US Air Force to Test Hi-Tech Weapons on Americans?

GayBliss writes to tell us CNN.com has an article about how the US Air Force secretary proposes testing new 'non-lethal' weapons on American citizens before deploying them to the battlefield. New weapons like a high-power microwave device are designed to incapacitate people or sometimes even electronic devices. From the article: "The object is basically public relations. Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions from others about possible safety considerations, said Secretary Michael Wynne."

Comments

Re:How about

[Vancorps]

I'm not sure you know how right you are here. I have a friend that worked in a maximum security prison as a sniper. He learned about pressure points and whatnot and the chief requirement for learning is that you have to allow the instructor to do it to you so you understand how it feels. That way you understand the level of pain your inflicting on your opponent. If it's non-lethal then they should go right ahead!

Re:How about

[twofidyKidd]

Actually, I've had such a system (millimeter wave emitter) tested on me. I voluteered myself, as did the people in charge of the project. The thing hurts like you're being cooked alive, and stops immediately once you're out of the way, but leaves no physical trace of injury.

I work for Raytheon.

If you don't like it,

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

you can always comply with the wishes of authority...

Or you can go here.

Re:How about

[Com2Kid]

Wanna test it in a riot scenario, pay yourself a bunch of Army recruits to stage a riot under controlled circumstances.

Hell with that.

You know those carnival/fair events where you get to dunk "Insert Person Here"?

I say we make the congress critters + president and cabinet sign up for non-lethal weapon tests performed by citizens who buy tickets to fire off said weapons. The more painful weapons have higher ticket prices.

Make all of them rotate through the program until the national debt is paid off.

I bet you that as a side effect, the budget would get balanced REALLY quick.

Re:How about

[GooberToo]

Yes, it's true. I'm not in law enforcement but know people. Likewise, not long ago on TV I saw a video of a cop going through his taser training. Seems the instructor had only just completed his training too. As a result, the instructor forget to properly elevate the taser to account for the rapid sink in the darts. As a result, the copy got a taser dart in the nuts. Worse, the instructor and other cops standing around started laughing their asses off...all the while, forgetting to turn off the taser. So while the other cops are all laughing, this poor guy is flopping around like a fish on a not tin roof.

Needless to say, I seriously doubt that cop will forget what a taser feels like.

And yes, pepper spray is also tested.

I don't usually agree with the Cowards, but...

[benhocking]

I've been in this situation. There was a peaceful anti-KKK protest in Atlanta many years back when I was an undergrad at GT (early 90's or late 80's), and I was there with more than a thousand others. Everything was going fine. Then, a few people started throwing rocks at the KKK marchers, several of which hit the police - either intentionally or unintentionally. (The KKK march was naturally the impetus for the anti-KKK protest.) Now, I was not in a position to stop "the destructive people in [my] midst", but I would have if I could have. The police then ordered us to disperse. Now, of course, with over a thousand people, no crowd can disperse quickly. I can't speak for everyone else, but I know that I was attempting to leave. Nevertheless, the police got impatient and started pushing. At this point, I got a club to the back from a police officer - not hard enough to do any real damage, but hard enough to leave a small bruise.

My point is that you shouldn't judge all protesters at a given protest for the acts of the few - or even the acts of the many. If I was there legally (and I was), then what other people did at the rally does not justify using force on me - as long as I'm continuing to act legally (and I was). Now, granted, the club incident was no big deal, and to the best of my knowledge no one else got treated much worse. The point is that even if you're doing everything right, you can find yourself in an unsavory situation.

(I also want to point out that calling police officers "pigs" (as the GP post did) is never useful. And, in most cases, it is highly inaccurate. Most police officers are decent, hard-working people and should be shown the respect they deserve.)

Re:This is to save lives, period.

[prisoner-of-enigma]

If I'm a Marine, I'm all for this. Likewise Air Force MPs (who are often guarding facilities that get swamped with representatives from Unruly Crowd Central Casting), etc.

I am a Marine, one who's done a tour in Iraq already, and I can tell you we are literally dying to have something like this. The current ROE is such that you're severely limited in the action you can take when somebody starts shooting at you or your convoy. You basically can either choose not to respond at all (i.e. disengage) or you can choose to excercise deadly force. There is no option three.

With all the reporters crawling around just hoping for a dead baby with an M-16 bullet lodged in it just in time for the evening let's-bash-the-U.S.-military evening newscast, I can assure you we all spend far too much time debating about pulling that trigger. We have dead Marines because of it, and because our enemy chooses to hide amongst civilians hoping we'll kill some of them. These people are animals, barbarians, sub-human scum, but don't get me started.

With a reliable, ranged, non-lethal weapon of this type, we could be much more indiscriminate about how we apply it. Don't take that the wrong way; I don't mean we run around zapping everyone in sight. Instead, when a threat develops, we could "stun" the person without fear of wounding or killing non-combatants. Fewer dead Marines, fewer dead civilians, and (maybe) fewer dead terrorists (captured alive instead and then used as a useful source of intelligence). Only the stupidest Peacenik would oppose the availability of such a weapon. It would save lives no matter how you look at it.