Reply #9: Yes it is negative - when it' designed to violate free speech!!! [View All]

[file83]

For anyone to even suggest that such an exercise is an "okay" idea, reveals an unhealthy mindset and an uninformed opinion. To not consider any of the below consequences is a manifestation of mal-adaptive behavior and a disgustingly submissive predispotsition to the state and illegitimate authority.

If a cop needs a non-lethal choice for individual cases, that's one thing.

But to "test" a microwave mass crowd weapon on an American crowd, that means it's going to be a protest of some kind (I doubt a sporting event or parade).

During large protests here in America, if there is any violence that breaks out, in the last couple decades it has been almost completely in isolated areas that can be dealt with by a small group of police.

There is ABSOLUTELY NO JUSTIFIABLE reason to be using a weapon (lethal or not) that could be used in that case that would end up breaking up the ENTIRE protest without violating the First Amendment Rights of the people involved in the peaceful protest.

Need you be reminded:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

If these mass non-lethal weapons are "legal", then that means the LAW is in violation of our rights.

Say for instance that you want to participate in a protest that has, say 5000 people. You are protesting the outcome of a local election (voter fraud). The protest is a peaceful one. But then 1 or 2 jackasses decide to have a fight with the police. The police decide to target YOU and the rest of your fellow patriots with microwave technology. The crowd disperses, the protest goes away. Your voices and political pressure is not heard. The newspaper decides to write about "how this great new technology" saved the day. The DON'T write about the reason the protest was there in the first place - voter fraud.

The person/group that was the target of the protest (corrupt politician) is protected.

Tell me how you think that is a good idea.

As if that isn't bad enough (and it should be), we haven't even mentioned the health implications of said "non-lethal" weapon - why should US citizens be the guinea pigs in some sort of experiment? That is not only sick, it's ILLEGAL!!!