Scientists Warn Against Riot-Control Ray Gun

[Lozzy_Ozzy]

See, I TOLD YOU we should use nuclear grenades instead .

 

[Bigfoot]

Much better is another idea I heard the Pentagon is making, in which they have a gun that shoots sound waves which cause nausea.

Can you imagine hnundreds of people all ralphing at the same time in a tightly enclosed area? What a disgusting mess that would make!

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

Wouldn't metal ignite, electronics be fried, causing more panic and chaos?

 

[Mr. Blonde]

That the tested persons had to take off their glasses and lenses should give a clue that this device is dangerous to the eyes. The materials they use for lenses haveusually low melting points, maybe they can melt and stick to your eye? Also people with a heart pacemaker will have problems when exposed to
microwave radiation.

Metal structures in the range of mm will usually diffract microwave radiation most efficiently - I suspect therefore glasses can be dangerous.
Concerning the cancerogenity of microwave radiation I´m not sure. It can penetrate tissue (I would guess several cm, otherwise using it to warm up food would be futile). The radiation can be used to make a plasma since it induces an oscillation between nucleus and electron hull, it also exaggerates lattice vibrations. It can be used to induce/accelerate certain chemical reactions - so I think it is potentially cancerogen.

However- the biggest drawback is that it can not be used in conjunction with water cannons for crowd control (the droplets/vapour will absorb the radiation). If they replace the water cannons with this microwave device they enhance the danger for the protesters - so I am against it since the right to protest is written in stone for democracies. And you can bet that the police will use it even when the protest is far from a riot (We had some peaceful protests against the new formed government in 2000 where the police started to punch and hit peaceful bystanders at will).

 

[zulu9812]

even if all the side-effects were fixed, isn't anyone else bothered by the notion of what is effectively a pain-ray?

 

[Mr. Blonde]

There is no way to induce pain without side effect except if you had a direct access to the pain receptors (and that´s not possible with a gun).
You have to induce pressure/heat/... for pain. Pain is a secondary effect of other sensations. You will never have a pain-ray.

 

[searcheagle]

Let's look at the alternatives:

Teargas-Weak and the body can get used to it, so after a few protests, no effect.
Pepper Spray-Hard to spread to spread over a large area.
Rubber Bullets- limited range and limite ability to spread out, severe risk of lethal kill
Riot Gear-Risk of injury to personnel, unlikely to work pushing against a whole crowd.
Real Bullets-Public Outcry, death of protesters

Heat, applied through this machine-possible long term risk of injury. Controllable, both in scope and range, minute risk to personel, etc.
Given the choose, put this system in place.

 

[Mr. Blonde]

What about water cannons??? And microwaves are NOT controllable since they are reflected/diffracted and they can have very nasty side-effects.

Imo, Riot gear seems to work good enough in conjunction with water cannons.

edit: If the police lacks anything it is a proper education for deescalation. (At least here)

 

[Godwynn]

I would suggest the beanbag gun. It doesn't seem too deadly.

 

[King Alexander]

- so I am against it since the right to protest is written in stone for democracies.

*bolding is mine.

I agree with you.

btw: I bet, the Iraqis are going to play the role of the 'lab-animal' when they'll test this weapon to them.

 

[cgannon64]

This is to be used on riots, not protests.

 

[King Alexander]

This is to be used on riots, not protests.

Yes, I understand it, but it's going to also be used against protests some wouldn't want to take place.

 

[cgannon64]

Illegal protests which do not have permits, perhaps; but I imagine in that case it would only be used after the police calmly and politely ask the people to leave - and probably even try to move them by other, less violent, means.

 

[nonconformist]

Illegal protests which do not have permits, perhaps; but I imagine in that case it would only be used after the police calmly and politely ask the people to leave - and probably even try to move them by other, less violent, means.

Obviously you haven't seen any footage of the 1980's miners' strikes.

 

[cgannon64]

Tell me about them.

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

Tear gas, fire hoses and night sticks work just fine for me.

 

[silver 2039]

Tear gas and watercannons do seem better. Then pepper spray and sticks and shields at closer range.

 

[nonconformist]

Tell me about them.

In the 1980s, the miners were all striking about being fired.
A huge numebr, as well as bstanders, and general supporters turned up at an old mine-pit (or a common, I forget the name).
The police were basically very helpful, and organised them all into one apot on the common.
They then charged horses into the protesters, ran them down, followed in with riot police and batons, with finally regular police to beat the remaining stragglers up.
Needless to say, it turned into a one sided, but hotly fought, battle.

 

[cgannon64]

Now, do you think America could really afford to do something like that in Iraq?

 

[silver 2039]

LONDON, England (Reuters) -- Scientists are questioning the safety of a Star Wars-style riot control ray gun due to be deployed in Iraq next year.

Of course why not?