Thread: non-lethal weapons

what do you think of non-lethal weapons?

Pioneering 'heat wave' gun may be used in Iraq - Telegraph
American commanders in Iraq are urging Pentagon chiefs to authorise the deployment of newly-developed heat wave guns to disperse angry crowds or violent rioters. But the plea for what senior army officers believe could prove a valuable alternative to traditional firepower in dangerous trouble-spots has so far gone unanswered.
Washington fears a barrage of adverse publicity in the suspicious Muslim world and is concerned that critics will claim the invisible beam weapons were being used for torture.

Originally Posted by sectionOne

what do you think of non-lethal weapons?

Pioneering 'heat wave' gun may be used in Iraq - Telegraph
American commanders in Iraq are urging Pentagon chiefs to authorise the deployment of newly-developed heat wave guns to disperse angry crowds or violent rioters. But the plea for what senior army officers believe could prove a valuable alternative to traditional firepower in dangerous trouble-spots has so far gone unanswered.
Washington fears a barrage of adverse publicity in the suspicious Muslim world and is concerned that critics will claim the invisible beam weapons were being used for torture.

I think we the United States in general should not be using weapons of any type to disperse an angry crowd. The decision should be made by the individual countries' governments if they want to implement this type of crowd control. However we should not ever be the ones using these weapons on another countries people. It is not our responsibility. I believe it would be another excuse to hate America, which we don't need now. We need to look at the causes and address them first.

Originally Posted by sectionOne

what do you think of non-lethal weapons?

Pioneering 'heat wave' gun may be used in Iraq - Telegraph
American commanders in Iraq are urging Pentagon chiefs to authorise the deployment of newly-developed heat wave guns to disperse angry crowds or violent rioters. But the plea for what senior army officers believe could prove a valuable alternative to traditional firepower in dangerous trouble-spots has so far gone unanswered.
Washington fears a barrage of adverse publicity in the suspicious Muslim world and is concerned that critics will claim the invisible beam weapons were being used for torture.

The so called heat wave gun works on the same principles as a microwave oven. Hardly non lethal. Tassers have killed about 300 Americans in the last couple of years, again hardly non-lethal.

Originally Posted by steezer

I think we the United States in general should not be using weapons of any type to disperse an angry crowd. The decision should be made by the individual countries governments if they want to implement this type of crowd control. However we should not ever be the ones using these weapons on another countries people. It is not our responsibility. I believe it would be another excuse to hate America, which we don't need now. We need to look at the causes and address them first.

Good post Steezer. But what about violent riots IN the U.S.?

Originally Posted by Peterpan

Good post Steezer. But what about violent riots IN the U.S.?

Good question, but that is a dicey proposition. If you look at it from a historical viewpoint, I don't think it would be a good idea to use any of these weapons. I don't know how old you are, but Kent State and the civil rights movement are still very fresh in a lot of people's minds, and a lot of people weren't treated very well by the police. People to this day are still not very happy about how they are treated by the police. How the 1st ammendment of the Constitution is defined by the courts goes a long way in determining police involvement (i think i got the right ammendment).

Originally Posted by steezer

Good question, but that is a dicey proposition. If you look at it from a historical viewpoint, I don't think it would be a good idea to use any of these weapons. I don't know how old you are, but Kent State and the civil rights movement are still very fresh in a lot of people's minds, and a lot of people weren't treated very well by the police. People to this day are still not very happy about how they are treated by the police. How the constitution is define by the courts goes a long way in determining police involvement.

I really am 19 like it says by my name. No, I'm not sure what happened but i'll google it. Yeah it is a touchy subject.

But when there are VIOLENT riots, they can be deadly sometimes for both parties. Police and rioters. The rioters are caught up in a frenzy almost like a crime of passion so some restraint is needed by the police. So a non-lethal weapon would be ideal. Beanbag rifle, or fire hoses or something. Maybe this heat gun is more effective and less harmful. I'm not sure I don't know much about it.

But it is irresponsible to let the rioters go unchallenged just because we don't want to "hurt" anyone. They are breaking the law and being violent.

I just don't know......

Originally Posted by Peterpan

Good post Steezer. But what about violent riots IN the U.S.?

Would that be the riots that are started by the police?

Originally Posted by michaelr

Would that be the riots that are started by the police?

You mean like at a police line and a rookie cop fires a round into the croud cause he gets nervous? Hmm I'm not sure. Riots started by police is something I couldn't begin to argue for or against, just cause i'm young and have not yet made up my mind on where to stand.

I'm talking about civilian started riots or violent protesters.

Originally Posted by Peterpan

You mean like at a police line and a rookie cop fires a round into the croud cause he gets nervous? Hmm I'm not sure. Riots started by police is something I couldn't begin to argue for or against, just cause i'm young and have not yet made up my mind on where to stand.

I'm talking about civilian started riots or violent protesters.

I am talking like what happened in Montabello this year, and in Seattle during the WTO protest! The Battle in Seattle, I was there!

Originally Posted by sectionOne

what do you think of non-lethal weapons?

Pioneering 'heat wave' gun may be used in Iraq - Telegraph
American commanders in Iraq are urging Pentagon chiefs to authorise the deployment of newly-developed heat wave guns to disperse angry crowds or violent rioters. But the plea for what senior army officers believe could prove a valuable alternative to traditional firepower in dangerous trouble-spots has so far gone unanswered.
Washington fears a barrage of adverse publicity in the suspicious Muslim world and is concerned that critics will claim the invisible beam weapons were being used for torture.

I saw the device mounted on a humvee, looking like a large satellite dish, and apparently a micro-wave device. I imagine they want to test it on humans to see how it scrambles their brains, or cooks them. I thought most of this testing was being done on humans in Africa (medicines).

If it saves American lives, how can that be bad? Violate the Geneva Conventions? Maybe, and that is the test the weapon should first meet before spending billions.

I am kinda partial to the shotgun myself, with riot slugs. The Germans feared the shotgun (The Trench gun) and worked to keep it out of war.