Portable pain weapon may end up in police hands

[Are_grits_groceries]

THE Pentagon's efforts to develop a beam weapon that can deter an adversary by causing a burning sensation on their skin has taken a step forward with the development of a small, potentially hand-held, version. The weapon, which is claimed to cause no permanent harm, could also end up being used by police to control civilians.

The idea of the weapon is to "create a heating sensation that repels individual adversaries", according to the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate (JNLWD) in Quantico, Virginia, which develops less-lethal weapons for the US military and coastguard.

Tests with a rifle-mounted infrared laser, carried out at a US air force lab near Dayton, Ohio, have determined a combination of laser pulse power and wavelength that causes an alarming, hot sensation on the skin, but which stops short of causing a burn, says JNLWD project engineer Wesley Burgei.

"We have established the minimum irradiance to cause a sensation and have characterised where thermal injury begins," he says. "But the exact operating irradiance which balances a useful military effect with a conservative margin of safety has not been nailed down yet."

That's something that will have to be done before the weapon is deployed, as too powerful a laser beam could permanently blind someone if fired at their eyes. Weapons that do this are banned under the UN Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427286.100-portable-pain-weapon-may-end-up-in-police-hands.html

And the hits just keep on coming.

"But the exact operating irradiance which balances a useful military effect with a conservative margin of safety has not been nailed down yet." =
We could blind you with this if we don't figure out the right setting.

Will they release it anyway?

[Joanne98]

1. OMFG! I'm sooooo tired of this SHIT!

[vadawg]

2. interesting, if they can get it to work, might be good for long distance take downs

of suspects, anything that allows the apprehension of a suspect with minimum danger to the public and officer is a winner to me..

[ShortnFiery]

5. It depends on WHO gets to define the term "suspect?"

Suspect = anybody who DARE protest the power of the ENTRENCHED ruling elites. :thumbsdown:

[JTFrog]

6. Persuasion by pain. Let's just blind and burn the peasants.

Push button torture that leaves no marks? Sounds like a cop's wet dream.

:eyes:

[Echo In Light]

20. Yep. A BLOOD RED wet dream. Sadists shouldn't be allowed to be Public Servants

[MadHound]

7. Funny, that's what a number of people were saying about tasers when they first came out

How many hundreds have died from tasers. How often have we seen tasers used as torture devices in the hands of police?

Sorry, but this will simply become another portable torture device in the hands of the police. It is going to horribly abused, much as tasers have been. A bad idea all the way around.

[MajorChode]

11. A better question is how many people will die from ignorance?

Right now the police are using rubber bullets and bean bags fired from a cannon for riot control. Those methods most certainly have and do kill people. Unless you're an anarchist who thinks it's a good idea to allow people to run amok and riot in the streets (which also manages to kill a lot of people), it might be a good idea to work on developing less lethal methods to achieve the same goals.

How many hundreds have died from tasers.

The answer is not even within a cab ride of how many people THINK have died as a result from tasers. You could probably count on one hand how many people have been confirmed by an actual ME to have died with a taser as a contributing cause and still have fingers left over. There simply is no such thing as a completely non-lethal non-lethal method of subduing people. Batons and nightsticks did cause thousands of deaths. Choke holds and all other forms of physical restraint cause death. Short of handing people a card that says, 'please show up at the precinct and turn yourself in because we don't have a method to take you into custody that doesn't have less than a .000001% fatality rate', there's not any better alternatives to the taser. Although it may have the potential for abuse, so does everything else. Dealing with those problems makes a helluva lot more sense, because they ain't gonna go away just because tasers go away.

So a better question to ask is, if those who prefer pseudo science to real science get their way and get tasers banned, how many people will die from that ignorance? If you don't know the answer to that question, it might be a good idea to figure it out before pointing the finger at something and calling it evil.

[nebenaube]

13. .

"For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction" These kind of devices breed insurgency.

[Bjorn Against]

14. You say anarchists rioting in the streets has killed "a lot of people"

Can you give me even one recent example of people being killed as a result of these so called anarchist riots? Your post is misinformation used in an attempt to justify police repression.

[MajorChode]

19. You're shitting me, right?

You actually expect me to provide you proof that rubber bullets and other 'non-lethal' crowd control projectiles kill people? Have you been living under a rock for the past 30 years? Is your google broke? How about hundreds of instances in Northern Ireland during the 70's and 80's? How about hundreds of people in South Africa in the 80's? How about hundreds of instances in the West Bank and Gaza for the past 30 years up to today? Oh, you want something more recent and closer to home? How about Victoria Snelgrove in Boston in 2004 who was killed deader than hell by a tear gas round? Rubber bullets were used in the LA riots and again at the Democratic National convention in 2000 which put numerous people in the hospital, some with serious injuries. Rubber bullets were used in 2007 in LA during an immigration protest and again people were hospitalized. Pretty much every WTO meeting has resulted in a riot that was answered with rubber bullets and other 'non-lethal' rounds.

You don't have a clue about these things and you accuse me of posting "misinformation"? That is rich. As I said before, ignorance can also be lethal and yours is a perfect example.

[JTFrog]

21. "Unless you're an anarchist who thinks....

"Unless you're an anarchist who thinks it's a good idea to allow people to run amok and riot in the streets (which also manages to kill a lot of people)"

Pretty sure folks are looking for your proof of the anarchists running amok and killing in the streets which you say is the justification for using these weapons.

How many people were killed in the street in PA by anarchists before they shot the lrad machines at the crowds during G20?

[MajorChode]

23. So now you think I have to justify any and all instances of these weapons?

Uncontrolled rioting in the streets is anarchy, and yes it does manage to kill people wholesale, and no you don't have to be a card carrying anarchist to riot in the streets. The LA police was criticized heavily for allowing the LA riots to rage out of control before they took measures to quell the violence and rightly so. Now perhaps you don't like the frequency or the methods used to quell violence, and there is some kind of point there, but that only strengthens the argument to research less lethal methods. If someone thinks that riots should be allowed to grow out of control, or they want to make some childish argument about how I need to justify each and every time a cop uses one of these weapons before I can advocate for the research of less lethal methods, they should go look somewhere else because I'm not going to play those games.

Your question is ridiculous. You're suggesting that people have to die BEFORE the police take action. Kind of a little late then, no? The question should be, how many people would have died had the police not taken action and the answer will never be known. What I can tell you is that about 53 people were killed during the LA riots and thousands more were injured and billions of dollars in damages were sustained that directly affected the people in that area. And had the police not eventually brought the situation under control, there's little doubt that far more people would have been killed.

Nice try, but I'm going to have to raise the flag here.


Cheers!

[JTFrog]

24. You don't need to fly your flag for us to see your BS.

Bullshit is exactly what I call trying to justify using devices that electrocute, burn and blind human beings.

But do carry on from your position of self proclaimed superiority.

[MajorChode]

25. You do realize that an appeal to emotion = BS, right?

Of course you don't!

You may want to educate yourself, assuming you don't want to allow your ignorance to continue to demonstrate your lack of reason.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion

The flag still flies in your honor. Display it proudly. You've earned it.

[JTFrog]

28. Insults and personal attacks from the advocate of torture?

Color me surprised.

I have enough education and intelligence to understand that torture is wrong.

You go ahead and believe whatever helps you sleep at night.

[MajorChode]

30. You can add false victimization to your list

And still you persist with the appeal to emotion BS. I guess some people can be educated, some can't, and others like to flaunt their ignorance as a badge of honor.

The irony of someone using a logical fallacy to make the case that someone else's argument is BS wasn't lost, so at least your failure to reason offers the element of entertainment.

Have a nice day.

[JTFrog]

33. If being opposed to torture devices in the hands of authoritarian bullies makes me ignorant, then

I guess I'll wear my "badge of honor" proudly.

I had a nice day. This wasn't it.

[MajorChode]

34. Yes, I'm all for torture, rape, and mahem at the hands of "authoritarian bullies"...

Because I don't subscribe to your warped sense of reality.

You make me laugh. I like you.

Cheers!

[Blecht]

40. the ignore button is your friend

just a suggestion

[Bjorn Against]

37. I never asked for proof that rubber bullets kill people

I know that rubber bullets kill people. I asked you to provide proof that "anarchist riots" kill people which you have not done. What you did provide is proof that the police kill people, I know that is the case but that is not the fault of anarchists.

[MajorChode]

42. I asked you if your google is broke

People die in riots, and no not even close to all of them are killed by cops. Riots happen quite frequently. There are riots in prisons, riots after sporting events, riots over protests, riots over civil unrest.

You asked me for "one recent example of people being killed as a result of these so called anarchist riots." (as if you can call a riot anything but). Your revised question is even more ridiculous, but since you are apparently unable to perform this search yourself, here's a good start:
http://www.lafire.com/famous_fires/920429_LA-Riots/LAWEEKLY-2002-0426/2002-0426_laweekly_TheLA53_Crogan.htm

[Bjorn Against]

45. Those were not "anarchist riots"

Apparently you do not know what anarchism is, not all riots are "anarchist riots" and riots which are started by anarchists are extremely rare.

[MajorChode]

46. Time to send up the flag

an·ar·chy (ān'ər-kē)
n. pl. an·ar·chies

1. Absence of any form of political authority.
2. Political disorder and confusion.
3. Absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose.

Pretty much any riot can be described that way. So perhaps you want to coin your own phrase "anarchist riots" with your own narrow definition. I could really give a shit less. Now try going back and reading what I originally wrote, which is copied for your convenience.

Unless you're an anarchist who thinks it's a good idea to allow people to run amok and riot in the streets...

So it was you that decided to use the term "anarchist riots" in the first place, not me. Instead of addressing the points of what I wrote, you have decided to descend into some tangential discussion in what you thought I said, which had nothing to do with the subject in the first place. I've already played this absurd game as far as I'm willing to go. If you want to continue your bullshit argument on the semantics of "anarchy", be my guest, but you're going to do it without me from this point onward.

Cheers!

[Bjorn Against]

50. The only BS is in your post

Read that definition again, it has nothing to do with riots in any way. The term anarchism refers to a specific political ideology, and if you read any anarchist literature you will see that most anarchists would strongly disagree with the second and third points in the definition you posted. Read some literature from prominent anarchists like Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn and Emma Goldman and you will see that they do have cohesive principles and a common purpose. They are not advocating disorder and confusion, they are advocating a society which is organized from the bottom up with people working together for their common interests rather than being governed by a central authority. It may be a utopian vision and I don't know that it would work in practice, but the ideology is certainly not about chaos and disorder as is often portrayed. Even if the definition you posted were accurate however it still has nothing to do with riots.

This is not just semantics, I was at the RNC protests in St. Paul and the police used the presence of anarchists as an excuse for their extreme tactics of intimidation despite the fact that the anarchists were non-violent. I have seen police repression with my own eyes, and anarchists are always the scapegoat used by police to justify that repression.

[MadHound]

43. Count the number on one hand the number of deaths and have fingers left over

Wow, what world of denial do you live in. For your information over four hundred people have died from being tasered. Tell you what, next time I go visit my in laws, I'll swing by the home made memorial to those tasered to death that's in their town and count the number of names for you.

You apparently have no clue as to the extent of the problems that surround this issue. Instead you're doing the typical knee jerk law and order routine. You don't seem to want to recognize that tasers have morphed from a weapon designed to subdue people into a weapon that is used to bring about compliance in any little matter dealing with the police. Back in pre taser days the police were more reticent about applying force. Now if you talk back to the police, even a simple question, they automatically reach for the taser. Don't talk fast enough, you're tased. Dare to question their authority in any little way, say for instance why you have to stop protesting, you're tased. Don't give them the information they want, tased. On and on it goes.

Last summer there was a man in a nearby city who was threatening to jump from an overpass onto a highway in order to kill himself. How did the police respond? They tased him, causing him to fall and suffer severe damage. Back in the "bad ol' days" the cops would have spent the time to talk him down, saved his life without injuring him. But now it seems as though the taser has become the way for the police to do their job quickly. Not well mind you, simply quickly.

But hey, keep up your ignorant law and order rants. Next time you are stopped for protesting or what have you, remember, comply. Otherwise you too will be tasered, possibly to death.

[vadawg]

32. How many injuries and deaths do you think tasers have prevented

from experience nothing stops a fight faster than the taser saving injuries all round.

[Cid_B]

41. It's the "portable pain device" bit that got me...

I think a rock falls in that category as well. I can carry it with me and if need be knock someone around with it.

[ShortnFiery]

3. More torture devices in the hands of our Police Forces?

Lovely. :eyes:

[bobburgster]

4. Tired of this crap too!

Every two-bit backwoods cop will get one of these too, just like the "non-lethal" taser.

[corpseratemedia]

8. maybe we need robot stand-ins if people want to excercise their first amendment rights

and demonstrate..and not die from vomit or pain or ear-busting sound machines

[liberal N proud]

9. No permanent harm?

How can they say that?

Because then they say:

"We have established the minimum irradiance to cause a sensation and have characterised where thermal injury begins," he says. "But the exact operating irradiance which balances a useful military effect with a conservative margin of safety has not been nailed down yet."

[JTFrog]

10. Not to mention this little gem:

That's something that will have to be done before the weapon is deployed, as too powerful a laser beam could permanently blind someone if fired at their eyes. Weapons that do this are banned under the UN Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons.

[Soylent Brice]

12. more on this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6138019

[Triana]

15. Jeeeze. Why not just give some gasoline and a book of matches to some psychopaths...

...and let them "control civilians".

Not much difference, really.

Gore V. said this will soon be a fascist country. He's WRONG. It already IS one.

[Orsino]

16. ...along with all their other portable pain weapons. n/t

[nc4bo]

17. From 1997 US News and World Report. Wonder weapons.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/970707/archive_007360.htm

Some highlights of the article:

LASERS! Light beams affect mind and body Lasers emit a high-intensity light, which can force an individual to turn away or cause blinding. Those that result in permanent blinding have been banned by international treaty. But dazzling lasers might be used in hostage situations, prison riots, and special operations. Status: Prototypes exist Dazzling effects Lasers can force the pupil to close, or they can burn the light-sensitive retina or cornea depending on the intensity of the beam. Laser guns Lasers have been developed to be mounted on existing weapons, such as the M-16 rifle. Grenade-shell laser Clip-on targeting transmitter Cornea Pupil Lens Retina

ACOUSTIC WEAPONS! Arms for crowd control and invisible fencing Acoustic frequencies could be used to guard sensitive facilities, rescue hostages, clear paths for military convoys, disperse crowds, or target individuals. Status: Prototypes exist. Acoustic frequencies can penetrate buildings Acoustic "gun" mounted on humvee Sonic "speakers"

VORTEX WEAPONS! These arms can knock down people or even aircraft The vortex gun expels a doughnut-shaped shock wave that could knock people down. The gun could also be filled with gases or chemical agents.

MICROWAVE WEAPONS! A "tunable" weapon that can discomfort or cook the enemy

As antipersonnel weapons, microwaves could be used as "barriers," causing pain or burns to those who enter their path. Phaserlike microwave "stun guns" have also been contemplated, but major technical hurdles still need to be overcome before their successful development. Status: Research is classified. Prototypes reportedly exist and are ready for testing. Vehicle-mounted microwave gun Microwave "barrier" BZZZZZZT!!! Disturbs brainwaves Affects heart rate Causes heat, burns, fevers Seizures or stun effects Impairs motor function

Not sure if US News & Reports' political affiliations or if can be considered a "safe" site to quote here. Never saw anyone quote it, maybe there's a reason why. Maybe a pass for this particular article just in case it's considered a RW rag?

Anyway, I had this link saved in my bookmarks for a long time. I found it interesting then and now it seems like the predictions are coming truer every day.

:scared:

[Are_grits_groceries]

18. In college my brother learned about

another type of acoustic weapon that is an offshoot of an LRAD. It uses infrasound or the low end of the spectrum that can't be heard. Once you get to a certain point it becomes very destructive.

"Infrasound"—vibrations below the range of human hearing (between 20 hertz and 20,000 hertz)—has profound effects on living organism and inanimate object alike, potentially rattling the latter to flinders and generating the aforementioned symptoms, along with confusion, depression, and even death, for the former.

But apart from seemingly unanimous agreement that 7 hertz can potentially kill, the jury is out as to exactly what happens where in the spectrum. Certainly, no firsthand accounts support one site's assertion that 12 hertz is the irresistibly bowel-loosening "poop frequency" long pursued by mean-spirited electronic musicians.

"Extremely amplified very low frequency sounds," the document states, "can set up a resonance within the inner ear and cause extreme discomfort for those subjected to these frequencies; very low frequencies (<20Hz) can cause internal organ damage. . . . LRAD does not produce harmful very low frequency (300–3000Hz) sounds. . . . Also, LRAD requires significantly less power to operate than is required by the SCREAM for the generation of its extremely amplified very low frequencies."</p>

http://www.seattleweekly.com/2005-06-29/music/weapons-of-mass-distraction/

Once they make a weapon with low enough hertz, it can't be heard at all and is devastating. They may already have them or at least are working on them.

[PreacherCasey]

22. Nothing to see here.

The militarization of our police force has been occurring for over a decade and resistance to it has more or less been confined to a few lonely voices screaming in the wilderness. I mean, if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear, right?

One day our big, shiny, multi-trillion dollar military apparatus will stop pointing overseas and get swung around right back in our faces. It will be a sad time for all those trusting Americans who ignored this issue for so long.

[Juche]

26. What is wrong with it?

I would rather the police use less than lethal force instead of lethal force when they are able to.

Abuse needs to be investigated and prosecuted. However police using non-lethal methods of subduing someone is better than them using lethal methods.

[Raineyb]

49. "Non lethal?" Like tasers?

:eyes:

Yeah, that's what we need. More devices that can be used by the police to abuse the populace like we don't have enough of them already.

:puke:

[G_j]

27. civilian control

big business!

[Quantess]

29. Bet on it.

[Brother Buzz]

31. Tin foil foils the beam...

So do garbage can lids and duck tape, lots of duck tape. Prepare to battle:

[ThoughtCriminal]

35. Your agonizer, please!

[cherokeeprogressive]

36. "Portable pain weapon"? WHAT. THE. FUCK?

So a 9mm doesn't cause pain, and isn't portable?

So a Taser doesn't cause pain, and isn't portable?

So a baton doesn't cause pain, and isn't portable?

So a bean-bag gun isn't portable, and doesn't cause pain? (caught ya)

Please, give me a fucking break.

[blues90]

38. I guess now in order to protest

One needs heat shields and some sort of ear and head sound cannon pretection because of these cluster fucks and their weapons.

What the hell is this country come too?

[Jkid]

39. No, no,no.

Outlaw this shit.

[Solly Mack]

44. any way to direct it back to the source?

[demodonkey]

47. There's talk of the G20 coming back to Pittsburgh in a few years...

...look for them to test it out here; since we've become the testing ground for LRAD and other anti-First Amendment weapons.

[MrScorpio]

48. Your Agonizer, please.