Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

China Buying US Directed Sound 'Weapon'

Posted by samzenpus on from the people's-sound-cannon dept.

holy_calamity writes "The directed sound weapon made by US company ATC is being exported to the Chinese police, despite the public law banning sales of weapons to China. Turns out that such 'non-lethal' technologies are not covered by this law — an omission that may become more widely known if they are used to quell high-profile protests during the Olympics."

3 of 350 comments (clear)

  1. Non-lethal? by celtic_hackr · · Score: 5, Informative

    Your incredulous attitude is troubling.

    The sound weapon being sold may be non-lethal, but who is to say they won't RE the device and make lethal sound weapons. Sound can kill. If you stand next to a speaker when 160db of sound comes out of it, you'll be dead. NASA uses sound to test the tiles on the shuttle, anyone caught inside that tester would be killed instantly when the sound came on.

    1. Re:Non-lethal? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 5, Informative
      How this got modded "informative" is anyone's guess...

      160 dB CANNOT kill. It can rupture your eardrums, but not kill. See, sound is measured in dB SPL - deciBels of Sound Pressure Level. The reference is 0 dB = 20 uPa (micropascals) of pressure.

      Do some math, and you'll find out that 194 dB SPL is one atmosphere of pressure. Meaning that 160 dB SPL is about 1/1000th of an atmosphere. You experience more pressure by swimming 0.5 meters under the surface of the water.

      160 dB CANNOT kill. Pressures - sounds - of 194 dB cannot kill (that's the pressure level of the NASA sonic test weapons). That's 10 meters under water, one extra atmosphere, and harmlessly encountered on a daily basis by millions of divers.

      And for the record, yes I am an acoustician, and yes I have worked on sonic weapons.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  2. Re:Might as well make a buck... by LeafOnTheWind · · Score: 5, Informative

    World War 1 - The upper-class of Europe gets a bit excitable and millions of people die, although in the long run (after WW2) it effectively removed the European upper-class from power which is a good thing. It had nothing to do with economics whatsoever. This is wildly inaccurate - I do not know where you gathered your knowledge of history, but it is sorely lacking. WWI was a product of a slew of different things, specifically, an escalating arms race between Britain and Germany, a shadowed and complicated alliance system, the overactive nationalism in Europe, and (of course) ethnic tensions. In fact, the backing of Austria-Hungary could be blamed largely on the international relations before the war. Germany was a new country, just united from its individual states, with no empire and practically no supporters in Europe. It's biggest supporter, economically and politically, was Austria-Hungary. When war came between Austria-Hungary and the Triple Entente, Germany had little choice but to give a blank check - its only significant partner in Europe was in dire straits. I won't extrapolate as I'd rather not write a 10 page paper on Slashdot, but there's an economic precursor for you.