Slashdot Mirror
Set PHASRs On Stun
brianber writes to tell us NewScientist is reporting that the US Government has unveiled a new weapon in their non-lethal arsenal. The Personnel Halting and Stimulation Response (PHASR) laser rifle has many potential applications such as temporarily blinding a suspect who drives through a roadblock. So far, however, the DoD has declined to comment on the specific details of how it works.
Geneva conventions bar the use of maiming weapons, and one that would blind the enemy combatant is right out.
Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
Beam me up Scotty!
english is way to easy
Or haven't they already told us how it works? It's a laser rifle, and it halts them with a bright flash ;-)
"Ow my eyes".
Death by snoo-snoo!
sharks with frickin lasers on their heads?
or does that PHASr look like it came directly from the set of Farscape?
So this is why Homeland Security is so worried about people blinding pilots?
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Let's blind the guy who's driving.
blind a person who drives through a road block and turn his vehicle into a lethal weapon
I love acronyms that are stretched to fit a word. "Stimulation response"? It sounds like they're tickling a target's balls or something.
Coding with assembly is like playing with Legos. Coding an application in assembly is like building a car with Legos.
Is it just me or are these over paid trekkers pushing it a bit to far to make the word phaser to name this weapon.
Personnel Halting and Stimulation Response (PHASR)
I recon it looks more like a BGF or Bio Force Cannon.
Because what you really want to do to the speeding 3-ton SUV is blind the driver... yup, definitely makes things safer for everyone.
I'm just going to not RTFA: If I found out that this suggested use was actually in the documentation rather than a stupid comment of an article submitter, I'd lose the last remaining scraps of faith I had in the existence of intelligent life in the universe.
...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
But the device will require close scrutiny to ensure compliance with a United Nations protocol on blinding laser weapons.
It would be nice if the UN would also regulate the use of traditional weaponary with regards to murdering people with them. Although I would rather be killed in battle than come home eating out a straw with a few parts missing.
No sig for you!!
It's a laser rifle, and it halts them with a bright flash ;-)
Stop by your local welding supply store and pick up an arc welders helment with the fast response LCD lens. If it's a green laser, pick up a pair of laser safety goggles from your industrial safety supply.
Sometimes not telling how it works is an advantage. You need to be a step ahead, not fill the public in on the details. Remember the riots of the 1960's. Many rioters came with gas masks. Teargas was just part of the scene.
Lets not tell them what to expect ahead of time, just like the cruise ship with the sonic defense. That was a suprise and as such it was effective. Now the cat's out of the bag. Next attack may come with motorcycle helments with proper hearing protection...
Why warn them ahead of time?
The truth shall set you free!
"(PHASR) laser"
/me is confused.
So now it's a Personnel Halting and Stimulation Response Light Amplification by the Stimulated Emission of Radation?
how many non lethal devices does the government need in its arsenal? it seems we get a new story on these every month lately. is "our" government just gearing up for complete control of us?
don't bother taking to the streets for necessary social upheaval! they will just laser, brown note, lrad, deathray us. i think i would rather die.
Could somebody please explain to me how blinding the driver of a moving vehicle can be considered a "non-lethal weapon"?
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
It's Less-Lethal, not Non-Lethal
There is truth in humor.
All this military spending in name of "national security"....meh I couldn't care less about national security. The harder it becomes to take over America, the harder it becomes for us to exercise our rights and overthrow our current form of government, should we see fit. I'd rather live my life and chance dying than be dead my whole life without a chance to live as a free man.
Innovation, or desperation?
Now you know why the men in black wear shades.
Yeah, that's a GREAT idea! I sure hope I'm somewhere near that roadblock so I can see it used, too! I mean, so long as they just temporarily blind the driver of a moving vehicle, no one will get hurt!
To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
I wonder if it's anything bigger then this
http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000253066406/
...
"...the US Government has unveiled a new weapon in their non-lethal arsenal."
There is no such thing as non-lethal weapon. What's non-lethal to you may be lethal to a person with a lesser tolerance to the stimuli, existing health condition and many other factors.
Non-lethal weapons do not exist.
Great. Now all the terrorists will be wearing sunglasses. 8-)
For things like the PHASR (couldn't find anything for the E I guess) or rail gun technology?
"Curse your sudden, but inevitable betrayal!"
They're most important for enemy combatants.
Have you seen this?
We're napalming civilians, now. But we didn't sign the 1980 UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, so it's okay.
The US government is developing NON-LETHAL weapons? Hmm...Something's not right here...Who or what is the US president and what has he/she done with George W?
Depends on what they can say about it ie use of laser dazzler in the Falklands War (1982). One flash and the pilots retina is ash? Sold to the public: 'only' for use with electro-optical systems? Is it 'only' for use with a set distace for a short time? Will it be like an instant bright light at a distance- you stop for a few seconds and then get your sight back? But afer click, click, click .....?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Does this have Laser sights? I always wanted a Laser gun with Laser sights, how else would I know what I am shooting at?
Fighting ignorance with ignorance.
Personnel Halting And Stimulation Response???
I can see why they made up that acronym though, because RBFTSOLLAF (Really Bright Flashlight That Sort of Looks Like a Fish) is way too long, hard to pronounce, and not as cool.
Hot girls have this feature built-in.
When they can control a protesting crowd by incapacitating everyone in it, they have another tool of control that won't bring the backlash of actually killing people. I'd almost prefer that their only option was a lethal one.
oh yeah, real smart. Anyone who drives through a road block is probably going fast. Mix that in with the fact that you're dealing with a multi ton object. Instant blindness to whomever is driving.. yeah good move If you don't understand that well enough here is another example: A person intent on causing harm is blinded.. he has a gun. Does he A: Sit there like a fool? or B: Spray as much ammo around as possible? Don't make me answer that for you
I fail to see how that's a problem for the US Dept. of Defense.
Senator McCain just led a passage of a bill that would expressly condemn torture and lifts language from the Geneva Conventions. Guess what the White House reaction has been... Cheney is now working hard behind the scenes to make sure that it dies when in the House or during committee, and Bush has vowed to veto any such bill. The official stance is that such language would "hinder the US's ability to defend itself."
Given recent news reports of the US using white phosphorus on civilians and napalm when taking Falluja, it's doubtful that Geneva conventions were even considered when this prototype was developed.
It's a good thing that America stands for freedom, democracy, and human rights, otherwise I'd be worried...
Lets not tell them what to expect ahead of time, just like the cruise ship with the sonic defense. That was a suprise and as such it was effective. Now the cat's out of the bag. Next attack may come with motorcycle helments with proper hearing protection.
Too bad they didn't have a Bofors 40 mm cannon. There wouldn't be a next attack.
Yay! More security through ...er, we're talking lasers here. Ok, two problems with your theory.
1- Do you trust the government to test weapons on the public without us knowing what they are? (And if you answered yes, what the FUCK are you doing here?)
2- People that steal cars are NOT going to wear anti-laser or welding helmets. Talk about not looking cool and making yourself conspicuous.
Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
Sunglasses.
Who said anything about stealing cars?
Blinding someone driving at high speed through a roadblock... oh yeah, that sounds non-lethal.
mi save tingting long peles bilong mi long Niu Ailan.
....LRAD and you can give terrorists the ultimate hellen keller experience (now dodging heavinly lightening bolts)
It's talking about roadblocks in Iraq, where vehicles are approaching too fast.
Preferable to just blasting the heck out of them with assault rifles, no? If the driver's intentions are not to ram them and detonate a bomb, they're most likely slam on the brakes. If they don't have bad intentions and don't slam on the breaks... tough luck. There's nothing that can be done about that at that point.
I bet that thing is set on lowest setting , and that if ppl whant they can switch between SAFE-STUN-KILL-DISITIGRATE. It has to be the thing as no one would make a kick-ass gun to just stun ppl.
but what smells better in the morning? white phosphorous or napalm?
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
Let's not forget that stimulation caused by pictures of hot girls can make you go blind too...
more non-lethal weapons being developed as an alternative to mr. bullit.
then the next step would be total disintegration for mortuary purposes. besides cremation we would have the disintergration option.
isn't that "logan's run"?
but....the gov't would give us a bonus for opting out early instead of by force
Looking at it that way the Geneva conventions would prohibit the use of flashbangs. I'm very confident the mutually agreed definition of "maiming weapons" among the signatories does not include temporary sensory depravation etc. and even more certain that most people would agree that non-lethal warfare is better than lethal warfare.
Continuing your thought one has to ask what weapon can't conceivably be used for maiming rather than killing? I know of no such weapon only which has such a "boolean value"-like use, not even weapons of mass destruction.
this comment is provided "as is" and without any express or implied legibility or congruity [...]
I'm sure I've seen one of those before somewhere ...
"Because what you really want to do to the speeding 3-ton SUV is blind the driver... yup, definitely makes things safer for everyone."
Well, I would have to say that if the 3-ton SUV loaded with explosives was heading towards a school (or other populous area) that is protected by an extensive roadblock where one has to navigate through a small opening that isn't so dumb (or even far enough away that it simply runs off the road).
Blow up some concrete bariers or 50 people? Well, if you can't see the difference then I guess so. But me, I'll choose blowing up concrete barriers and some soldiers who volunteered to protect us instead of blowing through a checkpoint and blowing up civilians in a dangerous zone. Of course, those enlightened like you can see that this is useless, never mind that many out there doing the actual fighting would like to be able to stop people from running through checkpoints with explosives.
This isn't designed for stopping people driving down an open road in a peaceful place. Better that you evaluate what it is meant to stop instead of what it isn't. It's known as a "straw man" argument for a reason. There are MANY tactical reason why this would be useful in places like Iraq and it doesn't take much thought to see. Just because it's not so useful in Lincoln, Nebraska doesn't mean it isn't useful.
------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
Please admit that you're a mentally challenged leftie so we can use your post for educational purposes.
MY EYES! MY BEAUTIFUL EYES!
I had an imaginary sig once, he said I was a loser and ran off.
Tonight the
Super Trouper lights are gonna find me
Shining like the sun
(Sup-p-per Troup-p-per)
Smiling, having fun
(Sup-p-per Troup-p-per)
Feeling like a number one
Tonight the
Super Trouper beams are gonna blind me
But I won't feel blue
(Sup-p-per Troup-p-per)
Like I always do
(Sup-p-per Troup-p-per)
'Cause somewhere in the crowd there's you
You're right. The US/NATO are one of the most consistently morally upright military forces during wartime; I have no argument with that. I'm also convinced that if say, China/Russia had invaded, we'd be seeing much more brutality and inhumane treatment stories.
That's not the problem.
The problem is that the US declares itself as a "City Upon a Hill," a force for freedom and democracy in the world - a perfectly noble and admirable goal, but one that invites criticism. A country that claims it fights for freedom, democracy, and human rights must hold itself up to the highest standard if it's to maintain moral authority in war. The reason America is criticized so harshly and is watched so closely is that few other countries in the world claim to invade other countries partially on the basis of bringing freedom and equality there. (Whether that was the original intent is irrelevant - the Administration has publicly shifted towards this new rationale). You cannot espouse the rule of law and human rights to other countries if you yourself fail to live up to that standard.
A leader cannot make excuses for immoral behavior, only rectify the mistakes and never let them occur again.
heh at least it's better than using white phosphorous: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/ar ticle325560.ece
this stuff caramelizes the skin burning it off down to the bone and you thought Sadam was the bad guy. btw Mark 77 napalm... right yeah... and this couldn't be done with armed men why? I thought chemical weapons were the big bad of Sadam? for shame America... FOR SHAME.
I wonder what acronyms will they use for PHOTN, QUANTM and TRNSPHSC CHRNTN torpedoes.
They're referring to suicide bombers in Iraq.
However, I agree the concept is yet another half-baked military weapon (see my comment history re the sonic weapon); what good is blinding a guy who just has to keep driving in a straight line and push a button to blow himself up? And by the time they figure out he's going to actually RUN the roadblock, he's well within the range that everybody's probably gonna die anyway.
Meanwhile, the "insurgents" are using improvised shaped charges to blast right through "armoured" humvees like they're made of paper...but sure, let's keep cranking out the multi-million-dollar laser pointers...
Please help metamoderate.
Americans still claim to be the "Land of the Free and Home of the Brave", even after demonstrating to the entire world that they are neither.
Hilarious, disgusting and terrifying all at once.
This is a weapon for temporary disable the suspect. Like mace. Like a flashbang. The previous methodology was called 'POONT' and involved lightly peppering the vehicle and its occupants with small gauge munitions, dare I say 9-11mm rounds. About 500 should do the trick, one of them is bound to miss an occupant and look like a warning shot, or hit the tyres.
/. but no doubt he has some kind of magic CmdrCookie that does this all for him.
You are right, it is not illegal to shoot someone, or force a foot long metal blade into their vital organs, while they are looking at you in the eyes. However, if that blade is rusty, you are in violation of the Geneva convention - where the poor sod might get an infection.
So, dying of an infection versus dying after being punched kicked and stabbed.
No matter how we try to dress war up, it is still never legal. War doesn't make it legal to kill people. People make it legal to kill people, it is our definition, and it is shocking.
I do not know why someone hasn't sued to try and get civilian death rates reported from this war in iraq. It is terrible.
The flamebait post shows just how mad society is. Mad I tell you! The doctors thought I was mad, but they are laughing on the other side of their disfigured faces now hheheh heheh ehehehheaahuaha aa aheeahmea!!
In all seriousness - no wonder CmdrTaco's spelling has improved - all these 'type in the word here' shenanigans on
please type the word in this image: quagmire
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
It's too bad they won't tell us how they work. I just can't figure out how they get lasers shot into someone's eyes to actually temporarily blind them...
or else!
Here's a link...
Once you realize you are looking at a "Psychological Operation" elements of this story like the needless futuristic styling in the posed photograph, the issue of the story to the press before it is decided how the thing will be aimed, and coupling the bogodevice to the very specific usage scenario for it, make more sense. Betcha $10 there's nothing inside that pretty Quake-style weapon casing.
Because what you really want to do to the speeding 3-ton SUV is blind the driver... yup, definitely makes things safer for everyone.
This is especially the case if the driver is a professional soccer mom, ferrying her manicured offspring to the local mall. Her sunglasses will shield her from the glare, and what filters through will only cause her already strained mind to finally snap. In her rage, she will plough over the road blocks and escaping marines in her three ton death mobile, hunched over the steering wheel, hands circling wildly screaming; "Won't Anyone Please Think Of The Children!! How Am I Supposed Get Them To Soccer Practice With All The Porno On TV, Violet Video Games, And Now US Soldier FLASHING Me On The Roads!! I Have A God Given Right To Do Whatever I Want In My Car!!!"
May the Maths Be with you!
Are you sure that's not just the next Motorola phone?
MTLA RLY LUVS 2 NM THR PHNS WTH RTRDD NMS LK THS.
So...considering their penchant for retarded phone model names and crappy phones, this would be a phone with a weak flashlight built-in. But it would be limited to 100 uses of the flashlight function, to avoid competing with standalone flashlights.
The lab says the weapon, developed by the laboratory's directed energy directorate, employs a two-wavelength laser system and is the first of its kind as a hand-held, single operator system for troop and perimeter defense. The laser light used in the weapon temporarily impairs aggressors by illuminating or, as the lab calls it, "dazzling" individuals, removing their ability to see the laser source
i d.852/QX/readprod.htm
from http://www.photonics.com/XQ/ASP/url.readprod/prod
It's just you, I don't remember seeing anything like that on Farscape (finished watching it last week). However, that does remind me of a Covenant Carbine from Halo 2.
There was this episode in Star Trek NG (movie I think?) where they meet the Borg. So Picard is on the hollowdeck dancing in 1920's. The Borg come in and Picard starts shooting them using common bullets and oddly enough that kills the Borg! Yet time and time again we see the Borg adapting to the lasers!
Where I get confused is if the 1) Borg is resistent to all "Laser" weapons 2) Not resistant to common bullets, why are they using lasers with futility. I will admit it makes for great action, but kind of stupid.
The laser and blinding reminds me of the same thing as in Star Trek. If a terrorist knows this gun exists, are they are going to go along with the show (for the action that is) and allow themselves to be blinded? I suppose not, they are going to get something against the light probably making the laser gun a 10 billion dollar paperweight. Albeit a REALLY cool looking and behaving paperweight!
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Ignorant is more like it.
That 3 ton SUV is already blowing your roadblock, anything you can do to prevent it from getting where the driver intends to put it is a viable solution.
This is probably a better solution than killing the driver which is what is done now in war zones or at least attempted. It also has the potential to save lives instead of blindly firing into a moving vehicle.
One example
The French reporter killed because her driver was speeding into a roadblock may be alive to day if a non-lethal method of disabling the driver was available.
Others.
There are cases where people freak at the sign of a checkpoint and a non-lethal device would allow a reduction in loss of life. The current alternative is to shoot at it with guns. An early example in the Iraq war was a van with women and children in it that ran or attempted to run a roadblock.
Finally, most roadblocks are set up so you have to navigate them. That 3-ton SUV with a blinded driver is not going to be able to navigate anything blid.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Surely they could just use one of these?
I wonder what will happen if opponents wear those shades with reflective glasses; you know, the ones that not only are black, but they also reflect photons.
Would a pair of glasses like that render PHASRs obsolete?
(by the way, it's cool they haven't named them phasers. You don't want Paramount after your tail. And real phasers may be developed in the future.)
Some scientists are using a kind of paddle-wand that can selectively, non-invasively, and according to them harmlessly deactivate portions of someone's brain. They're using it to run experiments in which someone's sense of sight is temporarily deactivated, to try to get information on the phenomonon of "blind-sight," a sort of rudimentary sense of the location and presence of objects not directly seen.
This is a guess of course, and other than what's in this article I know nothing about it. But I thought it was kind of weird that I should read about this, and then two weeks later someone announces a weapon that can blind someone....
2- People that steal cars are NOT going to wear anti-laser or welding helmets. Talk about not looking cool and making yourself conspicuous.
We are not talking about a car thief. We are talking about terrorists. Having a gasmask or IED in a backpack until they reach their destination is SOP. They come prepared for action. If I were on the bad side (I'm not) and I knew what I had to defeat, and could carry a small portable device that would render it useless and ineffective.....
People who try to crash a military guard gate defended with a laser may carry the tools to get past the gate. Recently the press hotel in Bagdad was attacked. They brought the tools to get through a concrete barrier (car bomb) so they could get past to deliver a cement truck bomb to the building. It almost worked. They got past the concrete barrier with the cement truck. They didn't reach the building because they didn't get past the entangelment wire.
A couple guards with a bright light are not going to stop most of these guys. The guards are going to need something else in addition to the front line defense.
The truth shall set you free!
Perhaps some day our troops will have a real LASER -- one which will actually destroy terrorists (that's "insurgent combatants" for you NYT readers).
Until that day comes, we have this.
"goram alliance technology"
Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious
If I found out that this suggested use was actually in the documentation rather than a stupid comment of an article submitter...
I'm sorry, dude, but I have to disappoint you...
May Peace Prevail On Earth
Surely any laser will bounce off a well mirrored surface? I hardly think this is going to foil the terrorists!
Remember the stun gun in the movie 'looker'?
if someone wanted to go through a roadblock would they go through slow or fast ? my guess would be fast.. now the next question is, do we really want someone that is speeding to be blinded ? imagine the beowulf cluster of lawsuits that come from this ?
Car theft was the first thing that came to mind when reading about police stopping cars that drive through roadblocks. Of course, it should have been obvious that you're thinking about those "terrorists". Blame it on an all-nighter and silly amounts of caffeine.
You didn't try to refute my first point, and you make a fairly weak case as to this technology's use against terrorists. Even if we did surprise them, how long until someone figures it out? If we'll call that "security by surprise", you better be one creative guy and have deep pockets. How much did this toy cost? And even without surprise, how long until it loses most of its efficiency and you have to invent a new toy?
Overall the cost-benefit of these types of technologies is rather dismal. Plus, how long until the "terrorists" get their hands on one (or improvise one) and use it to down helicopters?
Mark my words: this is going to be a disaster, and not just because of the civilians this will inevitably be used on.
Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
Another one bites the dust. :)
"All you have to do is be fragile and grateful. So stay the underdog." Chuck Palahniuk, Choke
The reasoning behind the article was photograhic evidence of burned civilians. I'm not saying civilians were not caught in the crossfire, because I really don't know, and neither do you. I am saying that civilians were not targeted by American soldiers. I'm also saying that the enemies we are fighting in Iraq make a habbit of intentionally targeting civilians, mainly because they are less armed than the military.
So, who do you think burned the civilians found after all action in Falluja? The US Military, who goes out of their way to avoid targeting civilians, or the terrorists (sorry, you probably call them "Freedom Fighters") who intentionally target markets, schools and mosques?
Is it possible to oppose the war and NOT want Saddam Hussein back in power?
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
The US forces do not use Willy Pete to burn people, it is an ineffective use of a tool. There was another article at the Independent talking about the same thing, only they threw in a bunch of so-called facts that were so false that anyone who searches more than one source can tell is fraudulant.
There are a lot of people in the world, and in the US too, that hate the US and can't see the truth when presented. The US Army retention rate is higher than expected for the troops deployed to the sandbox. The troops over there (I know quite a few) tell a different story than the one that you read about and see in the mainstream media. The majority of the Iraqi people are grateful we are there and want us to continue the course. We are training the Iraqi people to take care of their own, but it is not something that can be accomplished overnight.
We (the US) are making a positive difference over there, and if you don't believe me, talk to the troops who are there now, or better yet, go over there. The Iraqis would be more than happy to talk to you.
I think I saw a similar device on History Channel's "Mail Call" awhile back. Here is some other info:
http://www.icltd.org/laser_weapons.htm
That's idiotic.
Go stand in front of a car sometime and try and figure out how you'd like to shoot the tires, especially if it was driving towards you at high speed. They're not exactly a huge target to begin with, plus they'd be turned end-on, and all but the very bottom is covered by the front fender in most vehicles. Now imagine trying to shoot them and only them, using a machine gun, probably mounted on another vehicle (putting it ~6' up in the air) so there's a downward angle, and you'll realize it's highly impractical. Furthermore, it would really suck to waste your last chance at stopping a car by shooting at its tires, only to realize the instant before whatever large amount of explosive that it's carrying detonates, that it had run-flats.
This whole "shoot the tires" idea is pure Hollywood. If you're putting bullets into a car, chances are the situation has already degraded past the point where non-lethal force is appropriate anyway. Most of the time if you're trying to stop a car, you don't even aim for the driver, you'd be aiming for the engine block, which is unfortunately mounted in front of the driver. Cracking the block pretty much guarantees a quick disable of the vehicle, and is conveniently located "center mass" so it's not difficult to hit.
Think about the real world practicality of your suggestions in the future. There's a reason soldiers aren't trained to aim for the tires when somebody is trying to ram a roadblock, and it's not because they get a sick thrill out of shooting people.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
I hope they rotate frequencies on their lasers; otherwise the Borg will adapt and wear sunglasses to block that frequency.
"No one likes working in a hamster wheel, and your shop smells of cedar shavings from here." - TaleSpinner
ooh ooh I know -- and let's use closed-source encryption routines! That's more secure because sometimes not telling how it works is an advantage!
[/sarcasm]
No, an advantage is when you have something that works regardless of what the other person knows.
Look at the SIZE of that thing! It's either made of cardboard and hollow, or requires two extra people in the front to raise the--uh--barrel?! Flipper?
WP is generally used as an anti-armor round, although it's markedly less effective than it was in the past. It's not anti-personnel, although there are situations where it could be used against mixed forces and seem as though it was being used that way.
Before tanks were hermetically sealed like they are today, you could pretty reliably disable one by dumping some burning stuff on it (napalm, white phosphorous, burning gasoline) if you could get it to fall down into the gap between the turret and the chassis. The turret essentially sits in a hole in the top of the chassis...get something through that gap and it's in the crew compartment. This is why if you're in a tank, you don't want to let yourself get swarmed by rioters with Molotov cocktails; even though it might not seem like they'd be much of a risk to a tank, a few well placed ones can really make life uncomfortable for the crew inside.
As a result, you don't send out armor units without infantry support, because they'll get overrun by foot soldiers and destroyed (a la 'Saving Private Ryan'). An advancing armor unit will almost always be mixed in with regular leg infantry, as force protection.
As a counter to this, if you're an artilleryman and trying to stop an advancing column of tanks with infantry support, you'd use a combination of both air-bursting high explosive (to disable the soldiers) and white phosphorous (to disable the tanks). The command for this is "HE and WP, timed and quick" -- high explosive air bursting (timed fuse) and white phosphorous with a contact-detonating fuse (quick fuse).
Nowadays, I'm not sure that white phosphorous is really used as a weapon per se, I think it's mostly used for the psychological effect, and for illumination. Plus obviously the tactics of huge land armies maneuvering around each other is relatively outdated today.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
...and imprison someone, so that they are prisoners-of-war, it's "detain" an "insurgent" who becomes a "detainee". It's not "blinding", it's merely "dazzling".
To me, "dazzling" would be if they throwing vegas showgirls around at folks. Let's skip politically correct newspeak with this, it's a laser beam designed to hurt the eyes, the amount of hurt depends on how long the beam stays there, or what setting they put the amplifier on. Same with those microwave beam weapons designed to induce pain and heat we heard about before. There is a very fine line that is easy to cross technologically between a "hot, stinging sensation" and fried human.
Just turn it around, have it be some other nation/group do the same thing to a US troop, use the same words. Would the DOD and State Department let that fly?
This and the rest of the "selectively lethal" weapons, "not less than lethal", selectively lethal-coming soon to a neighborhood near you. I hope no one really thinks there isn't an "11" setting on these things. You'll see these and other weapons like the sonic nausea weapons, etc, used in domestic political situations, where whichever regime in rule at that point uses them against..hmm.. "resisters" or "domestic terrorists". And the blue and green and black suited order followers will just.. follow orders.
Do they play Pink Floyd or Led Zep with this new weapon?
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
When the US first invaded Iraq, US soldiers killed hundreds of civilians. Why? A bunch of US soldiers would set up a roadblock. A scared civilian would see a bunch of soldiers in the road ordering them to stop, and promptly slam on the accelerator to try and speed through. Marines would fire into the air as a warning, but simply scare said civilian further into accelerating. Marines fearful that the accelerating car was going to attack them would then pump it full of bullets, generally killing the occupants.
.50 cal gun rake through your windshield? You better fucking believe it. I can think of at least one Italian that would probably still be alive if the Army had something other then bullets to stop cars crashing through the roadblocks.
Personally, I wish that those Marines had been armed with ANYTHING that sends a clear signle of "MOTHER FUCKING STOP" without killing everyone in the car. Is there a danger that the civilian in question would simply crash instead of stopping? Sure. Is crashing better then having a
No, an advantage is when you have something that works regardless of what the other person knows.
Sometimes knowledge is power. I know the password to my server. I know the combination to my locker. I know the key to my encrypted files. Public posting of these items does not make me more secure.
There are a few advantages to some secrets. You may know how a combination lock is operated. You may know how encryption works. My encryption key, password, and combination should not be public.
The news that a cruise ship used a blast of sound is fine. Giving the details of how it worked was not nessary. Giving details that a bright light blinds drivers trying to crash a gate is fine. Saying it is a pulse of green laser is not a good idea.
Saying the police will respond to a riot is fine. Saying police will not be using guns, but just tear gas is not. Expect the riot to have lots of thrown rocks and see lots of gas masks.
Saying the police will respond to a riot is fine. Don't tell them they will be bringing water cannons, tasers, rubber bullets, bean bag rounds, tear gas, lasers, tranquilizer darts, snipers, and smoke bombs. Let it be a suprise. Let the perimiter exit searches and arrests be a suprise.
The truth shall set you free!
Stealth Bomber. Airshows.
;)
How much technological goodness has been yoinked from those? Sure, not enough to build a RandomCountry#32 Stealth Bomber, but hey - the shape is a step in the right direction for engineers who might not otherwise know where to begin.
"They have unmanned drones!" We have unmanned drones. Please start looking for ways to avoid them now.
"Blah blah blah cruise missiles, which have an effective range of..." Achmed, they can't hit us here - we're safe.
We're waving our penis to our own citizens, of course. And giving the enemy valuable information as well. Anyone remember that movie about that war in Iraq, where they had all those reporters giving out information like the opposition didn't know what a TV was?
Oh, SHIT! That was REAL LIFE, and the most STUPID IDEA IN THE HISTORY OF WARFARE? You mean, Saddam and friends had TV and CNN, and watched it rather than amusing themselves by milking female camels?
Frankly, the best thing the US could do to protect itself is to shoot any reporter who starts blabbing crap about the military. To hell with the press, it's all corporate-run crap anyhow.
Rumour has it that USAF pilots in afghanistan and other places where conventional aircraft munitions were pretty useless found that a low pass with the "attack" radar set on maximum power did quite a good job of causing cataracts in whoever you flew over, thus blinding them, thus achieving the same stated end "non fatal incapacitation" in typical mealymouth doublespeak.
http://slashdot.org/~GuyFawkes/journal
New military gadgets? Here we go...
1. New military gizmo is invented
2. Inventor deploys it. If others are impressed it goes on to...
3. Other armies copy it sooner or later
4. Armies decide to add it to their "arms for sale" lists
5. If product can be hand-held it drops in price and works it's way down to paramilitaries, rebel groups, etc
6. Inventor now must invent countermeasure to it's own invention
I used to work at a DOD lab. I always thought it was ironic how they went through so much effort to build these systems and devices and then had to immediately figure out a countermeasure to their own invention.
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
This is certainly less lethal than bullets or a nuclear weapon. Whether or not we should be using any of these weapons is another question.
A helmet which automatically darkens in response to bright light can be bought on ebay for about $30. The availability of such an easy defense means that this technology is entirely pointless for road blocks, as a speeding vehicle will be too close to stop with other methods (bullets) once you've discovered they're immune to your primary attack.
It's a bit more useful for protests (peaceful or not) because it's very hard to wear a welding helmet and a gasmask at the same time.
Enough with the @*&$*&# acronyms already. The english language has suffered enough torture already, and in light of recent claims by this 'administration,' we (the US,) aren't supposed to be doing that sort of thing.
-- it's ridiculous how many people misspell ridiculous... (damn, damn, damn...)
will punch through 2 inches of solid aluminum. Can't remember if those were AP rounds or not. A .50 cal will do significantly better. :o)
Makes you wonder, though-- Why not just set some qualified marksman up with a high-power rifle and have 'em put a couple rounds through the engine. In head-on cases, it's an easy traget for a stationary shooter. Steel-sleeved aluminum blocks are pretty much in all cars these days, so I'm guessing that you'd pretty much kill the car.
Of course, physics says that a 3000lb car going 55mph is going to continue moving along its trajectory for a good while, even if you blind the driver or shoot out the engine.
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
Wonde what that thing does when I wear dark sunglasses, laser protection glasses or similar protection.
The next ime I drive thru that roadblock I probably have to a wear a welding mask. DAMN! I just go used to those damn paintball masks that work well with the shattering mask every time they shoot my windscreen..... OK bad joke, I am not driving thru any roadblocks and never got my windscreen shot with anything else but paintballs near the field where I play.....
Shotgun tank! , don't want to be the unlucky guy infront of that.
Wonder if something like that would null out any lasers shot at it, or something close..... Now the terrorists get to sport stylish eyewear...yeah!
If they'd made it out of green plastic, they could have marketed it as the "Johnny Seven". (That's a comment for males of a certain age.)
:-)
Or is it alien technology?
If the user of the item, the inventor and the politician OKing this are willing to be hit by the non-lethal weapon at least once every three months until it is taken off the list.
If they are willing to do that, then I'd believe them when they call it "non-lethal". If they aren't, then I'd say "how non-lethal is it then?".
Motorola is branching out into the laser rifle business?
"Personally, I wish that those Marines had been armed with ANYTHING that sends a clear signle of "MOTHER FUCKING STOP" without killing everyone in the car."
One would think that the knowledge that the marines have 50 cals aimed at you would be this one clear signal. I had a friend killed by a cop that had his guns aimed at him telling him to stop and the guy kept going right towards the cop...loved him dearly, but he was an idiot in his final act (last I heard, his family was suing for not just wounding him...I would have done the same thing in the officers place).
The minute someone points a gun at me, I stop. They tell me to run, I'm probably going to stay stopped as well. And if someone is too fucking stupid to realize huge guns pointed in their direction means "MOTHER FUCKING STOP", then their isn't a damn sign in the world that will help.
As for the Italian -- he was a former intelligence field officer and knew exactly what would happen if he ran the roadblock, and if he didn't, he was truely an idiot that shouldn't have been in the situation he was in. He took the chance that this might not have been US forces and his family will have to live with that. The US forces, however, couldn't take the same chance he had (non-lethal was not an option even if it existed).
What do you mean, how it works? It's a giant Class II or III laser. Any Class II or III laser will blind you. The clue is in the name...
-- There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, And those who don't.
Now, if this laser could instead be used to give a person the irresistable urge to pull over and masturbate, would they still go blind?
You are stupid. You posted your comments already. Don't come back and troll to prove your comments should not be put down. Slashdot should allow 1 post only. No replies. I hope all of your children and grandchildren die of cancer. STFU and die danharan.
Damn. i was wondering why my submission was rejected... you beat me to it!
It would be nice if the UN would also regulate the use of traditional weaponary with regards to murdering people with them. Although I would rather be killed in battle than come home eating out a straw with a few parts missing.
:(
At least, I think that's what you were referring to. Rwanda happens all over again, and the entire world turns a blind eye. Yet, the tools remain simple and same - blades. Let's just have the UN outlaw blades of any kind. Ah, but it's the UN who's turning the blind eye, while their 'workers' are raping Darfur's child refugees for fun.
So what if the US bends the rules a little bit? When are people going to realize and figure out that the world is a helluva lot nastier than the United States Military, while it may have it's whackjobs, most are sane, smart, and compassionate people who make the right decisions. And I'm sorry, if it takes a little bit of pressure and coercion, maybe even some torture for a while, to rid the world of these IslamiFacisiNazis that are slaughtering who races of people... GO FOR IT! Hell, give me some bamboo splinters and a water bucket, I'll join in the fun.
Genocide is the most animalistic exhibition of evil on the planet today... yet the world says nothing, does nothing, and continues to let millions of people die by the hands of Allah in the name of race purification. It makes me sick, it makes me vomit, and it makes me proud to be an American to know that despite all the bullshit and the protests and the fuckwads, WE ARE DOING THE RIGHT AND JUST THING.
Sorry man... the Internet pooped on me.
...This device is complatly useless agaist blind terrorists!! They can train driving skills in the deserts of Iraq and still be able to get through the checkpoint zigzag baricades. Nice try Mr. AntiTerrorist
I am assuming this comment was on the yankeedoodledandy side of the pond, but I don't know if you heard what has happened in France after two (admittedly theiving little asswipes) kids killed >themselvesTHE WORST INSULT?
These people who are doing this, are not even cautious, or subtle, or intelligent and they are getting away with it.
Amazing. Sickening. Damn, I wish I could do that instead of them.
please type the word in this image: instead
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
She blinded me with science!
I am assuming this comment was on the yankeedoodledandy side of the pond, but I don't know if you heard what has happened in France after two (admittedly theiving little asswipes) kids killed *themselves* after running away from the police.
A bit of a kerfuffle.
Even if people don't care about the lives of people they don't know, at least they relish the ammunition against bush and co, and although, if I may make this statement: dumb asshats for letting him dupe you twice, and dumb asshats for being the seat of liberty and freedom with an unelected guy calling the shots (literally) and doing what he pleases.
America, home of the corporate dicatorship - the worst insult: THE WORST INSULT?
These people who are doing this, are not even cautious, or subtle, or intelligent and they are getting away with it.
Amazing. Sickening. Damn, I wish I could do that instead of them.
please type the word in this image: instead
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
If you're ever driven in rural Mexico, you find out a very effictive way to get someone to slow down. 5 inch diameter steel pipe across the road tacked down with tar. You *will* slow down.
PLaying the name-game doesn't really change anything.
Which is why it is important to call something what it is. The way language works is we pick up on things implied by the name regardless of whether that affects the reality. This is why we call someone an "accused murderer" rather than "murderer" before they are convicted (though people will still conclude that accusation is the same as guilt). Similarly it is natural (and has been observed in reality) for the users of a "non-lethal" weapon to believe that the weapon, used as intended, will not kill when that simply isn't true. Updates to training of police officers have started to take this fact into account.
"Less-lethal weapons" is a perfect name for the devices normally called "non-lethal", and I was glad when I started to see news reports using that term. It conveys the absolutely correct idea: These are weapons who are designed to do less-than-lethal harm, but still have the capacity for lethality inherent in any weapon capable of incapacitating someone. The very important inference from this is that one should use caution relative to that risk of death when deciding whether or not to fire the weapon.
Personally I believe the cop that shot the woman through the eye with a rubber bullet would have been much less likely to discharge his weapon into a crowd at head level had that weapon been a full-fledged "lethal" weapon. "Non-lethal" lends to thinking of the device more like one would think of a baton, or hand cuffs, when in fact it is much closer to the sidearm a police officer is trained to consider carefully before using.
As opposed to, say, a pillow, which is not designed to harm at all. Non-lethal applies perfectly to pillows. If you think a tazer or pellet gun is closer to a pillow in terms of lethality than a gun, you are mistaken. If you don't think this, then why is "less lethal" not a superior phrase?
The enemies of Democracy are
...Willy Pete. It's Wooly Pete you silly. As in W for White and P for Phosphorous As in the slang for those oh so fashionable wool sweaters they hand out (marines: green, army: black, airforce: blue, navy: who the hell cares? Pink perhaps). If you're gonna be all cool and use (what you want us to believe is) your vast military knowledge: get it right.
:-)
Semper Fi
So is it that 2 wrongs make 1 good ? ...or is just a bunch of 8 years old boys yelling "he started first!" at each other ?
That the murderer of a murderer isn't a murderer ?
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
I get the first part -- Personnel Halting -- but "and Stimulation Response" just sounds like someone sucked at reverse acronym forming. "Ok guys, we need two words, any length.. one starts with an S, and one starts with an R. They don't have to make any sense in relation to the object they're supposed to describe, they just need to be words damnit!"
Now I don't claim to be an acronym genius by any means, but, uh... "Personnel Halting and Stunning Rifle," maybe? How f'ing hard is that? And look, it even makes sense. Or you could even make it "Stunning Energy Rifle" and it'd be PHASER.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
They sound cute. Where do I get them, Japan?
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
Its quicker to blind your mum than to close all that porn.
Every now and again, however, you get leaks in the media net which describe the real state of technology. . .
Ignore the following article's intention, and look at the leaks. . .
-Uh. . , they temporarily did what? (And people still continue to insist that the human nervous system is not affected by EM. "There's not enough power emitted from a cell phone to damage cells!" Uhh, fine. Have you considered what other effects EM might have on the brain, or is that pleasent buzz in your skull keeping you from thinking too much?)
Honestly. Green lasers to blind drivers is just another dumb budget gouge as military contracters try to cash in on the war created by the wealthy. The real state of technology is waaaay beyond green lasers, but don't expect Zionist-owned mouthpieces like, New Scientist to tell you about it any time soon. Or ever.
Sheesh. How dumb do they think we are? (Well, pretty damned dumb actually, and by the number of cell phones I hear ringing. .
Not knowing you are being manipulated is ignorance. Choosing to play along with the manipulation once you do know is something else entirely.
Those who have the courage of a lion will not have the fate of a mouse.
-FL
the real reason chemical weapons were developed was to get people out of the trenches. Notable by killing the people in the OTHER trenches.
They guy whio invented it also invented nitrogen fertilzer.
He was German and he was Jewish. He was forced to leave is beloved country when hitler came to power. Somethinf that may not have happend if it wasn't for Chemical weapons.
I will let you use your own devices to get the man's name.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Neutron bombs could definetly be used to maim rather than kill, even when not done on purpose they are likely to maim people that are not in the killzone close to the detonation. It would/could induce cancer, immune system deficiencies, tissue failures and similar, and if the dose is low enough it might not be lethal in their future either (that even goes for radiation sickness).
For example (this is all by memory so take it with a grain of salt - I might be mixing up the percentages etc. however the gist of it should be correct) only about 45% of the initial survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs have died from reasons related to the bombs but many of those that have not died from the longterm effects would still be said to be maimed from the radiation exposure (I'm sorry I can't be bothered to dig up the link to this claim but I think it was Nature or NewScientist who had a story on this some time between june and now).
this comment is provided "as is" and without any express or implied legibility or congruity [...]
You're neglecting quite a few things here:
.50-cal slug through the engine (and I wouldn't be surprised if that is a rare occurance in any situation).
- the angle makes the (accelerating) speed of the approching car into a very big issue in relation to precision fire, much bigger I guess than anyone except those with extensive firearms training would realize
- the target area of a wheel is much less than the engine (but this is kind of irrelevant as pointed out in the next paragraph)
- the reaction time has to be low both because many roadblocks do not have a long field of view and because most who want to penetrate a roadblock speed up rather than slow down in a relatively short stretch in front of the roadblock (and that's when one notices)
For these and other reasons nobody would be concerned about anything else than hitting any part of the car possible to stop it, be it the occupants, engine, wheels, whatever. I guess this goes quite a long way in explaining why one can find that something like 500 rounds of all sorts of calibers are fired in such a situation.
It's only if you feel "safe" that you would consider getting a perfect aim and stopping the car with one
Disclaimer: IANAAS (I Am Not An American Soldier)
this comment is provided "as is" and without any express or implied legibility or congruity [...]
It is actually 1 wrong (terrorists) and 1 good (practical rather than principled response to terrorists) making 0 wrong or good.
Remember that no terrorist organisation has ever signed the Geneva conventions and that none of them have avoided intentionally breaking them. Until the time that the worlds governments can figure out an agreement on what rights (if any) terrorists should have that's how it will stay.
Oh and terrorism does not equal militias (civilian resistance movements) acting on behalf of, and under at least indirect guidance from, an acknowledged state. This is easily understood from the definitions of the Geneva conventions themselves as well as other international treaties: it makes a lot of the people shouting about the issue look rather stupid, they're seldom talking about the central point that should be discussed (above paragraph).
this comment is provided "as is" and without any express or implied legibility or congruity [...]
The goggles, they do nothing! (Simpsons)
Sorry, I just had to.
/. bug #926803 - Why I can post.
I leave it to you guys: Interesting or Off-Topic?
I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
OK, are you on crack? What the hell are you talking about?