Tech | August 04, 2011 | 41 comments

6 Creepy New Weapons the Police and Military Use To Subdue Unarmed People

source: http://www.alternet.org/story/151864/6_creepy_new_weapons_the_police_and_military_use_to_sub...

Image
Almibry
August 1, 2011 | The US is at the forefront of an international arms development effort that includes a remarkable assortment of technologies, which look and sound like they belong in a Hollywood science fiction thriller. From microwave energy blasters and blinding laser beams, to chemical agents and deafening sonic blasters, these weapons are at the cutting edge of crowd control.

The Pentagon's approved term for these weapons is "non-lethal" or "less-lethal" and they are intended for use against the unarmed. Designed to control crowds, clear streets, subdue and restrain individuals and secure borders, they are the 21st century's version of the police baton, pepper spray and tear gas. As journalist Ando Arike puts it, "The result is what appears to be the first arms race in which the opponent is the general population."

The demand for non-lethal weapons (NLW) is rooted in the rise of television. In the 1960s and '70s the medium let everyday Americans witness the violent tactics used to suppress the civil rights and anti-war movements.

Today’s rapid advancements in media and telecommunications technologies allow people to record and publicize images and video of undue force more than ever before. Authorities are well aware of how images of violence play out publicly. In 1997, a joint report from the Pentagon and the Justice Department warned:

"A further consideration that affects how the military and law enforcement apply force is the greater presence of members of the media or other civilians who are observing, if not recording, the situation. Even the lawful application of force can be misrepresented to or misunderstood by the public. More than ever, the police and the military must be highly discreet when applying force."

The global economic collapse coupled with the unpredictable and increasingly catastrophic consequences of climate change and resource scarcity, along with a new era of austerity defined by rising unemployment and glaring inequality have already led to massive protests in Spain, Greece, Egypt, and even Madison, Wisconsin. From the progressive era to the Great Depression to the civil rights movement, Americans have a rich history of taking to the streets to demand greater equality.

Meanwhile, tens of millions of dollars have been invested in the research and development of more media-friendly weapons for everyday policing and crowd control. This has lead to a trade-in of old school weapons for more exotic and controversial technologies. The following are six of the most outrageous "non-lethal" weapons that will define the future of crowd control.

1. The Invisible Pain Ray: The 'Holy Grail of Crowd Control'




Source: Pasadena Star NewsIt sounds like a weapon out of Star Wars. The Active Denial System, or ADS, works like an open-air microwave oven, projecting a focused beam of electromagnetic radiation to heat the skin of its targets to 130 degrees. This creates an intolerable burning sensation forcing those in its path to instinctively flee (a response the Air Force dubs the "goodbye effect").

The Pentagon's Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Program (JNLWP) says, "This capability will add to the ability to stop, deter and turn back an advancing adversary, providing an alternative to lethal force."

Although ADS is described as non-lethal, a 2008 report by physicist and less-lethal weapons expert Dr. Jürgen Altmann suggests otherwise:

" ... the ADS provides the technical possibility to produce burns of second and third degree. Because the beam of diameter 2 m and above is wider than human size, such burns would occur over considerable parts of the body, up to 50% of its surface. Second- and third-degree burns covering more than 20% of the body surface are potentially life-threatening – due to toxic tissue-decay products and increased sensitivity to infection – and require intensive care in a specialized unit. Without a technical device that reliably prevents re-triggering on the same target subject, the ADS has a potential to produce permanent injury or death. "

The weapon was initially tested in Afghanistan, but later recalled due to a combination of technical difficulties and political concerns, including the fear that ADS would be used as a torture tool making it "not politically tenable," according to a Defense Science Board report. The tens of millions of dollars spent to develop the ADS did not necessarily go to waste, however.

While the weapon may be too controversial for use on the battlefield, it appears that nothing is too sadistic for use on US prisoners, so the ADS has since been modified into a smaller version by Raytheon, for use in law enforcement. Last year, the renamed Assault Intervention System (AIS) was installed at the Pitchess Detention Center's North County Correction Facility at the behest of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD). Former LASD Commander, Charles “Sid” Heal had been lobbying for the pain ray for years, calling it the "Holy Grail of Crowd Control," due to its ability to make people scatter almost instantly.

The device is operated by a jail officer with a joystick, and is intended to break up prison riots, inmate brawls and prevent assaults on officers. Sheriff Lee Baca added that it would allow officers to quickly intervene without having to physically enter the area to incapacitate prisoners.

The ACLU claims that use of such a device on American prisoners is "tantamount to torture." The organization even sent a letter to the sheriff in charge, demanding he never use the energy weapon against inmates. “The idea that a military weapon designed to cause intolerable pain should be used against county jail inmates is staggeringly wrongheaded,” said Margaret Winter, associate director of the ACLU National Prison Project. “Unnecessarily inflicting severe pain and taking such unnecessary risks with people’s lives is a clear violation of the Eighth Amendment and due process clause of the U.S. Constitution.”

The pain ray’s use in the Pitchess Detention Center is a pilot program. If successful, the weapon could find its way into other prisons around the country. The National Institute of Justice has also expressed interest in a hand-held, rifle-sized, short-range weapon that could be effective at tens of feet for law enforcement officials.

[Read about the other 5 at link]
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Tech,   Culture,   19 more
  2. tags:
    Technology,  Weapons,  Arms
  3.     
    |

41 comments // 6 Creepy New Weapons the Police and Military Use To Subdue Unarmed People

  • bailey78
    • +5
      bailey78  

    • This kind of says it all. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

      -- Thomas Jefferson,

    • 10 months ago
  • remanns
  • bailey78
  • Almibry
  • KurtLewin
    • +3
      KurtLewin  

    • Looks like Israeli IDF culture has taken over US...

      "A government afraid of its citizens is a Democracy. Citizens afraid of government is tyranny!"
      — Thomas Jefferson

    • 10 months ago
  • Almibry
  • SoCalFramer
    • +3
      SoCalFramer  

    • Now to find the right soldiers to turn these weapons on thier neighbors, relatives and friends. Typically you would use an old stratagy, you have christain use it against muslims, you have young use it against old, rich against poor, southerners against northeners. You get it. Now do you take hostages and use them for shields?

    • 10 months ago
  • Almibry
  • freshfish
  • Paratus
  • Almibry
  • gfar713
  • Leen61
    • +6
      Leen61  

    • Once again, they are always finding new ways to kill us. Instead of putting this energy toward solving this country's problems like job creation, health care, infrastructure, etc. they have the time and money for this shit. Why? Because they know sooner or later that the people are going to rise up against this plutocracy, gilded age and cutting of social safety nets and they want to be ready to cut us down. Welcome to the Police State. This IS 1984.

    • 10 months ago
  • SIBob
    • +4
      SIBob  
    • Image
    • Leen61:

      You are right Leen61. The Homeland Security forces and the National Guard armories are in place to keep us in check. The way things are going, what with this week’s latest sellout in Washington, things are going to get rough. I saw on the news last night that some inner cities have over a 50% unemployment rate. Empty promises and lies are all we get out of the political/corporate alliance. It is beginning to feel very Orwellian, (doublespeak, rewriting history and all that). I wonder if there is really any way to push any politician into office who doesn’t get corrupted by the process. Once they get in, they change. It must be all that power going to their heads. I just wonder how we are all going to survive. http://sibob.org/wordpress/

    • 10 months ago
  • Leen61
    • +3
      Leen61  
    • SIBob:

      That's a good question, SIBob. How are we going to survive? Speaking of survival, what I forgot to type here this morning before I went to work was this--the article mentions "subdue unarmed people." This kind of ties into the story from yesterday about "why don't the young people get out in the streets." Think about this--look at how bad the economy is. People are worried about how they are going to pay their bills, if they will ever work again, how long will they have unemployment checks coming in, is their enough money for food, etc and don't forget the people who work 50-60 hours a week. Now, after all the stuff I just listed, who would have the energy or time to protest? See my point? This is built in anti-resistance as well.

    • 10 months ago
  • Colin_McCabe
    • +1
      Colin_McCabe  

    • That 'holy grail' has been in "testing" for years and hasn't seen even minimal deployments let a lone full deployments. Lets think about this for one second. Should we halt them from making "less than lethal" type items for crowd control? If you answered yes then the police would only be left with what they already have; lethal options. Giving cops the choice between a taser or a microwave dispersal unit is better than being on the receiving end of a .45 or tear gas.

    • 10 months ago
  • figgdimension
  • Colin_McCabe
  • Incredulous
  • Almibry
    • +1
      Almibry  
    • Colin_McCabe:

      "If you answered yes then the police would only be left with what they already have"
      The "less-lethal" weapons they have now can only target one person at a time, or a handful of people grouped closely together.
      I want them to respect our rights to peaceably assemble without being the first to break the truce. The best way to do that is stop them before they start down that slippery slope and having a wide variety "less-lethal" weapons at their disposal will undoubtedly encourage infringements on our rights. All you have to do to be convinced by that is look at the way tasers are abused. They use them on children and grandparents!
      I'm disturbed by your support of crowd control. Crowds DO NOT need to be controlled. Riots, maybe, not crowds.

    • 10 months ago
  • Colin_McCabe
    • -1
      Colin_McCabe  
    • Incredulous:

      Oh give me a break. You and I both know that was a dramatic and excessive use of force for which hopefully they will be punished severely for. Even if they didn't have the tasers they still would have beat the guy to death.

    • 10 months ago
  • Colin_McCabe
    • -1
      Colin_McCabe  
    • Almibry:

      I'd agree with you if this were Egypt or Syria etc but "crowd control" in the United States means riot control, Presidential protection and protection of National assets like the White House. It does not mean that the backwoods police department is going to invest in millions of dollars of equipment to control the populace. This is America, formed by revolution, and if necessary can be taken back by revolution. Sitting around and trying to stop the Police from subduing riots without shooting people with rubber bullets, which have proven fatal, or tear gas let them try something a little less deadly.

    • 10 months ago
  • Almibry
  • Colin_McCabe
    • -1
      Colin_McCabe  
    • Almibry:

      It's "crowd control" what are riots? Groups of people who're angrily and violently protesting something and destroying property while fighting control. Groups of people can be labeled as a crowd. It's just words. Their words shouldn't irritate your, their actions should. So what if they use the term crowd control to subdue a riot and so what if they use that term to subdue an illegal protest? Again you shouldn't care about the term used but the actions that they take and if they're legal or not. Buying and developing less than lethal items is not an illegal or unconstitutional act but if they used them to suppress/subdue the masses who're acting legally then that would be the offense. It would be like trying to ban the development of a better steak knife because some women use them to stab their husbands.

    • 10 months ago
  • Almibry
    • 0
      Almibry  
    • Colin_McCabe:

      "It's just words"
      *scoffs*
      Since you're having trouble with it, I'll break it down for you.
      crowd1    /kraÊŠd/ noun
      1. a large number of persons gathered closely together; throng
      2. any large number of persons.
      3. any group or set of persons with something in common
      4. audience; attendance
      5. the common people; the masses
      ri·ot   /ˈraɪət/ [rahy-uht]
      noun
      1. a noisy, violent public disorder caused by a group or crowd of persons, as by a crowd protesting against another group, a government policy, etc., in the streets.
      2. Law . a disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons acting together in a disrupting and tumultuous manner in carrying out their private purposes.
      3. violent or wild disorder or confusion.
      4. a brilliant display
      5. something or someone hilariously funny
      If someone fires aimlessly into a crowd with teargas, I consider that an infringement on my right to peaceably assemble. If someone fires teargas aimlessly into a riot, I condier it protection.
      Some actions irritate the SHIT OUT OF ME.
      If I opened a restaurant that attracted a CROWD and someone decided they should be be "subdued", I'd sue their sorry asses. If I opened a restaurant that attracted a RIOT and someone decided that they needed to be "subdued", I'd give them a fucking medal.

    • 10 months ago
  • Almibry
  • Colin_McCabe
  • Almibry
  • Colin_McCabe
    • -1
      Colin_McCabe  
    • Almibry:

      I think its hilarious that you're so stuck on the terms used. Big deal. That's the problem with most American's today. They get stuck on the small things rather than looking at the "issue" as a whole. Call it crowd control, riot control or anger management it still doesn't change the fact that when they deploy these items they're doing so in a lawful manner 99% of the time. We can't always sit around and say "what if."

    • 10 months ago
  • Colin_McCabe
  • Almibry
  • Colin_McCabe
  • Almibry
    • 0
      Almibry  
    • Colin_McCabe:

      My "quick search" is more than your "humble opinion".
      Edit: No one should vote this comment down, I was being nice in assuming that anything Colin might say could be counted as "humble".
      You should be voting me up for being Mother-fucking-Teresa.

    • 10 months ago
  • Almibry
    • 0
      Almibry  
    • Colin_McCabe:

      Another resource for you:
      http://current.com/s/community_standards.htm
      Hater, according to the Communtiy guidlines:

      Being a hater.

      Hate speech, racism, and bigotry are unacceptable. Remember, just because someone disagrees with you on an issue doesn't necessarily make their statements hate speech.

      Personal attacks.

      We can't always agree on everything, and that's fine. But stick to debating the point, not attacking the other person.

    • 10 months ago
  • Almibry
    • 0
      Almibry  
    • Colin_McCabe:

      It should be obvious that you've pissed me off, but I'm willing to admit that I might be in the wrong here so let's make a bet:
      You flag the comment I posted announcing that I flagged you for personal attacks and hate speech and we wait to see what stays and what goes.
      If my comment is removed, I'll remove my profile from Current permanently.
      If your comment dismissing my arguments because they're something the "typical woman" would post gets removed, you publically apologize.
      If both comments, or neither one gets removed, we call a truce and agree to disagree.
      And since I'm feeling generous, if you refuse to respond, I'll accept NO RESPONSE as a public apology.
      What do you say?
      P.S. I have blocked you, so if you try to send me a private message I won't recieve it, so I'll accept that as "no response."

    • 10 months ago
  • Almibry
  • Colin_McCabe
    • 0
      Colin_McCabe  
    • Almibry:

      More of your comments were removed than mine so you shouldn't be accepting anything other than defeat.

      *Edit: Oh wait YOU deleted all of the comments that would have been removed by current lol.

    • 10 months ago
  • Almibry
    • 0
      Almibry  
    • Colin_McCabe:

      No, they were deleted on the basis of starting fires, personal attacks, and excessive profanity, but the out of the two comments the bet was based on, mine is there, yours isn't. Yes -in total- I slung more shit than you did, but to quote your average five year old, "you started it".
      You shouldn't under estimate women. That just means while you will see the elbow heading towards your nose, you won't BELIEVE it until it's too late to dodge. All points in my favor really, but I DO like to help the disadvantaged.

    • 10 months ago
  • COMMONSENSEFORCOMMONGOOD_COM
    • +5
      COMMONSENSEFORCOMMONGOOD_COM  

    • Instead of developing alternative energy efficiencies and technologies, they develop technologies to suppress citizens campaigning for alternative energies and technologies. Good God! Is our only safe and effective way to get our voice out through Anonymous and Lulz?

    • 10 months ago
  • cmc101
  • figgdimension
more from Tech:
from the community

top videos