China Buying US Directed Sound 'Weapon'

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."

Comments

Is it really a weapon?

[JSBiff]

I don't really know much about this device, but let's, for the moment, assume it can't actually hurt anyone, just make them uncomfortable / stun them. Is it really a weapon then?

Re:Is it really a weapon?

[lymond01]

I think anything used with intent to harm (and stunning would be "harm") is defined as a weapon under most U.S. laws. See Ms. Green in the library with the candlestick for more details.

Not to start a slashwar, but our government has redefined many standard terms in the past 8 years, so a weapon may be classified as anything more destructive than the Death Star. Everything else is called "French Toast" and is clearly non-threatening in the greater scheme of things.

Why bother?

[urcreepyneighbor]

Unless the PRC plans on using this sometime in the immediate future, why wouldn't they simply develop this technology locally?

AFAIK, the principles behind the technology aren't all that complicated.

Re:Why bother?

[urcreepyneighbor]

Because it's cheaper to buy an existing product than to reinvent the wheel. Obviously. However, as I said, there appears to be a time factor here that isn't being publicly stated. I'm sure the Chinese government could easily produce their very own "sound weapon" if they so desired.

Later they may decide to reverse-engineer, Later? Ha! I'm sure they're ordering enough to deploy and RE.

I would be absolutely shocked if the PRC doesn't already have existing teams whose sole function is to RE stuff.

but even then it's cheaper to buy the blueprints. Why buy when you can steal? ;)

Re:Might as well make a buck...

[Anonymous Coward]

I say sell Beijing whatever it wants, and quit caring about how Asians handle internal affairs. Of course, selling weapons to oppressive regimes has never come back to bite the US, oh wait...

Re:Yes let's...

[willyhill]

I very much doubt "the vast majority" are. I'm sure the ones that live in the large cities and have well-paying jobs are, but the actual vast majority of Chinese still live at or below subsistence levels. I'm also pretty sure that the members of Falun Gong and all those people that got nailed during the Tiannamen square protests would not agree with you. And let's not forget the millions who are victims of widespread corruption, the families of criminals that are executed for petty crimes, the ones that are sick because of rampant environmental problems caused by unchecked industrial growth, etc.

The images of pretty affluent Chinese living in modern-looking cities we've come to enjoy in the Western media are not exactly indicative of what actually goes on over there. It's a big country with a billion people.

In any case, it's illegal to express negative feelings about the glorious Communist Party or its leaders, so I'm not sure who you've been talking to over there. Just about every Chinese I've ever met here in the US love their country, but they've rarely had anything but negative things to say about their government, regardless of the era they happened to leave.

Re:Yes let's...

[WindowlessView]

the vast majority of Chinese are very happy with their government at the moment

On the other hand, it was recently reported that there were over 85,000 protests in China last year, some of them violent. That is a staggering number. I suspect these sound machines will see a lot of action.

Re:Mixed feelings on this

[Gideon Fubar]

I applaud you for actually making reasonable sense of the situation. Far too much energy is spent around here on people reinforcing their own beliefs by pointing out the flaws in others'.

If i had the points, I would totally mod you up for your insight.

Re:Mixed feelings on this

[augnober]

Without getting into a big discussion about the philosophy of government, I just want to point out that China has a long cultural history of obedience to authority. My understanding is that the common perception is that there is nothing to be done about government, so the best thing to do is to either bend it to your needs (via bribe, etc) or just accept it as an immoveable constraint. That is true. You can sense this in other ways in China too - not just in relation to governance. For example, if someone butts in front of everyone in line, you generally see very little (usually none at all) reaction or discontent from the people behind. If you call out the injustice of the person butting ahead, people look at you like you're crazy and your friend, confused and embarrassed, tries to calm you down. Once you've lived there for a while, these relatively minor transgressions slip your mind because there's no benefit to doing anything about them. No one will look at you like a hero for making a fuss, and people prefer it that you don't. Once you get used to it (if you have a normal disposition that is -- some people are just wired up to be uptight), it doesn't bother you either. You get by just fine. Calling out injustice is primarily about the ethics of helping other people rather than saving yourself. This is something that is difficult to understand until you have lived in circumstances where it is pulled out from under you.

This is from my experience living in China before. After living there for over a year, I could walk around all day amongst throngs of people and have nothing affect my nerves even the slightest tinge. I think it is a related phenomenon. Not to sound too selfish -- but if nothing is bothering you, and nothing is bothering your friends and family, then nothing is wrong.

Re:Non-lethal?

[Fishead]

The LRAD (Long Range Acoustic Device) that I assume they are talking about is far from lethal. Loud? Yes. Annoying? Oh yeah. Kickass speaker for AC/DC Thunderstruck? Yeaaahhhh!!!

I had the pleasure of playing with one of these in a previous job, and the pain of having it turned up too high while I was in front of it. The LRAD is good for causing extreme discomfort, and disorienting a large crowd of people, and though it may cause permanent hearing damage if abused, I can't see it killing anyone.

Re:Non-lethal?

[KaizerttheBjorn]

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. Yes, but a lethal weapon that uses sound would have to consume an extremely large amount of power to be lethal, and since the intensity of the sound decreases as the square of the distance, it would really only be useful as a close combat weapon. There are much more efficient ways to kill, even if you want to kill "cleanly".

Re:Non-lethal?

[joggle]

Rock bands have speakers loud enough to kill people if you stand right in front of them. What's your point? Do you think the Chinese need our help to make lethal speakers? I don't. A device that doesn't kill but is also effective in dispersing crowds is more difficult to make and which is why they are buying the device from a US company.

Re:Non-lethal?

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with andi75. Diving at .5 meters doesn't rupture your eardrums - a blast of 160dB does. So clearly air pressure isn't the only factor. Time, acceleration, etc. are clearly also playing a part.

Furthermore, rupturing your eardrums is not trivial. That's like saying shooting someone with a .22 Short can't kill them. Maybe not in most cases, but the right wound with the right complications can be lethal. Same goes with an eardrum rupture - the inside of your head is exposed to the environment. And even presuming survival, the impact on quality of life is not without consideration.

As someone who suffers from hearing loss and tinnitus, I can tell you it is hellish. Your hearing systems in your body make up probably the most sophisticated, complex sensory system you have. We can fix eyes relatively easily; touch is a little tricky; taste and smell are tough but loss of those is truly rare. Sensorineural hearing loss, on the other hand, is far too common, untreatable, and probably will be for the foreseeable future.

Yet, here's people like you, making "harmless" sonic weapons, and this morally deficient company, selling them to a government whose M/O is repression of all dissent. You're designing/manufacturing weapons that deliver a payload that would be considered torture or cruel and unusual punishment in many circumstances. How do you figure that's justified?

I just personally don't get it. Lethal weapons I understand. Sometimes people need to be killed; I'm no pacifist. But if you're going to take violent action against someone, either make it truly recoverable or make it lethal. Don't make it something that will rob them of hearing or sight or movement or feeling for the rest of their lives. That's the worst thing you can do to a person. Ask someone who's been intentionally wounded with a gun - why couldn't a fist or a bat have done that job? Instead, the victim is given a lifetime of suffering from the wound. If you dare to pull a gun - or any weapon - on someone, as they always say, you should be shooting to kill.

Sorry for the flaming/trolling, /., I really am. But I just don't buy that this is a "non-lethal weapon." It is a torture weapon, and it should banned from manufacture here, not just sale. Fat chance of that, though, so I guess I'm just sayin' my piece. Thanks for giving us a place to exercise free speech.