Slashdot Mirror


Riot Control Ray-Gun for Use in Iraq

team99parody writes "An 'Active Denial System' weapon that 'fires a 95GHz microwave beam at rioters to cause heating and intolerable pain in less than five seconds' is scheduled for service in Iraq in 2006 according to CNET and the print version of New Scientist. It was recently tested on people playing the part of rioters at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico where they asked the subjects to remove glass and contact lenses to protect their eyes. Hopefully real rioters will get the same courtesy. Police and the Marines are working on portable versions. Sandia Labs also has a nice writeup on this system with pictures of smaller versions of the weapon."

80 of 1,317 comments (clear)

  1. Coming to America by nokilli · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's only logical. Our right to peaceably assemble is in the process of being eviscerated, which means that future efforts on the part of the citizenry to protest the increasingly hateful policies of this government will become more and more confrontational, and which in turn sees the government resorting to ever more punitive policies in response.

    Prediction: the ray-gun is on the streets in America in time for the 2008 Republican National Convention.

    I can't wait to hear what they consider to be acceptable levels of casualties as the result of using this thing on people.

    The thing I regret most in this life is that of all the science fiction movies I loved watching as I grew up, Soylent Green ends up being the one that most closely depicts the future.

    (I'd rather take my chances on the Nostromo.)
    --
    Why didn't you know?

    1. Re:Coming to America by iamdrscience · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Our right to peaceably assemble is in the process of being eviscerated,
      Since when are riots considered peaceable assembly? This thing is designed, like teargas, beanbag guns, rubber bullets, etc. to disperse riots. Now I'm not saying that that's all they'll be used for, certainly there are instances where the line is grey and the police in charge of these devices have inappropriately chosen to use them, but there is a valid reason for them to be developed.

      I'm glad that devices like these exist because as much as it's important for people to peaceably assemble, if a mob of people gets rowdy and starts destroying peoples' property en masse, they have abused their right and ought to be dispersed.
    2. Re:Coming to America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
      put in place by a democracy
      Well, Nazi Germany started out as a representative democracy, too.

      But I didn't realize we were supposed to give people a hard time about their sigs.

      The fact is, crap like this is bad. I don't care how violent a small minority of Iraqis are. There is no sense in burning them and giving them cancer just for being in a crowd.

      And yes, if it were applied domestically, crap like this would be just as bad. The grandparent raises a good point. Recent attitudes of law enforcement towards political protesters post Patriot Act have been alarming. Add this "ray gun" crap, and you've got something bad.

      Maybe the grandparent shouldn't have singled out the RNC '08 convention, (would that offend you less?) but he is definitely right.

      In my opinion, anyone who sees a distinction between using this in Iraq and using it in the USA is extremely ignorant, naive, or worse. People are people, regardless of nationality. There are a few bad apples in Iraq but the majority are normal people like you or me. Something like this has far too much potential for misuse.
    3. Re:Coming to America by nokilli · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Absent the trend in placing new and more onerous restrictions on where, when and how many people are allowed to peaceably assemble, I might agree with you.

    4. Re:Coming to America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, Johnny, we're talking about your civil liberties.

      Now, I know what you're thinking. "But dude, these aren't Americans like us. We're talking about towel heads. They're all a bunch of douches. Fucking terrorists, they are."

      Well, fuck, son. There's no difference. I'll give you a hint: most Iraqis want nothing to do with terrorism. Meanwhile, we blast them all with depleted uranium and ray guns. Environmental risk? Cancer? Well fuck, it's not our soil.

      Man. Can you imagine what it'd be like if the kind of shit that happens in Iraq were happening in New York, Chicago, insert your home town here? Well fuck. If every American knew that, we wouldn't have this stupid war.

    5. Re:Coming to America by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's designed to be used against people. How does it sort out the "rioters"? Is it any better than the cops at the NYC RNC convention last year, who swept up everyone on the streets, regardless of their "peacable" status? Or any of the other mass arrests I've ever heard of, where my friends, or their friends, have been picked up, even when just caught on the other side of the street, on their way to work?

      Have you ever been in a public demonstration? The actual treatment of your rights - ignoring them - is enough to wake up practically anyone. Especially when you see how different it is from TV and the movies. This raygun is going to get abused even worse than batons and tear gas, because its effects are mostly invisible. So the person leaning on the trigger, farther away from the action, won't be as inhibited by feeling personal responsibility. This thing is a nightmare from hell for people who actually care about exercising freedom, rather than just hiding behind a police fantasy, fearing for their property over crowds that will never threaten them.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    6. Re:Coming to America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Amen, everyone properly inside the free speech cages will be shielded from the microwaves completely.

    7. Re:Coming to America by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 3, Funny

      We(the Dutch) "stole" half of our country from the North Sea. Does that count? I guess the fish have an argument against us...

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    8. Re:Coming to America by Seumas · · Score: 3, Informative

      How about when police officers attend pre-assembly rallies and discussions under cover and try to promote violence from within and then attend the actual rallies under cover and start spraying people randomly with pepper spray just to stir them up and cause a disturbance so you can claim that they are violent and not peaceful?

      And yes, this does happen. It has been videotaped.

    9. Re: Coming to America by zoney_ie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Course not. Sure didn't some big world superpower give him a load of help in the 1980s?

      --
      -- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
    10. Re:Coming to America by q.kontinuum · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The trouble is that the mood of crowds is unpredictable, can change *very* quickly, and cannot be reasoned with. Added to that people in packs tend not to act with the same restraint they would individually

      This might be a reason to deny the right to assemble. But the right to assemble is graned by Your constitution, so this argument does not count.

      A mob of lunatics rampaging through the streets burning cars, smashing in windows and robbing houses

      Agreed. But on most demonstrations I was, it was only very few lunatics rampaging being used as an excuse to capture many obviously peacful people.

      or even one just throwing rocks, firecrackers or bottles at a line of police isn't "exercising freedom".

      COMPLETELY different story! How can one person render all others around him illegal? So next time I see a demonstration I don't like I will join the demonstration and throw a bottle. That way, all people around me loose there right to assemble. Nice, very efficient.

      --
      Trolling is a art!
    11. Re:Coming to America by jacksonj04 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Protest != Riot
      Riot != Protest

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    12. Re:Coming to America by Biomechanical · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This isn't a counter-argument to either you or the next comment up, merely an observation of a rally I was in several years ago.

      It was a rally for the decriminalization (sp?) of cannabis.

      We sang songs, smoked dope (quite illegaly) with a couple of coppers on the job watching us, and generally just annoyed people by holding up traffic and chanting corny slogans.

      The few people I noticed who did try to get everyone all fired up and bloodthirsty got one of two things - the first few were, very inconspicuously, beaten up by a couple of the bigger, "gentle giants" in the crowd, and the other wankers were shoved straight into the arms of the police, who arrested the dickheads for "assaulting an officer", with a wink and a smile from the rest of us.

      We'd decided on having a peaceful rally, with some civil (polite too) disobedience by our pot smoking, and we'd kept that peace through some subtly violent methods. There was no damage to property, nor people who weren't being morons.

      We were Brisbanites, quietly, seriously, exercising our possible - still dunno if there's anything in the books that says we're entitled to it - right to peacefully assemble and express our displeasure at the government, and that's what we did, and because we were civil-minded, peaceful folk, we beat mary-hell out of the dumb fucks that tried to ruin it for us and then we handed them over to the police while wearing big, doped smiles.

      It was a pleasant day.

      --
      His name is Robert Paulsen...
    13. Re:Coming to America by Loconut1389 · · Score: 3, Funny

      What does Dance Dance Revolution have to do within anything?

    14. Re:Coming to America by will_die · · Score: 3, Informative

      The FEC did let loose any "trail balloon" about delaying the elections.
      An office of the Justice department was ordered to do a paper on that and what would be required to delay the popular vote by a week or two at the most. It came down to that congress would have to approve the delay,the constitution does not place a date it is a federal law done by Congress and the President. Then a whole bunch of state laws would have to be changed, such as Florida's state law that says the vote has to be in place by a certain date in December.
      Overall a smart idea to have it research, but from the research it was quickly determined that it was impractical to do anything about, and just hope and pray that some attack did not prevent a large number of people from participating in the election.

      The information on that paper is easy to find and was publicly available at the time it was made a big thing in the press. So are you just using it as a non-issue to spew your hate speech or did you not care about the issue enough to do anything besides read about it at some kookie conspiracy web site?

    15. Re:Coming to America by JudicatorX · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Because shotguns permanently maim and/or kill

      Because shotguns can't be used by one or two people against tens of thousands.

      Because shotguns aren't (usually) used to deny large crowds their fundamental right to assemble in peaceful process.

      Because shotguns weren't developed for crowd 'control'.

      Because before George "Fucking Haliburton" Walker Bush there were no "Free Speech Zones", and hence no "No-free-speech zones".

      --
      "It is a good divine that follows his own instructions" - Portia, The Merchant of Venice
    16. Re:Coming to America by jglen490 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "Since when are riots considered peaceable assembly?"

      First, one must define "riot", and then (more powerfully) must define who gets to decide what a riot is. Witness the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago in which the powers-that-were either panicked or were not understanding the purpose of protest.

      Yes, in an emotionally charged situation it's easy for anyone to lose control of that situation and to thereby allow, or even cause, an escalation. However, comma, this is a very powerful system and hardly qualifies as a "non-lethal" weapon. Any protests of "we would never use it in anger" notwithstanding, all it takes is a few extra seconds of panicked press on the controller to weld glasses to skulls and permanently burn a copy of the latest state quarter into skin, or much worse.

    17. Re:Coming to America by chrish · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's it, Citizen, you just earned yourself a trip to the Freedom Zone!

      --
      - chrish
    18. Re:Coming to America by VanWEric · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the major point of difference between a riot control shotgun and a riot control laz0r b33m of 95Ghz millimeter microwaveryness is the intent of the person on the trigger end.

      A good cop ain't going to shoot me in the face with a shotgun (unless I'm doing something _really_ bad). A good cop will shoot me in the face with this gizmo if he has been told that it is "just a little pain" with "no permanent damage".

      The real danger comes from divorcing the damage inflicted from the percieved damage inflicted.

      And even if we train the riot cops, we don't know the worst case scenario. Riot cops get tear gassed during training - but that didn't save the life of the girl who was tear gassed during the red sox riots last year.

      --
      www.olin.edu
    19. Re:Coming to America by Total_Wimp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, it is.

      The reason is that assembling to call the government to task for the wrongs they've done is instantly reclasified as rioting and pillaging.

      Boston tea party. A bunch of guys rioted and pillaged to decry the wrongs of the government.

      Rodney King verdict riots. A bunch of people rioted and pillaged to decry the wrongs of the government.

      What's the difference? Was one violent and the other peaceful? Did one involve property damage while the other did not?

      How about the WTO protests in Seattle that were broken up with rubber bullets and tear gas? Were they causing property damage? Were they pillaging?

      And then of course there's all the pillaging that was going on in Tiananmen square.

      Whenever you have a government force putting down "riots", you better take some time to figure out why so many people are so god damned upset. Calling them a bunch of pillagers is moste definately missing the point.

      TW

    20. Re:Coming to America by whopis · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If we proceed ahead by excusing the actions of one group based on the evils and crimes committed by another group, then we are certainly doomed.

      Why do you insist that if one group is in the wrong, then anything done by the other group must be right and justified? Is it not possible that both groups committed unjustified actions?

      What about the group of blacks that pulled Reginald Denny from his truck and savagely beat him, smashing his head against the ground with a cinder block? Are they justified in beating him because a white jury freed a group of racist police?

      What about the targeting of Korean storeowners during the riots? How does that fit into the picture? Perhaps that was justified due to the light sentence Soon Ja Du (a Korean shopowner) received after shooting and killing Latasha Harlins during a minor robbery attempt.

      This is not about blacks vs. whites, or "whitey" vs. minorities.

      This is about evil people (who come in every race and color) and how much control and force they can exert over others when they are allowed to do so.

      To say that the L.A. Riots are a response to a black man being beaten by white cops is greatly misleading. Like many things this is not a clear cut black and white issue.

      After all, if that is all there was to it, how would you explain the hispanic cop that was involved in the beating? How would you explain the group of black residents that witnessed the beating of Reginald Denny live on the news and rushed out of their houses to save him?

      There are good people, there are evil people, there are people who are a mixture of the two. The ones who want you to believe that these incidents are merely related to race want you to have an uncontrollable visceral reaction to such thoughts. They fear people's ability to use intelligence and reasoning. They don't want you to understand the true causes behind anything. And that is how they will attempt to control you.

    21. Re: Coming to America by kalel666 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I know this is one of those things that "everybody knows", that the US armed Saddam in the 80's, but the facts speak otherwise. Yes, we supplied Iraq with monies and arms, but we were far behind those paragons of International virtue like:

      USSR 17503 50.78%
      France 5221 15.15%
      China 5192 15.06%
      Czechoslovakia 1540 4.47%
      Poland 1626 4.72%
      Brazil 724 2.10%
      Egypt 568 1.65%
      Romania 524 1.52%
      Denmark 226 0.66%
      Libya 200 0.58%
      USA 200 0.58%

      But don't take my word for it. Refer to the report from SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) here: http://projects.sipri.se/armstrade/Trnd_Ind_IRQ_Im ps_73-02.pdf

      If you're going to blame the US for something, go ahead, but a least blame us for something legitimate.

      --
      I HAVE CUBIC WISDOM THAT TRANSCENDS AND CONTRADICTS ONE DAY GODS
    22. Re:Coming to America by BarC0d3z · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not sure how you ended up with Insightful.

      "Rioting" really doesn't accomplish all that much. Whereas "Protesting" accomplishes more. Why do you think Dr. MLK is revered and Malcolm X villanized?

      But to answer your questions: Boton tea party was a small faction of people - the Sons of Liberty - who were considered extremists and denounced publicly by the likes of John Adams. We celebrate them now that history has had a chance to smooth out the rough edges. Regardless, the destruction they caused was very deliberate. Crates of Tea being imported from British owned companies and excessively taxed. It was symbolic because the British were excessively taxing everything imported. Tea just happened to be in the harbor at the time.

      Rodney King riots weren't decrying any wrongs of the government. It started out as a tantrum because 12 men and women couldn't determine beyond a reasonable doubt that those police officers were guilty of the charges brought against them. People were angry because the same laws that protect them from wrongful incarceration were protecting the people they didn't like. It escalated into a free-for-all of looting and stealing. There was no lesson learned that day except that people will steal and in some cases kill when they think they can get away with it.

      You got the WTO right - they were just protests. However there's a fine line when you have a large mass of people who are protesting and a mob of people who are becoming unmanageable. It's also a fine line when you have to be the one to manage those people. Give them their right to protest, but don't let them trample on the rights of others be allowing them to get violent. Rubber bullets sting a lot less than a crowbar to the back of the head.

      Tiananmen Square - I know you were being sarcastic so I won't berate you for it. All I can say is thank God I don't live in a communist state.

      I agree that freedom of assembly is a good thing. I can agree that getting to the cause for disgruntlement is a good thing. But "rioting" isn't synonymous with "protesting" as you seem to want to make it. Rioting does the exact opposite of what you're trying to accomplish. It allows your opposers to point to you and say, "See! They're barbarians. Their ideas hold no weight."

    23. Re:Coming to America by anaesthetica · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Your moral equivalency is really quite striking.

      Everyone has the right to assemble peaceably to protest what they consider a grievance against our duly elected and representative government.

      The Boston Tea party did not protest against a democratic and elected government, but against a monarch taxing unrepresented citizens.

      The Rodney King rioters damaged and looted the property of their fellow private citizens in protest of government action. That's completely unjust to those that had their homes and stores wrecked. A march, a rally, fiery public speeches, petitions, a sit-in at the court or city hall--all of these would have been acceptable. But the rioters damaged their neighbors in their anger at the government, and such action is rightfully stopped. It is one thing to protest against a monarch and another to protest against an elected and accountable government.

      WTO protesters in Seattle were not uniformly non-violent. Many private citizens, once again, had to pay the price for someone else's anger at the government. That's fundamentally unjust, that I might have my property destroyed by someone angry, not at me, but at the government.

      Tiananmen square was certainly peaceful to begin with, although I don't doubt that as it went on the protesters engaged in provocation with the police. But, you cannot draw equivalency between protest in a public square against a totalitarian government and protest in the streets of LA against an elected government's decision which involves destruction of private homes and stores. There is no moral equivalence there, whatsoever.

    24. Re:Coming to America by Irvu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      At the Republican and Democratic national conventions police have begun creating "Free Speech Zones" located inside barbed wire fences often miles from the actual convention site. People inside these zones were still, in some cases, subject to behavior restrictions (no shouting etc. At the RNC convention in new york police shut down a permitted march and arrested large numbers of people for being on the sidewalk or doing what they were otherwize told they could do. Many of those convinctions were subsequently thrown out and the police were rebuked both for arresting non-violent demontrators and for excessive use of force.

      At the Central American Free-Trade Agreement minesterial in florida last year unarmed and non-violent protestors were shot with bean-bag guns and rubber bullets (in theory non-lethal but they can in fact kill or at least cause permanent soft-tissue damage). Judges there are still sorting out the damage.

      Wake up!

    25. Re: Coming to America by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 3, Informative
      If you're implying the $200M from the US was used exclusively for chemical weapons and other WMD, then I'd love to see a source.

      You gotta be kidding. I am not gonna waste a day looking for primary sources, I will point you instead to this report, they cite their sources, go check them yourself. They mention figures totalling over $5 billion.

      USSR sold weapons to Saddam as he was not part of the Warsaw Pact and USSR was in no position to give him stuff. As a matter of fact when Saddam fell, he was $8 billion or so in debt to USSR/Russia for all that junk.

      Note that while the US money was earmarked for weapons, it was funnelled through various covers like the agriculture department. This is a standard practice with clandestine military aid, serving among other things to hide it from the taxpaying public.

      Also from the article:

      The Soviet government had refused to deliver arms to Iraq as long as Baghdad continued its military offensive against Iran.

      and

      The US government approved 771 licenses [only 39 were rejected] for the export to Iraq of $1.5 billion worth of biological agents and high-tech equipment with military application ...

      Look, I'm not excusing the fact we provided this materiel to Iraq, only that we were hardly alone, and weren't nearly the worst offender.

      The difference is that all the other participants were just trying to peddle their wares to Saddam (which still makes them covered in blood snakes) although of course they had their agendas. Particualry amusing is the fact that Saddam was falling out with the USSR over his war with Iran, which is what made him such a great buddy of the US. But unlike even the USSR (although they did sell him arms on credit - which ended up costing them dearly), the US was actively funding him during his attrocities, which is worse. Doubly so now, when the hypocrisy is of cosmic proportions, with all the "liberation" and search for WMDs crapola.

  2. So... by einstienbc · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wheres mine?

    --
    If you die horribly on television, you will not have died in vain. You will have entertained us.

    --Kurt Vonnegut

  3. Health implications by JemVai777 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I Wonder whether its usage can contribute to cancer down the track?

    --
    "The problem with our economy is that our budget is balanced by people who aren't" - A.E.N.
    1. Re:Health implications by DanMc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I wouldn't worry about it... US gunfire and air strikes are more likely to kill you than cancer.

    2. Re:Health implications by Tezkah · · Score: 5, Funny

      I Wonder whether its usage can contribute to cancer down the track

      ... only if you use it to light your cigarette. =)

    3. Re:Health implications by Kadin2048 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Given that the only depleted uranium rounds are only fired from 25, 105, and 120mm guns, if you got hit by one cancer ought to be the last thing on your mind. Personally, I'd be much more concerned with keeping myself in one piece, or barring that at least in as few as possible.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    4. Re:Health implications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      The round gets vaporised by braking during target impact and thus it gets to atmosphere, then into foodchain (or directly into your lungs if you are nearby). To smaller degree, if DU is not enclosed in full metal jacket, same happens to weapons crew.

    5. Re:Health implications by carldot67 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's hard to say.

      All cells have a fundamental shock response to heating as well as to UV and other stimuli. They produce various repair enzymes that wander around doing useful stuff like refolding damaged proteins and relinking damaged DNA.

      The problem is they sometimes get it wrong leading to mutations or regulation imbalances. Heating also changes the shape of proteins. Go higher than 42C for many animal proteins and they cease to work properly, in some cases permanently until they are replaced (there is a natural turnover).

      Now since proteins are involved in genetic switchgear and regulation I can easily see the possibility of one delicate subsystem going out of whack: growth factors, receptors, messengers, polymerase initiation factors, repressors etc. If one or more of these go wrong you _can_ have unregulated cell growth. aka Cancer.

      This would be particularly true for children or individuals with a pre-existing disposition.

      Numbers are hard for me to take a stab at without data and mammalian heat-shock isnt my field (although my degree in molecular biology is a good start).

      However, and as most people would suspect, unnatural stimuli given often enough to a large enough sample will eventually throw up something bad in individual cases at a rate higher than a control group. Its a statistical certainty.

      What "how often", "eventually" and "large enough" and "something bad" mean in relation to the weapon are anyone's guess. And I think thats a problem. You can find all this out for Aspirin, so why not the weapon?

      On balance, if you get tagged by this thing once due to being in the wrong place at the wrong time then the chances are it's not going to harm you long term. That said, I would really, really steer clear of it. It sounds like a nightmare.

      Speaking from a social viewpoint, I personally think its a dangerous escalation. If the authorities start firing this at people then it can surely only be a matter of time until they start firing back.

      --
      I wish at was Friday, but I dont want to wish my life away. So I wish it was last Friday.
    6. Re:Health implications by plumby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It means that the level of uranium 235 (compared to U234/U236) is reduced to below the levels found in nature. It is around 60% as radiocative as natural uranium, and once inside the body has exactly the same effects as natural uranium (mostly lung/kidney damage). Not as dangerous as enriched uranium it's true, but still not particularly nice stuff.

    7. Re:Health implications by Tom · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Speaking from a social viewpoint, I personally think its a dangerous escalation. If the authorities start firing this at people then it can surely only be a matter of time until they start firing back.

      Mod parent up. That's the point. Shooting at people with stun guns and CS gas causes them to throw stones at you (not to take sides, it also works the other way round: If you start throwing stones, don't be surprised if a CS grenade comes back).
      So why should this be any different? It will be a shock and probably disperse the crowd the first few times around. After that, it'll incite violent reactions. Since it is a most natural reaction to eliminate the source of your pain, I wouldn't want to be the cop who's holding the gun.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    8. Re:Health implications by pkahle · · Score: 3, Interesting

      At the moment, the "gun" is mounted on a Humvee. So you don't much have to worry about anybody carrying it. Also, it's purpose is to scatter a whole crowd. It's not directed at a single person, it's got a wide arc of fire. And from what I've heard, nobody's managed to stay in the beam more than 2 seconds (in somewhere over 2000 test subjects)

    9. Re:Health implications by Fishstick · · Score: 3, Funny

      >they sometimes get it wrong leading to mutations

      great - that would serve us right, have a bunch of angry, mutated Iraqis using their heat vision, super strength or invisibility against us!

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

  4. "non" lethal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
    • Interesting that they focus on the non-lethal aspect. I'd suspect the military would also be interested on whether you could turn up the power a bit, and you have a lethal ray gun that can hit lots of people at once.
    • Wonder if the volunteers of which the article speaks were found in a similar way that earlier human radiation 'volunteers' were found.
    • Wonder if making people feel like they're being burned alive counts as torture?
  5. Wow this is stupid by vectorian798 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But New Scientist magazine reported Wednesday that during tests carried out at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico, participants playing the part of rioters were told to remove glasses and contact lenses to protect their eyes. In another test they were also told to remove metal objects such as coins from their clothing to prevent local hot spots from developing on their skin.

    In real life obviously there are going to be people wearing lenses or carrying metal objects so what gives???

    Is Iraq just the guinea pig for our experiments now?

    While I certainly support non-lethal weapons in use of riot dispersion, this does not seem safe at all (and certainly, I do not want to be aimed at with microwaves!)

    1. Re:Wow this is stupid by kfg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Is Iraq just the guinea pig for our experiments now?

      Yes.

      KFG

  6. Little Waves in an Ocean of Hate by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's the way to win "hearts and minds" of people angry at the US occupation forces: zap them with rayguns. We'll teach them how the 21st Century US welcomes them with "compassionate conservatism", by frying them with rayguns. After sizzling whole towns, there's no way they'll ever listen to insane jihadists telling them that the Great Satan has burned them with hellfire, that we're all better off in a medieval fiefdom under god. Yeah, sticking Iraqis into a microwave oven is exactly the way to get them to calm down, stop their civil war, and break out those flowers they're supposed to be greeting us with.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Little Waves in an Ocean of Hate by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, some Americans now remember that Nixon revealed in tapes before the 1972 elections that he was backing the South Vietnamese only long enough to win reelection, then he was dropping them like a napalm bomb. Which he did, to the cheers of the hippies. If third-rate burglars like G. Gordon Liddy hadn't given the press and prosecutors the kind of easy meat they needed to nail Nixon, he would have claimed he pulled out of Vietnam as the "peace president", and sent his Chinese ambassador, George Bush Sr, to a landslide election in 1976.

      Now that Bush Jr is in front of the camera, they're not making any of those mistakes again. Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense who "lost Vietnam" by officiating over the fall of Saigon, has been sure not to let any bodies get counted, let alone televised. President Vice President Cheney learned, while on Nixon's staff, to stay in the privacy of the president's shadow, letting him speak whatever the political genius whispers in his earbuds.

      But it's all so similar to Vietnam, which was so mostly successful for the Republicans, with such clearly identifiable mistakes. This time, though, the press knows they can grab the limelight like Woodward and Bernstein, and turn minor careers into popular myths, guaranteed lifetimes of selling books and being hailed as geniuses. That's why they're howling for Rove now, after 5, 25 years of watching that reptile get away with literal murder (or accessory to).

      Personally, I remember Watergate, and I really remember Iran/Contra. It's not an echo: it's the same creeps, with the same playbook, updated from their Superbowl losses to work with some new blood. Blood all over their hands.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    2. Re:Little Waves in an Ocean of Hate by quarkscat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Methinks you need to turn the clock back just a bit more.

      Think about the Republican Eisenhower/Nixon plan for the liberation of Communist Cuba, AKA the Bay of Pigs Fiasco that "failed" because Democrat JFK wouldn't furnish "air support". The Republicans have made use of Cuban-American expatriates in covert operations ever since that time, including terrorist bombings and air piracy against Cuban civilian aircraft. They played a part in repeated attempts to assassinate Castro, which may have been a direct cause of JFK's death. The Cuban-Americans were also part of the CREEP "team" that buglarized the Watergate offices of the DNC. They were called upon again as part of the "tiger teams" that got directly involved in the war against the Sandanistas. And it was a Cuban-American on the IT staff of the Senate Republicans that "broke into" the Senate Democrats' fileservers, and then released damaging emails and "position papers" to the press in 2002.

      So, it really is all the same players, and with similar but updated playbooks, but the same dirty tricks. With brother Jeb Bush as the governator of Florida , is it any wonder that President George Bush has promised amnesty and SS benefits to illegal aliens who have increasingly flooded across our still unsecured after 9/11/2001 southern border. The Cuban-Americans have proven to be capable and willing covert partners of neo-Con(artist) Republicans. No doubt Dubya&Co. expect similar support from the illegal Mexicans.

    3. Re:Little Waves in an Ocean of Hate by quarkscat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With the (literally) tons of money being spent on the Iraq war, including new "high technology" answers to the wrong geopolitical questions, there is a convergence of "Rumsfeld" technology coming.

      Picture 20 or 30 thousand less American troops in Iraq in 2006, replaced with remote controlled DARPA challenge robots with these microwave "rayguns" mounted aboard. Along with the already effective and deadly remotely piloted UAVs riding "shotgun" overhead. All being controlled by US military (or contractors) in nicely air conditioned facilities in Qatar. Everything from "crowd control" to "riot dispersal" to killing insurgents, all without the loss of American solder's lives protested in silent memorial on PBS.

      Considering the penchant for the Dubya regime to "cookie cutter" patch the same problems in different venues, I would expect this very same technology to be applied to the control of domestic American insurg^H^H^H^H^H^Hprotestors in the same time-frame.

  7. That's a relief by legLess · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the article:
    Burn injury is prevented by limiting the beam's intensity and duration.
    Well thank god for that. We all know the customary restraint of law enforcement and military personnel will prevent any civilian injuries,
    --
    This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
  8. Wouldn't this be foiled by ostsJoe · · Score: 5, Funny

    by tin foil?

    1. Re:Wouldn't this be foiled by Boricle · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I suspect that what happens then is that they use the "less-lethal" tool first - anyone left standing, or with shiny foil face masks are then categorised as "combatants" and "more-lethal" tools are then used.

      The trick will be to incorporate the foil into some unobtusive clothing, dress up like a woman in head-to-toe covering (otherwise it will look strange if you are in full head covering). Or maybe a member of the Klan with some sun-glasses on. That'd be unobtrusive (not). Any kind of full body covering will do. Cow costume..., Scuba gear, ummm....

      Of course the fact that you are not running away screaming might still be a bit of a clue.

      Probably won't do much for improvised explosives though.

      ...which reminds me, I must remember to wrap my passport in foil..

  9. So many questions by Valacosa · · Score: 5, Insightful
    My first thoughts:
    • How wide-focus is this? Would police be able to use this on the street without frying everyone?
    • Could some sort of protection be made against this? (Portable Faraday cage, maybe?) If not, what's to prevent one of these falling into the black market and eventually being used on Police?
    • So Iraq has become the population-control guinea pig. What's even better is that this will probably be viewed by police as a magical dissent-eliminating ray. It's not. If people can't peacefully protest (or even riot), dissent is just forced underground, causing it to be made manifest more anonymously, more unexpectedly, and likely more distructively. Instead of more protests or riots, we have more things like...say...roadside bombs.

      Wait, isn't that terrorism? Using this thing could increase terrorism? Fucking wonderful.
    --
    "Live as if you'll die tomorrow." Ridiculous. You could die later today.
  10. "Nonlethal" at the sandia article by hobotron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nonlethal weaponry is a horseshit myth.

    The term they should have used (and what law enforcement uses now, after more than a few wrongful death lawsuits, is the term of "Less lethal". Did any of the Kirtland Air Force Base participants have a pre existing heart condition? I bet they didnt let pregnant women participate.

    Im so glad that when every time one of these proportedly nonlethal weapons pops up its run under a FULL and accurate barrage of labratory and set up tests, which almost never reveal the compounding issues that lead to death in real world enviroments.

    The news.com article asks a few of the many lurking questions to this system. We all know this device is going to Iraq to go through real world testing before its used here in the US. Someone is counting on all the "little kinks" that are more than likely deadly will be ironed out under the public eye.

    I find it highly ironic that our testing of this indescriminant weapon will be used in our even more indescriminant war.

    Terrorists dont use large crowds as weapons, if you stop and think at why this weapon would be needed, its ultimately crowd control on our home front. Now why would we need that? Lakers winning again? I highly doubt it. Someone had a plan when they initated and funded the development of this, and it doesnt look like a good one.

    --
    There is truth in humor.
  11. Re:mod these trolls down. by grumpygrodyguy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why the heck are mods modding this flame-war up!?!

    What could be more on-topic than a flame-war?

    --
    The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
  12. Re:Talked about earlier... by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

    No, they'd rather people not shoot protesting crowds. If the crowds are using lethal force or threatening the position of our troops, our troops will use lethal force back with or without our magic ray gun.

    Seriously, from a practical standpoint, what will happen the first time we fire this thing into. say, one of al-Sadr's regular 10k+ angry-mob protests? Everyone with glasses risks going blind; everyone with metal on them gets burns. Everyone with a pacemaker risks getting their heart stopped. It'd be almost a guaranteed new Sadrist revolt, plus easily increasing other Shia and widespread Sunni insurgency recruiting, while not killing any insurgents. Of course, the effects don't apply just to the crowd; beams keep on going.

    But lets take this further than the obvious anger that the US using some sci-fi style technology on a country that has no ability to resist it would inspire. Everyone who gets cancer within a few months of such a usage within half a dozen blocks of the site will blame it on the US's new "pain-ray". Everyone who miscarries? The same. Everyone who gets a headache, who has a heart attach, who comes down with a nasty disease... it'll all get blamed on the device.

    Strategically, this is an awful decision.

    --
    Point of interest. Offering to shoot us might not work so well as an incentive as you might imagine.
  13. We have lost the war on Iraq by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We have given up on winning their hearts and minds, instead we will cook their hearts and minds with experimental ray-guns. God Bless America!

  14. Why is it ... by chrispycreeme · · Score: 5, Insightful

    with all our technology, science, power and resources, all we seem to do is come up with more and more fucking evil disgusting ways of hurting people? This is fucking sick.. Does nobody else see this?

  15. Re:Totally Inappropriate Slashdot Article by The+Wooden+Badger · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Tell me about robots, new types of air-conditioner and spacecraft but keep this weapons crap out of here - we geeks are pretty much pacifists and don't care about this stuff.

    Yeah! tell me about Quake, and Doom, and Half Life, and Counter Strike, and Halo, and Unreal...

    --
    Heroscape, it's like legos combined with anachronistic wargames.
  16. Freedom Ray by HunkaHunkaBurninLove · · Score: 5, Funny

    This will nicely wrap up our hearts-and-minds campaign.

  17. Re:Right... I'm sure that's it by arodland · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Government, as an institution, is supposed to exist to solve (or at least mitigate) the people's problems.

    The average person, when placed in a position of power, wishes to use that power to improve his own situation. Such a person, in a government position finds that the best way to increase his personal power is to increase the size and importance of his domain of power -- which, as we've seen, is based upon "solving" some problem that the people have.

    The best method they've found so far is to create the problem with one hand while solving it with the other. Move more responsibility from the people to the government, and justify more work. Create more complications and loopholes in the tax codes, and work harder to bust tax evaders. Make more things illegal, and make law enforcement look good. It's a justification to do more, to take more of your money for your own good. It is evil. It's a million acts of small, petty evil in the guises of kindness and service.

    As to the bit about the Republicans -- it's been said before that the US is run by two parties: the party of Evil and the party of Stupidity. I agree with that assessment, but I think that the roles change day-to-day. Neither one is any better than the other.

  18. Re:Hearts and Minds by pegasustonans · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is this part of the battle for "winning hearts and minds"?

    No, it's the battle for cooking them up with Worcestershire sauce.

    --
    And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. --Will
  19. Re:Totally Inappropriate Slashdot Article by pandrijeczko · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Yeah! tell me about Quake, and Doom, and Half Life, and Counter Strike, and Halo, and Unreal...

    We geeks are also pretty good at distinguishing fantasy from reality.

    Besides, Counter Strike is the only game you list that has any basis of fact, all the others are in totally fictional environments.

    The whole point of violence in games, particularly with kids, is you don't stop them playing these games because they are just fun pure and simple. It's bad parents that use PS2s and XBoxes as "babysitters", leave their kids on them for hours on end and don't spend time with them balancing out in-game violence with real-life love and attention.

    So let's have none of this "game violence" BS...

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  20. Re:Potentially lethal? by Grym · · Score: 4, Informative

    The real question is, can we trust the weapon operators to use this responsibly?

    Probably not. Last year the police in the US managed to shoot one of their pepper-spray paintballs through an bystanding girl's eye, killing her. And that's a "non-lethal" weapon you can aim!

    The thing in the article covers an entire area. Do you think the operator is going to check and make sure that nobody in the crowd is wearing glasses, jewelry, or contacts? That's impossible!

    Even in theory, this isn't a non-lethal weapon at all... It's quite obvious that this is intended as a means of disarming (have we forgotten that guns/knives are metal?) and/or killing large groups of people immediately without collateral damage; just like a neutron bomb, only more controllable and cheaper.

    -Grym

  21. they've used this in Miami by pirateshot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have anti-globalization activist friends who were in Miami in 2003 protesting the FTAA meeting going on at the time. They tell me that the cops (other than having their own embedded journalists, getting extremely favorable corporate media coverage, beating people senseless and blinding some people with pepperspray) used some sort of microwave weapon on them and it made them throw up. For more info on that protest, check out a movie called the Miami Model http://www.ftaaimc.org/miamimodel.

    1. Re:they've used this in Miami by basic0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'd never heard of this "microwave weapon" until now, but you may be referring to the "Long Ranged Acoustic Device" which has been in use by police and military for years now. Apparently, with the right sound frequency, it's able to cause nausea and disorientation within seconds. More info can be found here

    2. Re:they've used this in Miami by Khyber · · Score: 5, Informative

      You are right, it was indeed the weapon you describe.

      It's been known for quite some time now that using waves of sound can do all kinds of things to the human body. Using stereo-separated soundwaves of differing frequencies, you can create a harmonic that your brain respods to. This has been shown to make people sick, or make them feel better and give relief from a headache. It's also shown to be possible to make people hallucinate, put them to sleep, pep them up, and more. Our skulls and brains respond rather well to nice resonating frequencies. Kudos for you bringing this up. Makes me wish I could post and mod at the same time.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  22. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Here's a hint for you:

    Those $1,000,000 per laser guided bombs have absolutely nothing to do with 'avoiding killing innocents'. They're about making sure that bomb hits the target it's aimed at, so's not to have to drop a dozen $100,000 ones. That avoidance of 'collateral damage' is just polite lip-service given to mollify the easily led on the home front. I mean, look at how uppity they got with My Lai... better put a PR spin on that, pronto.

    And the reason you're hated is that the innocents die anyways. Lighting up schoolbusses and torturing people in the same prisions and chambers that saddam used to use might be a giveaway to why that may be.

    It's strange that you have a realist perspective as to war and its outcomes, yet are so completely suckered in by the idea that your 'representatives' in-country give a fuck about any hajji that happens to wander in front of his scope. Here's a hint: Individual soldiers *may* have some qualms, after the fact, about gunning down unarmed prisoners and children and so on, but the forces in general couldn't give a rats ass. ... and why should they? It's not like the dirty little ragheads are actually HUMAN or anything, right?

  23. Iam certain by jd · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ..it is possible to devise a genuinely non-lethal weapon. The problem is, I doubt anyone would buy it if such a thing really existed. In order to be truly non-lethal, it would need to operate on some principle other than extreme shock or total immobilization.


    I'm surprised they haven't deployed water cannons over there - those would seem to be infinitely less lethal than machine-guns or even this microwave laser they're proposing. However, given the heatwaves and lack of electricity for cooling, there's a danger people would riot just to cool down.


    Of course, a lot of the dissaffection is as a result of a lack of amenities in an extremely unforgiving climate. On that basis, it would probably be much more cost-effective simply to give every household their own generator and supply them with fuel until the power situation has been stabilized. Probably kill a whole lot fewer people, too. Might even win a few friends.


    For the safer parts of the country, they could even run a water delivery service. Drop off a 20 or 50 gallon tank in the morning at the front door, picking up the empties in the process. No different than what a million milkmen do every day in England - except the getting shot at part, and the size of the bottles.


    That wouldn't eliminate problems, but it would reduce a LOT of the tension. And if you reduce the tension, you reduce the risk of riots and other violent protest. Containment is better done by meeting legitimate complaints, rather than suppressing them. Suppressing them only risks building the tension up more, which increases the risk of massive confrontation.


    Things are bad enough, over there, why go out of our way to make things worse, when it is cheaper, easier and quicker (not to mention more ethical) NOT to?

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  24. Re:This WILL cause lots of nice CANCER. by Dahan · · Score: 4, Informative
    GHz is not a measure of energy.

    True, but the energy of a photon is proportional to its frequency. E = hf, where h is Planck's constant. That's why hard ultraviolet light (~1 PHz or 1,000,000GHz) has enough energy to knock electrons out of orbit and cause mutations in DNA, while 95 GHz microwaves do not have enough energy to do so, no matter how many photons you crank out.

  25. The answer is: TINFOIL! by notany · · Score: 5, Funny

    Tinfoil. Tinfoil hat, dungarees, under your normal clothes. And you can carry tinfoil placards that reflect microwaves back to police.

    --
    Dyslexics have more fnu.
    1. Re:The answer is: TINFOIL! by notany · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Yeah. I tried to put tinfoil in the microwave. The point is that if you wrap tings in tinfoil, it won't let microwawes in.

      All the outside special effects, sparks and lightning, just make the demonstrators look like they have been attaced by The Dark Lord of Sith (tm). Great way to get prime time TV-coverage for the cause.

      --
      Dyslexics have more fnu.
    2. Re:The answer is: TINFOIL! by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 3, Interesting
      From an article on the subject.


      In another test they were also told to remove metal objects like coins from their clothing to avoid local hot spots developing on their skin.


      So, this countermeasure would require an extra-ordinary measure of dedication on the part of the activist. It converts "a gun that causes momentary (but severe) pain, but leaves no trace" into "a gun that leaves causes lasting pain, along with burns".

      So, best wear some sort of heat protection underneath your tinfoil suit.

    3. Re:The answer is: TINFOIL! by Pxtl · · Score: 3, Informative

      Those are dull metals. Highly reflective metals (like aluminum foil) would do better.

  26. Re:Totally Inappropriate Slashdot Article by lxs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    we geeks are pretty much pacifists and don't care about this stuff.

    You misspelled apathetic.

    Seriously, this attitude is why crappy patents and laws like the DMCA are passed uncontested. It's all very nice living with blinkers on your eyes, ignoring the real world, but don't go crying when that world rudely intrudes on your own life.

    If you really were a pacifist, then you should be extremely interested in the ways states have of hurting dissenters, since this thing could be used against you or your fellow humans (but not while you're locked in your bedroom playing Everquest)
    Not to mention that inhumane weaponry like this is the best propaganda tool for those opposing war.

  27. Technology to Defeat The Corporate Police State? by torpor · · Score: 3, Insightful


    Okay, so this crowd control of the lower classes is one thing.

    But where are the tech research projects to defeat the techno-millitant industrial corporate police? Do you really think the world is safe breeding such corporations, capable of producing devices like this for the purpose of MASS CONTROL?

    Weapons-manufacturers are the ones who create wars to sell their products. The U.S. Gov't has proven time and again that it cannot be trusted to keep its despotic fingers out of the mass-control pie. Why should we be 'grateful' that 'non-lethal weapons' are now being created out of electronics, when electronics have been governing the masses for decades now?

    Show me a hand-held device that defeats television. Show me a device which will de-fuse a rabid neo-con. Show me a tool that can be used to bring religions together in peace.

    Too many times I've seen Defense-industry nazi's get their rocks off on their latest weapons designs. I think its about time the people of the world revolted against the weapon makers ..

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  28. everything's back to front now by markandrew · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This shouldn't surprise anyone, really - the whole culture of western government (the US and UK, certainly) is moving away from solving the problems they face, and toward minimising the bother they cause the government.

    Too many people protesting outside parliament? Don't find out why they're so angry, just make it illegal for anyone to protest, peacefully or otherwise, within 1km of parliament.

    Too many corrupt middle-eastern regimes? Don't try to help get rid of the corruption, just invade one and hope for the best!

    Too many terrorist attacks? Don't try to figure out why so many people are willing to die to hurt you, just find a convenient country to blame and invade it!

    Too many underage criminals active at night? Make it illegal for *any* children to be on the streets at night, whether they're doing anything wrong or not.

    Too many riots and violent protests? Don't worry about it, just develop new and ever more sophisticated ways of punishing those who take part, or even those who are in the same place at the same time.

    What's next? Too many people thinking Bad Things? Don't worry...

    The whole mindset of the people in control at the moment is skewed - they're not solving problems, they're just hiding symptoms (or, increasingly, brutally suppressing them).

  29. Testing "intolerable heat" - in NEW MEXICO? by evilandi · · Score: 4, Funny
    Lemme see if I've got this straight.

    They tested a system to find out whether people were experiencing intolerable heat in New Mexico?

    Surely in New Mexico, all you have to do is just stand in the sun?

    --
    Andrew Oakley - www.aoakley.com
  30. Nice thought by zpok · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Something a friend of mine said some four years back (when everybody shouted "tinfoil hat" at the idea): if a few seconds can do this, imagine doing it for a few minutes.

    Isn't it nice we have all these backward countries to test our toys with and send our kids to to teach them some geography?

    --
    I think, therefore I am...I think.
  31. This reaction surprises me by drewpc · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I'm currently serving in the Marine Corps and the reaction I've heard here on slashdot is surprising. It seems that no one at all has chimed in saying "hey, maybe this is a good thing".

    I was at the Force Protection Equipment Demonstation this year where I talked to some of the Marines at the Joint Non-Lethal Warfighting Lab about this exact product. We as Marines are looking at this tool as a lifesaver (literally). If we can roll through a place like Fallujah and use this tool to incapacitate the bad guys in front of us, then that saves their lives and puts less risk on our Marines. We want to and are doing everything we can to improve our non-lethal and less-than-lethal capabilities so that we have more options when we're faced with an enemy.

    More importantly, the general vibe that I got from these responses is that you all think that we're a bunch of indiscriminent killers! Guess what...we're not! We don't want to kill if we don't have to. However, when someone is pointing a gun at us, we're not going to sit there and wait them out. For example, we have Marines coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan who are messed up psychologically because they had to shoot a kid who was shooting at them. They had no choice. They did the right thing, but now they're fucked up in the head. The only reason they're fucked up though is because they believe that it's morally wrong to shoot a child. But when that child puts themselves into a situation where they become a combatant, the only response we have right now is to shoot them.

    Back to this less-than-lethal ray gun, if that Marine could've incapacitated that child instead of killing him, then the Marine can go home knowing that he completed his mission and didn't have to shoot a child, and that child can go home alive.

    I'm really dissapointed in this crowd. I've been a slashdot reader for the last 8 years and I've been pretty impressed with most of the comments up until now. Have a little faith in the people serving on the front lines. We're professionals, just like you try to be at work. We care about honor, courage, commitment, etc. Frankly, if I can use this ray gun to help make my Marines safer and bring them home to my families, then as a commander, I'm all for it.

    --
    -- Get your free Mini Mac http://www.FreeMiniMacs.com/?r=14209873
    1. Re:This reaction surprises me by kilfarsnar · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This is a great post, and I appreciate your sharing your views. I do not often hear from people "on the ground". You make good points and I believe you when you say that the US military is professional. You guys do an important job that I, frankly, would not want to do. But I am concerned that not every person is as professional as you are. I am also concerned that things can get out of hand and that many situations are quite open to interpretation.

      If someone is pointing a gun at you, you probably do have to shoot them. Not too much interpretation there. But governments around the world, including the US govt., have a history of misusing power and classifying protesters as "rioters" or worse. We have seen many examples of police and soldiers overreacting to situations. Kent State and all that kind of stuff. Although, perhaps this microwave thingy would have helped in that situation.

      Basically, I hold our men and women in uniform in high regard, but I don't trust our civilian leadership one bit. And I know how clashes between citizens and the authorities can get out of control. Anyway, thanks again for your perspective. And thanks for doing the job you do. I hope, in the future, our government has better reasons for sending people like you into harm's way.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  32. slashdot - predictable by argStyopa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Browsing at 4: 33 comments, universally bemoaning the near-fascist oppression of the Evil Bush & Co., as well as the obligatory comments about how we shouldn't be in Iraq.

    1) Do you people understand what a Riot IS? This is not a bunch of grungy stoners standing around peacably smoking hemp before they are brutalized by the jackbooted police thugs. I've BEEN in a riot, and they are characterized by VIOLENCE. Violence and damage to property, as well as against other people standing around. Many posters have said something about the indiscriminate use of these weapons. Hey dumbass: the point of RIOT CONTROL cops is not to beat your sorry ass down (as much as you may deserve it) it's to DISPERSE the rioters, because people are far less likely to be (rioting) assholes when not protected by the anonymity of the herd around them. If you're a spectator, you're part of the fscking problem. For all the sympathy we're supposed to have for 'innocent bystanders' accidentally caught in this weapon's area of effect, I don't see a SINGLE post suggesting sympathy for the people whose businesses, cars, property, and yes, even LIVES are threatened/damaged/ruined by the rioters.
    But then again, why should they get sympathy? They're working a job, running a local business, making a living, supporting a family...you know, all those things that the "anti-globalization protestors" (really fancy way of saying unemployed vandals) are supposedly "protecting"...

    2) It's great we're in Iraq, we're accomplishing good things in the majority of the country where the psychotic terrorists aren't an everyday event. And yes, it's JUST as irrelevant for me to make that point as it is to make yours that "we shouldn't be there".

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:slashdot - predictable by kilfarsnar · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "For all the sympathy we're supposed to have for 'innocent bystanders' accidentally caught in this weapon's area of effect, I don't see a SINGLE post suggesting sympathy for the people whose businesses, cars, property, and yes, even LIVES are threatened/damaged/ruined by the rioters."

      This is a good point, and a view that is probably underrepresented here. The act of rioting does not deserve a defense. I don't condone violence in response to a problem. But it is useful to ask why a riot happens. Sometimes it is as you say; a group of unemployed vandals or a pack of boneheaded sports fans after a Superbowl win.

      In the case of Iraq though, I think a lot of the rioting is a result of our negligence and mismanagement. That is why so many here have the reaction they do. The US military never established order. There has been looting, rioting, and lawlessness in Iraq from the moment we toppled the government there. We had a responsibility to establish law and order and we didn't do it. Now, as a result of this and the fact that clean water and electricity are in short supply, we have rioting. In response to this, we are developing new weapons, but having very little honest discussion of why the riots are happening.

      I agree with you that riot control is necessary in the short term. But more important in the short, medium, and long term is to understand why people are so upset that they riot.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  33. feel like they're being burned alive by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In what way does this device make them 'feel' they are being burned alive rather than actually burning them alive? This isn't pepper spray that triggers pain sensors without associated damage. This thing makes people feel like they are burning because it is in fact cooking them!

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  34. I believe the fear is.... by electrosoccertux · · Score: 3, Insightful

    a result of looking what this could turn in to. Sure, most of us might not ever be in a riot, but I can easily see myself being involved in a peaceful protest (in the future) where our government has simply gone too far in taking our rights away. Then, while the protest is entirely peaceful, there are so many of us that the authorities simply stop caring, or even worse, plan to ignore the masses. Weapons like these make it all the more difficult for us to overthrow the governing body, should the majority find it inadequate and not sufficiently capable of fair ruling.

    Its getting easier and easier for the gov't to supress, rather than acknowledge, the problem at hand, whatever it be; and we are the ones giving ground.

    Don't get me wrong, I think stopping violent riots is a good thing. Using this would most likely save more lives than it would take; however this is teatering on the "cruel and unusual" line. I know thats for punishment, but I think the idea ought still apply for contol of the masses. Inducing nausea is simply not humane. Nor is making a person's skin feel like it's on fire. Each law inforcement officer should be subjected to the effects of each weapon they will be using before they are given conrol....say 5 seconds....enough to keep in mind the power they are wielding. Pay them a bit more, I don't care; just make sure they are as sparing as possible in the "non-lethal" weapon's use.