmanned force delivery technologies—may infringe upon human rights standards. His report highlights possible areas in which unmanned weapons may potentially be used in law enforcement context, including crowd control; action against specific classes of perpetrators, such as prison escapees or big game poachers; and provision of perimeter protection around specific buildings. The Special Rapporteur notes that law enforcement officials have a much stronger duty to consider the specific circumstances of each individual case before using force, including the subjective intention of those against whom force is used, than is the case during armed conflict. In addition, unmanned systems generally do not allow for capture. The Special Rapporteur thus has suggested that serious consideration needs to be given to whether unmanned systems, in particular autonomous weapons systems used in the context of law enforcement, whether with lethal or less lethal force, can be considered lawful weapons per se. a Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, A/69/265, 6 August 2014, paras. 65-87. 5.4.  How to decide when to use what type of force? With the various instruments of force at the disposal of law enforcement, how can she or he decide which instrument constitutes appropriate force in a given situation? It is impossible to regulate in detail what type of force should be deployed precisely under what circumstances, and when and how to scale up to the next level of force, as obviously this is dependent on the circumstances, including the type of resistance put up by the alleged suspect. The discretion afforded to 151  Small Arms Survey (2011): States of Security. chapter 3, p. 94. Download: http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/ publications/by-type/yearbook/small-arms-survey-2011.html Also the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions emphasizes there is an urgent need for clear guidelines on both the development and deployment of the new instruments of force. Moreover: “it may be necessary to place restraints on the international trade and proliferation of these weapons.” Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, A/HRC/26/36, 1 April 2014, para. 106. 152  Human Rights Council, “Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan, Report of the Secretary General”, A/HRC/ 25/38, para. 15, available from: https:// documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G14/109/03/pdf/G1410903.pdf?OpenElement