Tech Wars In Meat Space

Starfish writes: "Police and protesters are asking if new technologies used by both sides will turn street protests into bloodless, but also meaningless rituals. Real protest robots, phaser-like weapons, and other cool gadgets are discussed in this Village Voice article. Good heads up about the Ruckus Society's tech action camp in October."

Comments

Elitist Revolts in History, part 1

[Ars-Fartsica]

Don't forget that other great romantisized revolt, where a small cadre of wealthy, elitist intellectuals led the trash of the countryside into armed conflict - the American Revolution.

You're of course only highlighting the inherent contradiction in a democratic society - free speech that threatens free speech.

Well, in any case you live in a corporate republic where the flow of information is controlled by increasingly narrow interests, so you have to wonder what we're preserving in any case.

The Scariest Thing in the Article

[jeko]

USMC Colonel Mazzar, speaking in his official capacity, about the use of force by cops and military forces against protestors:

"It is the exploitation of perceived civil liberties which extends into violence...

My civil rights are merely perceived?!

Colonel, I see you're working at a college. Do us all a favor and go audit the freshman civics courses again. You are an embarrassment to the cause you have sworn to defend.

Re:The Scariest Thing in the Article

[Salamander]

My civil rights are merely perceived?!

Only some of them. What the colonel was probably getting at was that, in addition to all of the civil rights they legitimately and properly have, many people extend those rights in invalid ways or assume the existence of rights that do not in fact exist. For example, the right of free expression does not extend to arbitrary destructive or dangerous acts, no matter what pseudo-political excuse the perpetrators concoct. The colonel's point is quite valid.

Re:Meaningless ritual? Not if there's a camera aro

[SubtleNuance]

I am a veteran of a couple large-ish Anti-Capitalist protests (Windsor, Quebec). Let me assure you, there are certainly agent-provacateurs amoungst the crowds. The police badly need to justify their overwhelmning threats of violence. While I was marching with the Windsor-Detroit Communists (we had grown to about 800-1000 on the streets in Quebec) we were joined at the front by someone who was as obvious as could be. He reputed to be a local Communist (though our known-local-contact didnt know him) he was dressed in 'casual wear' like it was haloween and asked *alot* of odd questions with regard to our direction and intent. It was almost laughable. We later made a film and this person features prominently in it.

Now, it is also a known fact that radical movements, like the present anit-capitalist one, will become paranoid and dillusional. Those involved will cease to trust 'outsiders'. The solution to this I fear is absolute honesty, why keep secrets at all? If you are completely honest about your intent there is no need to keep secrets.

What to help ruin the present Plutocratic Picnic? Join the FIGHT! See protest.net.

Sometimes Slashdot depresses me...

[m0nkyman]

I just read the comments above, and the general tone surprised me. Once upon a time, slashdot readers would have talked about the tech, not talk about how dumb protesters are.

In the past twenty years, I've watched the change as police have become more and more likely to clamp down on protests. The black bloc is a response to police violence, not the cause of it. As an original black bloc-er circa 1989, I know why we started fighting back. It was due to police being more and more likely to use force to put down democratic protests. We were defending ourselves. In Genoa, there were some pretty serious allegations that the 'black bloc' doing property damage to small businesses etc. were provocateurs. That tells me that they are getting worried about the effectiveness of the black bloc, and want to discredit the movement.

Freedom is not easy folks. You have to be willing to fight for it.

Re:Sometimes Slashdot depresses me...

[daviddennis]

The reasons behind protests have changed, too. According to Michael Albert of Z Magazine, they are to scare elites out of their wits, so their policies will be changed.

Through the escalation of the WTO protest response, you can see the elites are indeed scared, and with good reason. The above article is a coded incitement to violent protest, because only violence (in the view of the author) will frighten elites and effect change.

Is it any wonder the cops react as they do?

D

Re:Meaningless ritual? Not if there's a camera aro

[ozbird]

Cameras are a two-edged sword. On the one hand, they allow protesters to get their message to a greater audience; OTOH, they attract the "rent-a-riot" types who don't seem to care what the protest is about so long as it's an excuse to indulge in mindless violence and vandalism. The latter does nothing to help the cause of the protest. From watching the media coverage of recent "anti-globalisation" protests, the general public wouldn't have had a clue about what the protest was about - all they saw was a bunch of "anarchists" trashing the place.

Ghandi is frequently quoted in these parts as saying: "First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win." To keep this in context, it should also be noted that he also said: "Non-violence is the first article of my faith. It is the last article of my faith."

Re:What's wrong with this?

[Salamander]

teaching cops conflict resolution might be helpful.

They often do receive such training. How many protesters do?

The real problem is that protests are viewed as a problem and no one gives a damn about what's being protested.

Yes, it is a shame that often no one - most notably most of the protesters - seems to care about the issues. Every protest I attend, it seems like the majority are there for the adrenaline rush, or publicity, or the social scene - anything but the issues.

Less snidely, the police are expected to be dispassionate regarding the issues under protest. They are not there for the issues; they are there to preserve public safety and the law. You might not like that, you might not like the laws, but there it is.

What the hell are cops doing protecting the corporations against the point of view of protestors?

That's not what they're doing. They're not protecting points of view; they're protecting people, and laws, and sometimes property, against inappropriate expressions of a POV. As mentioned before, they are dispassionate wrt the issues, and concerned only with preventing criminal acts - including politically motivated criminal acts.

The cops are following orders -- but who the hell is giving the order?

Proximately, the civil authorities. Ultimately ourselves, through our duly elected representatives. If you don't like it, elect someone else. This is a (representative) democracy, not rule of whoever shouts loudest.

Who's protecting the protestors?

Those same police. I almost wish that some corporation would be stupid enough to hire their own goons, so you could see those very same police protecting the protesters - which they most assuredly would do. What a conundrum that would create for the self-righteous cop haters.

Corporations should hire their own security.

They do, and that's why the protesters prefer to misbehave in public places. They're too cowardly to risk getting their asses kicked on private property with little or no legal recourse, so instead they subject the public to all the BS they claim is directed at the corporations.

Re:Cops will have the bots...

[BadDoggie]

It's worse than that. Non-lethal weapons are more likely to be used because they are non-lethal (http://austin.indymedia.org/display.php3?article_ id=590) And because the repercussions are lower when non-lethal force is used in any crowd control situation, the police are that much more likely to use such force, and using as a defense "I was in fear for my safety and the safety of my fellow officers. It was just a beanbag/foam/pepper spray. At least I didn't kill him." And you can't really argue with that because there is a need to have police, a need to protect the police who protect you, and there is also an easily understood concept that when you have to make someone stop doing something bad, it doesn't necessarily mean you have to take his life -- worst case you Rochambeau.

Would I rather be shot by a beanbag or a bullet? Not a tough choice, that one. But the rules of engagement change with non-lethal weapons and the threshold for their use is lowered by virtue of the fact that they generally don't kill -- not intentionally, anyway. It becomes much easier to pull that trigger.

I could write a dissertation here, score a five, get some cool responses and maybe some E-Mail, but I don't have the time or resources. There's a lot of information about this; check out some of it. Google, teoma, even Yahoo.

Let me note that the military's use of non-lethal weapons has historically been to disarm/disable an enemy so that lethal force could then be used, from the days of catapulting rotting carcasses into the keep to the gas attacks of WWI.

woof

Re:Cops will have the bots...

[Gordonjcp]

All you need to do to fight back is scrounge a gigawatt laser...

Protestors = agitators

[sourcehunter]

"I would trust the judgment of trained law-enforcement professionals trying to maintain public order and public safety over that of a younger, immature, less circumspect agitator."

This quote emobides what is wrong with law enforcement in America (especially) and (I'd assume) across the world!
Basically, this quote says "Everyone participating in the protest is wrong and just an agitator - a malcontent - someone who we should lock up anyway."

That thought, combined with these new weapons - I'm scared.

"One more day before the storm
At the baracade of freedom
when our ranks begin to form...
will you take your place with me?"
--- "One Day More" from Les Miserables

From HSV Technolgies Website...

[tshak]

How long does it take to immobilize someone? The effect occurs within a few milliseconds.

This will come in great when I need to get in the front of the line for the next Star Wars movie. No more camping outside the theatre - JUST STUN THE CROWD!