Slashdot Mirror
Revisiting DIY HERF Guns
An anonymous reader writes "HERF guns have previously been regarded as nothing more than an interesting project with uses ranging from at-home experiments to malicious pranks. But the deployment of 'morally gray' forms of high-tech crowd control, such as the recent use of a sound cannon against domestic protesters, along with the likely future unleashing of the pain gun on more than just 'foreign terrorists,' creates a new purpose for these relatively easily assembled devices. Could HERF guns become a new method to counter the silencing of protesters via these sophisticated attacks, or is there any other way to prevent such efficient, convenient crowd dispersal?"
a HERF gun is "(a device like EMP but directional) ... capable of stalling cars at a distance and crashing computers as well."
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
I can't claim to know what HERF is without a visit to wikipedia, but compared to protesters, authorities will always outperform them when it comes to weaponry.
Yes, there is. Too bad most of the people in countries where it is available think little of it. It is called voting, and it works - although not very often. The idea is, basically, that you vote your friends into your parliament and they pass laws that forbid hi-tech crowd control.
A serious coordination effort is needed for that to happen, which would have been facilitated by some electronic medium that allows easy and cheap communication over large distances, by wire or otherwise. Maybe someone can build a prototype of such a medium as well?
But the deployment of 'morally gray' forms of high-tech crowd control [...] creates a new purpose for these relatively easily assembled devices.
No, it creates a new purpose for the second amendment to the US constitution.
Until a few people die to demonstrate that we won't put up with casual torture via tasers, sound cannons, pain rays, and what-have-you, the police will continue to use such technologies on the populace for increasingly trivial reasons. We've already seen them go from "nonlethal defense" to promoting "compliance" to merely enforcing obsequious levels of civility... And now, merely to clear the streets in blatant violation of another of our rights (the first).
Can't say I have the balls to put myself in the firing line, but I predict another "Kent State" within the next few years.
The US and UK have two parties each, and the two parties are basically not very different. Barring a few specific situations, votes for other parties or independents have no effect. If you don't agree with the way things are, you can't stand for the major parties, and I'm not too familiar with the US system, but the UK's "first past the post" system makes it nearly impossible for new parties to go anywhere, as the only way for one to become effective would be for large numbers of people to throw their votes away for several elections in a row.
Sometimes, voting is not going to change anything.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
In fact, one of the simplest HERF designs (a hi current coil compressed suddenly by igniting an explosive surrounding the coil) has a dual-lobed bidirectional radiation pattern. So yes, without some sort of reflector or attenuator, it certainly can work both ways.
I can see the fnords!
I'm all for promoting homegrown electronic countermeasures, as I've long fantasized about building a directional, subsonic-targeting HERF weapon to discourage noise pollution on my residential street.
However, I think promoting Counter-countermeasures is equally important: Faraday cages, attenuators, reflectors, and EMP-hard electronics. If you're gonna play with fireworks, then learn how to make a fire extinguisher, too.
I can see the fnords!
Shit I forgot about you Young'ins> That song by Buffalo Springfield (Neil Young was in it - the crazy looking old guy who sang "Rockin in the Free World" ) was a song about the Kent State Massacre. A bunch of national guardsmen shot some college kids for protesting against the Viet Nam War.
It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
All you have to do is wear a Faraday Cage (see wikipedia on HERF)and you're immune!
The fools!
Yes, there is. Too bad most of the people in countries where it is available think little of it. It is called voting, and it works - although not very often. The idea is, basically, that you vote your friends into your parliament and they pass laws that forbid hi-tech crowd control.
My kingdom for a mod point. Human societies often suffer from the Little Red Hen syndrome, wherein everyone wants the bread, but nobody can be bothered to actually help prepare it.
Democracy is a messy, tiresome, boring, downright infuriating system where one is constantly tormented by the most aggravating invention known to man: other people's opinions. It is, however, the one system that actually incorporates social/political change into its very structure. And that is something that countless people suffering under authoritarian or absolutist rulers find remarkably appealing.
A serious coordination effort is needed for that to happen, which would have been facilitated by some electronic medium that allows easy and cheap communication over large distances, by wire or otherwise. Maybe someone can build a prototype of such a medium as well?
The technical means exist. That's never been the problem. The issue here is creating and sustaining a culture of participation. While social networks and other means go a long way to facilitating that process, people still need to actually listen to one another. And that, as I've said, is one of the most exquisite tortures known to man. Except of course for all the other ones.
By the way - and not coincidentally - the Beck-ification of political discourse is neither accidental nor unplanned. Politicians have known for decades that the best way to subvert democracy was simply to shout it down. It's far, far easier to manipulate a population that's splintered, resentful and incapable of conducting an actual dialogue to resolve its differences or find manageable compromise. The knee-jerk name-calling on either side of every issue, when it's echoed, magnified and given focus by mass media, is specifically designed to subvert the kind of processes that sustain democracy.
In short: Yes, there are anti-democratic forces at play, and yet we are still our own worst enemies.
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
I think the gist of people's interest is the overwhelming concern about the police having access to such technology, without any policy in place guaranteeing that it won't and/or can't be misused. It scares the heck out of me that I could be in a perfectly legal protest, and some officer in charge arbitrarily decides we're "not in compliance", and all they have to do is press a button to force people into submission. And your contention that it should be alright to arrest people for interest in this subject is absurd. Plain and simple.
I'm all in favour of making DIY HERF devices to safeguard against tyranny. But we only need such things because the government is no longer afraid of the people who vote it into power. When ordinary people can no longer acquire the tools to depose despots, then it is a sure sign that those tools are now needed.
Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
I don't know Stephen, that depends. Are they using those AP bullets against drug lords wearing body armor or are they spraying windshields on the highway after having an unmarked police car pull an illegal maneuver to give them an excuse?
This isn't using molotov's in a riot "against the man", its a bigass radio antenna that breaks high tech equipment that's used to torture people sometimes to death in the streets after a few undercover cops threw rocks out of a crowd.
The police and military are supposed to have an advantage, they're not supposed to use that advantage butcher american citizens just because its more convenient. Go read up on "Excited Delirium".
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
Must be nice to be a rich white man. And I say this with all due respect... you are a tool. HERV weapons don't blow things up, they aren't designed to do so, and they aren't generally capable of doing so. They do disable sophisticated electronics in an area.
The police are not "supposed" to have an unfair advantage, WTF ever gave you that idea? The same armor police wear is available to anyone that wants to buy it. The same weapons the police use are available to anyone that wants to buy them (with some exceptions). However, the systems and weapons to defeat the police are also available to anyone that wants them. (or can build them).
Ultimately the people will take the power back. The only question is how much and whoes blood will be spilt in the process.
Cops are supposed to have an unfair advantage. What do you think about armor piercing bullets?
Cops are supposed to uphold the legitimate rule of law, as well; not to act as the brute force support system of global fascism. There is a vast difference.
All it would take is some unlucky person with a pacemaker getting near your device and you're in for negligent homicide.
For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
You can vote for anyone you like to your hearts content, but unless that person has the blessing of a major party they will not be permitted to take office.
Because only voting for winning candidates has effect, voting for anyone but the majors has exactly the same effect as not voting at all.
In the US, the "two party system" is a sham designed to keep the real power(s) (in power) and no one could ever have a successful third party.
In fact, the most successful "third party" presidential candidates (Libertarian & Green) are forbidden entry into the presidential debates (even as audience attendees).
In many states new laws have been passed which effectively prevent any participation by third party groups by making it impossible to get a candidate on the ballot.
In the US (IMHO) the government is just a tool of the vast financial interests that are the real masters of the US of A.
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
I can't be the only one who read this as "DIY NERF Guns" and imagined an arena of people duking it out with homebrewed foam weapons, right?
Epic fail. Being interested in building a HERF device - or even doing so - doesn't make anyone a criminal, let alone a terrorist. I direct your attention to the concept of "intent".
The process you're referring to is called "buying" and is done by lobbies. Voting is just a facade, because it does not matter who you vote for. Nearly everyone on the list is already bought.
The rest is pushed out by not having tons of financed marketing.
I say: Build your own community. Your own state. And make yourself as independent as possible. Especially from the cattle that still vote those strawmen.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
"Sometimes, voting is not going to change anything." Whoa there sparky! No offense but this is EXACTLY the sentiment that keeps the corrupt in power. Especially in a country like the United States, the ability of congress, or elected officials in general, to infringe on your rights is proportional to your willingness to accept it. I am from a small town in North Carolina, our local government was using federal authority to condemn property along a projected water works project. It was supported by 80% of our local elected officials. Our High School took it upon ourselves to put an end to this because two of our teachers were losing their family homes because of it. We found candidates who were qualified and AGAINST the use of eminent domain and campaigned for and with them. We managed to replace 75% of our incumbents in a single election, in my town all officials are elected for two year terms, including our mayor. We held public rallies and carnival like events explaining how the government was stealing "Your land" and caused the mass replacement of elected officials. The waterworks project was canceled, and my ex-teachers are still in their homes. The point of this rant is this, the day we stop exercising our right to a democracy is the day we lose it. Sitting on your couch complaining about what is going on achieves nothing! As long as a large section of the population is uninterested corruption becomes ever more common. Democracy works but it requires you to care. Anyone that does not get involved with politics but complains about the outcome is simply asking for others to make decisions for them and do all the leg work, if you want a country where you don't have to worry about being involved with politics try Iran. It seriously sickens me to hear "Vote? What's the point?" Your FREEDOM is at stake fool! Governments rarely destroy liberty overnight, they do it peicemeal, as in "The came for the eggs, they came for the tobacco, they came for the money, they came for the land..." eventually you wake up under a dictatorship. Don't believe me? Look at world history, dictators don't come to power overnight they build a strong political base of loyalists first and THEN take over. Wake up, get off your couch, and make a difference before you have no say at all.
It is, however, the one system that actually incorporates social/political change into its very structure. And that is something that countless people suffering under authoritarian or absolutist rulers find remarkably appealing.
a) Genuine democracy does not scale with current population levels. As someone else here said, the American Constitution was originally written for a population of 3 million, which is 1/100th of the population's current size.
b) Government now has sufficient control of the media that they don't need to play by the rules. They can kill whoever they want, whenever they want, and then call it terrorism, and the majority of the population will not challenge it.
c) Any attempt to displace the current government would result in unspeakably massive civilian casualties, and you can bet that the government knows that. They would be relying on the domestic population's reluctance to engage in large scale conflict, more than anything else.
It's also a very safe thing for them to rely on. The contemporary population of the entire Western world has been domesticated more chronically than at any other time in human history. Only very small percentages of that population have actually seen active combat. The rest of them would have less than no chance, and that includes you and me. Training and physical fitness aside, the single biggest problem is probably simply the extent to which we would not have the stomach for it.
Video 1 VS a PC
Video 2
If you truly believe that the two parties are roughly equivalent and that both candidates are equally bad for the job, then, at least in Britain, you aren't throwing your vote away by choosing a third party candidate. No, you're not going to win the entire government, but you will end up with at least some representation. In the U.S., if a national third party were to get 25% of the vote in a years worth of Senate races, spread out roughly equally all across the country, absolutely nothing would come of it. If that happened in England, the third party would have a decent representation in parliament. So while it is very difficult in England for a third party to gain significant power, it is absolutely impossible in America (unless winning the presidency but having no support in congress counts as significant power, which would require a well funded, well connected, and charasmatic candidate, in addition to miraculous circumstances).
Guns, as used by the police, have actual restrictions and policy in place to direct their use. These new nonlethal technologies are, well, new. Any policies in place aren't going to be as clearly defined, or as restrictive.
The fact that the police have guns, doesn't make push-button control of crowds any less scary.
If they use those, you'll likely end up with some dead/maimed protesters, which is a great way to give publicity to the protesters' cause. Not to mention the lawsuits against the police force.
Most 'non-lethal' weapons leave no identifiable marks or immediate, lasting effects. Opening fire with actual guns is a very restricted action, and civilian getting hurt or killed by police guns causes horrible publicity and higher officials into early retirement. But with 'non-lethal' weapons, you can open fire indiscriminately. Going about your daily business? Protesting peacefully? Sorry, but you were deemed trouble makers, and will be hit with short-term torture, which may have long-term effects. Good luck proving that, though.
When someone DOES die from these weapons (it is not at all uncommon; look up "taser deaths" for just one group of such), the police get off, the officials get off; it was just a "fluke" which they "had no control over". Technically difficulty. The death was an unfortunate accident, nothing more.
So yes, I would rather they have only guns. There is accountability with guns, and it is a hell of a lot harder to justify firing a machine gun into a crowd than using 'non-lethal crowd control technology'.
Great Intellect...
And yet it is getting better, for lots of reasons:
* I read a survey that shows 70% of the country believes that the news is biased and inaccurate. This is compared to 30% only a year ago. Realizing that your news source is inaccurate is the first step towards a realistic perception of the world.
* The internet is giving people more information, and forums where they have to defend their ideas. I know it may be hard to believe, but the sophistication of the average argument on the internet is improving. Sure, we always have people going through the clueless adolescent troll stage, but compare the arguments of someone who actively posts on the internet with someone who only reads the newspaper and talks to his friends, and you will see a huge difference. You just can't get the same breadth of ideas in meatspace.
* People actually care. In the 90s, when everything was going well, no one cared too much what the government was doing. We kind of ignored it. Now after 9/11 and Bush, people are taking a lot greater interest in their government, and are really unhappy with it. If there's one thing I can thank Bush for, it's motivating people to be more interested in government.
* The two parties have never been weaker than now. Centrist, independent voters have become a major force to reckon with, and there is even talk that in the next few years independents might start winning elections. Really, there isn't much to like about either party, but politics move slowly, and it will take time for things to change.
Qxe4
I think you'll have a hard time proving that 'government', or even some specific component of government, has enough control of the media in order to perpetrate something serious. They can frame a small number of people, brand them with 'pedo' or 'terrorist' or 'drug dealer' and everybody just nods... but this doesn't scale.
A much more relevant government power is this: more than 50% of Americans now receive significantly direct payments from some level of government. At that point it is impossible for a democracy to scale back its own taxing or spending. The only way out of it is to switch over to a monarchy for a while, and hope we get a philosopher king who can resist the corrupting force of that power.
FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
In short: Yes, there are anti-democratic forces at play, and yet we are still our own worst enemies.
Yes. And the worst offender is Rupert Murdoch.
Look at the lengths this man will go to in order to have control of the media, he took American citizenship so he could buy a TV station in the country. Now, you have Fox News.
To Mr Murdoch it is about power. His control over media - on a near-global scale - makes politicians his playthings. If you are suspicious of government, then perhaps you should not be ignoring the man behind the curtain. Nobody fucking elected him.
Where's the Kaboom?
There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom.
It is, however, the one system that actually incorporates social/political change into its very structure. And that is something that countless people suffering under authoritarian or absolutist rulers find remarkably appealing.
b) Government now has sufficient control of the media that they don't need to play by the rules. They can kill whoever they want, whenever they want, and then call it terrorism, and the majority of the population will not challenge it.
You have that rather backwards. In all too many cases, it is the media who control the politicians.
Where's the Kaboom?
There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom.
As the previous poster stated, this can silence any inconvenient camcorders or photo-taking cellphones at the scene of a police action against protesters.
No sig for the moment.
Wake me up when someone puts a cheap and easy to assemble orgasmatron or tasp. That would be the ultimate weapon to control masses.
It's also a very safe thing for them to rely on. The contemporary population of the entire Western world has been domesticated more chronically than at any other time in human history. Only very small percentages of that population have actually seen active combat. The rest of them would have less than no chance, and that includes you and me. Training and physical fitness aside, the single biggest problem is probably simply the extent to which we would not have the stomach for it.
In other words : you have it too easy and cannot effectively defend yourself. You should consider how lucky you are to live in 21st century in the west, in most other periods, and most other cultures, you'd be dead. Or at least beaten. Your problem would not be theoretical and academic with situations on far-off battlefields that you really don't have sufficient information to judge. Your problem would most likely be with the treatment of your sister (or yourself) by the local police officer, and the body parts it involves.
You refuse to be troubled by defending freedom, but demand the result of it. Why should anyone choose to die for you ? For your freedom ? If you can't answer that question ... heh ... guess what will happen when too much of the population cannot answer that question anymore. The old answer was simple : "Christ". Of course that answer had shortcomings, like it's dogmatic nature and it's obvious intolerance of different cultures (but the cultures that support individual freedom are few and far between, and certainly "western culture" is the only ideology that tolerates individual freedom today)
Most of the mass-media, imho, actually attack anyone who defends freedom, because hard choices and mistakes are made when violence is used against those who curtail freedom of others. Instead they offer the "neutrality" option as a supposedly morally good option. In reality, however, neutrality favors the stronger, and is the opposite of the ethic of defending the weak against the strong. Anyone claiming any neutral position really favors the short-term stronger party. Neutrality really favors the taliban, and not afghan journalists. Neutrality favors the murderer, not the victim. And that unfortunately includes "not judging a culture" when it's about something like honor-killing. In reality neutrality (or "tolerance") is, in this case, supporting the murderers. Everything except supporting violence against the culture is in practice equivalent to supporting the murders that are part of it.
The only way microwave radiation is going to sterilise someone is by cooking their reproductive cells. These HERF devices would have to be pointed right at a crotch, and used for enough time for all the flesh in the area to be cooked, for sterilisation to occur. I rather suspect that even the dimmest of backyard tinkerer might figure out to point the device in another direction when they start to smell the pork.
To help you understand the large gap between the amount of microwave radiation necessary to harm humans, and the amount necessary to harm electronics, try microwaving your phone for 15 seconds. Then try microwaving some raw chicken for 15 seconds.
Don't eat the chicken, it's been irradiated. Also, it's raw.
To implement difficult your proposal is, as Yoda would say. Everything is dual-use. A DVD writer can be turned into a laser dazzler. A RC toy or a cellphone can become a remotely activated switch. Regarding EMP, the most difficult part of the design is getting enough energy in short enough time. Luckily, technological development marches on. Supercapacitors are being investigated as possible replacement for batteries; they are able to charge much faster and provide extremely high currents on discharge; a 1500 farad capacitor available just now on eBay for $50 can provide you with peak power of over 5 kilowatts. And the available power will go up, and the price will go down. In few years, such capacitor banks will be in most cordless power tools, and in many electric cars. It's difficult to stop technology based on car spare parts, don't you think? The knowledge is out there. Even for explosion pumped flux compression generators there is a detailed book on Amazon that describes the construction and the necessary calculations. Many other related weapons are lower-tech than that, and are within the development capabilities of even a moderately smart electronics geek. Sometimes even a lower power is enough; jamming enemy's communication takes just a few watts at the right frequency, causes great tactical discomfort, and in combination with other measures may tip the balance of power. The cops are not supposed to abuse their advantage. If they become doing so, they aren't cops anymore, just above-the-law thugs in uniforms. And then (and only then) they should be dealt with accordingly. Armor piercing bullets? A commercially available bulldozer can be armored with a homemade composite armor from alternating steel sheets and concrete layers, and become virtually impervious against everything below an antitank rocket. (With all the disadvantages of a heavy, slow, poorly maneuverable vehicle.) People should know how to arm themselves. The Man should then behave so they will not have reasons to actually do so. It's not that difficult; just be fair and restrained in wielding the power, and actually punish its abuse. The Man is here FOR the people, not AGAINST them.
The US and UK have two parties each, and the two parties are basically not very different. Barring a few specific situations, votes for other parties or independents have no effect. If you don't agree with the way things are, you can't stand for the major parties, and I'm not too familiar with the US system, but the UK's "first past the post" system makes it nearly impossible for new parties to go anywhere, as the only way for one to become effective would be for large numbers of people to throw their votes away for several elections in a row.
Sometimes, voting is not going to change anything.
I often hear the term "throw your vote away" in reference to voting for a third party. If voting was the same as betting on a horse race or football, then yes voting for the loser is throwing your vote away; however voting is not like sports. You see, even though you may vote for a winner, if the winner doesn't represent your views you are actually losing.
It can also silence any police radios.
Exactly what I was thinking.
1. Encounter electronic Area of Effect weapons
2. Fire HERF gun. AoE weapon fails
3. Police draw truncheons
4. Fail.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
>What it's about is people who are in the wrong damned lane. If, under
>normal circumstances, you are not going noticeably faster than the lane to your right,
>you are in the wrong lane. Period. I don't mind people driving slow, but I *do* mind
>them doing it in the wrong lane.
Sorry, you are just wrong.
The speed limit is the speed limit. By law, no one is allowed to drive faster than the posted speed limit, regardless of whether or not they are passing someone.
If I am passing someone driving 69 MPH in a 70 MPH zone, you are just going to have to wait however long it takes for me to pass them at 70 MPH.
BY LAW, I am not allowed to go faster than 70 MPH to pass someone, no matter how long you have to wait for for me to finish passing.
I will be happy to accelerate up to whatever speed you like, provided you set up an escrow fund to pay any fines and insurance fees should I get caught doing it.
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
"...or is there any other way to prevent such efficient, convenient crowd dispersal?"
I developed an apathy gas once. I thought if you just fog this into a crowd, they'd get bored and just go away. Thing is, my storage container developed a leak and I couldn't be bothered to patch it. I was partway through filling out the patent paperwork, and I figured "Meh, what's the point?". I think I have the formula somewhere, or at least part of it. I never did get around to writing it all down, and frankly, I can't be bothered to find it.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!