Riot Control Ray-Gun for Use in Iraq 1317
team99parody writes "An 'Active Denial System' weapon that 'fires a 95GHz microwave beam at rioters to cause heating and intolerable pain in less than five seconds'
is scheduled for service in Iraq in 2006
according to CNET and the print version of New Scientist. It was recently tested on people playing the part of rioters at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico where they asked the subjects to remove glass and contact lenses to protect their eyes. Hopefully real rioters will get the same courtesy. Police and the Marines are working on portable versions. Sandia Labs also has a nice writeup on this system with pictures of smaller versions of the weapon."
"non" lethal? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Coming to America (Score:2, Interesting)
(BTW Genius, Nazi Germany was a democracy too.)
Re:Coming to America (Score:2, Interesting)
with goggles that filter it of course (can they make those? i've seen them for lasers, but idk if that's possible in this range)
also of interest, it only penetrates 1/64 of an inch or
Re:Little Waves in an Ocean of Hate (Score:3, Interesting)
After which, they can still go home to their spouses and children, which is far more than they could say under the Old Regime [kdp.pp.se]. Of course, this won't stop them from strapping explosives around their waists and blowing up children [cnn.com].
Re:Talked about earlier... (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously, from a practical standpoint, what will happen the first time we fire this thing into. say, one of al-Sadr's regular 10k+ angry-mob protests? Everyone with glasses risks going blind; everyone with metal on them gets burns. Everyone with a pacemaker risks getting their heart stopped. It'd be almost a guaranteed new Sadrist revolt, plus easily increasing other Shia and widespread Sunni insurgency recruiting, while not killing any insurgents. Of course, the effects don't apply just to the crowd; beams keep on going.
But lets take this further than the obvious anger that the US using some sci-fi style technology on a country that has no ability to resist it would inspire. Everyone who gets cancer within a few months of such a usage within half a dozen blocks of the site will blame it on the US's new "pain-ray". Everyone who miscarries? The same. Everyone who gets a headache, who has a heart attach, who comes down with a nasty disease... it'll all get blamed on the device.
Strategically, this is an awful decision.
Re:Coming to America (Score:3, Interesting)
You have every right to be cynical. But have you looked into the history of this device? I remember hearing about it several years ago, where it was touted as a better means of crowd control for the police. This isn't some paranoid delusion of the grandparent, it's what the device was designed for.
And honestly, the original intention is good. Current riot control measures can damage and injure protestors. This is supposed to replace that with a more "humane" method. The problem is that the system seems to have some problems of its own, and although the military claims otherwise, would you expect anything else? ^_^
they've used this in Miami (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:they've used this in Miami (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Coming to America (Score:1, Interesting)
It will probably take the US a whole lot longer.
Pain Beam vs. Rubber Bullets and Tear Gas (Score:2, Interesting)
Also, I am very much in favor of considering the use of nonlethal weaponry for regular forces. Every war we fight is tragic and horrible, but every war we fight is more humane than the previous. I consider myself a pacifist, and until we have evolved to rid ourselves of violent ideologies, the development of nonlethal weaponry is worthy and admirable. If we can corral our opponents without maiming and shredding their bodies to pieces, I think we're improving the human condition.
The government that controls the weapons may be democratic or totalitarian, but I argue that the weapon ownership is a different discussion since most governments have automatic weapons, rockets, and bombs and can currently opress their citizens using equal methods.
Re:Why is it ... (Score:2, Interesting)
everything's back to front now (Score:4, Interesting)
Too many people protesting outside parliament? Don't find out why they're so angry, just make it illegal for anyone to protest, peacefully or otherwise, within 1km of parliament.
Too many corrupt middle-eastern regimes? Don't try to help get rid of the corruption, just invade one and hope for the best!
Too many terrorist attacks? Don't try to figure out why so many people are willing to die to hurt you, just find a convenient country to blame and invade it!
Too many underage criminals active at night? Make it illegal for *any* children to be on the streets at night, whether they're doing anything wrong or not.
Too many riots and violent protests? Don't worry about it, just develop new and ever more sophisticated ways of punishing those who take part, or even those who are in the same place at the same time.
What's next? Too many people thinking Bad Things? Don't worry...
The whole mindset of the people in control at the moment is skewed - they're not solving problems, they're just hiding symptoms (or, increasingly, brutally suppressing them).
Re:Little Waves in an Ocean of Hate (Score:5, Interesting)
Think about the Republican Eisenhower/Nixon plan for the liberation of Communist Cuba, AKA the Bay of Pigs Fiasco that "failed" because Democrat JFK wouldn't furnish "air support". The Republicans have made use of Cuban-American expatriates in covert operations ever since that time, including terrorist bombings and air piracy against Cuban civilian aircraft. They played a part in repeated attempts to assassinate Castro, which may have been a direct cause of JFK's death. The Cuban-Americans were also part of the CREEP "team" that buglarized the Watergate offices of the DNC. They were called upon again as part of the "tiger teams" that got directly involved in the war against the Sandanistas. And it was a Cuban-American on the IT staff of the Senate Republicans that "broke into" the Senate Democrats' fileservers, and then released damaging emails and "position papers" to the press in 2002.
So, it really is all the same players, and with similar but updated playbooks, but the same dirty tricks. With brother Jeb Bush as the governator of Florida , is it any wonder that President George Bush has promised amnesty and SS benefits to illegal aliens who have increasingly flooded across our still unsecured after 9/11/2001 southern border. The Cuban-Americans have proven to be capable and willing covert partners of neo-Con(artist) Republicans. No doubt Dubya&Co. expect similar support from the illegal Mexicans.
Nice thought (Score:4, Interesting)
Isn't it nice we have all these backward countries to test our toys with and send our kids to to teach them some geography?
Re:Why bother? You wouldn't understand. (Score:0, Interesting)
Re:Coming to America (Score:5, Interesting)
This isn't a counter-argument to either you or the next comment up, merely an observation of a rally I was in several years ago.
It was a rally for the decriminalization (sp?) of cannabis.
We sang songs, smoked dope (quite illegaly) with a couple of coppers on the job watching us, and generally just annoyed people by holding up traffic and chanting corny slogans.
The few people I noticed who did try to get everyone all fired up and bloodthirsty got one of two things - the first few were, very inconspicuously, beaten up by a couple of the bigger, "gentle giants" in the crowd, and the other wankers were shoved straight into the arms of the police, who arrested the dickheads for "assaulting an officer", with a wink and a smile from the rest of us.
We'd decided on having a peaceful rally, with some civil (polite too) disobedience by our pot smoking, and we'd kept that peace through some subtly violent methods. There was no damage to property, nor people who weren't being morons.
We were Brisbanites, quietly, seriously, exercising our possible - still dunno if there's anything in the books that says we're entitled to it - right to peacefully assemble and express our displeasure at the government, and that's what we did, and because we were civil-minded, peaceful folk, we beat mary-hell out of the dumb fucks that tried to ruin it for us and then we handed them over to the police while wearing big, doped smiles.
It was a pleasant day.
Re:Why is it ... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Coming to America (Score:2, Interesting)
The whole Weimar system was something that the Nazis were against because it weakened Germany's position in the world - and this is exactly the reason that the Weimar system was put in place in Germany after the first world war.
It's disgusting that the Nazis should have come to power, but you don't understand anything about the genus of the war unless you grasp the notion that the Nazis used democracy against itself to kill it in Nazi Germany. They competed in the elections to win on an anti-democratic platform. One way of reading their reasoning is that if the anti-democrats can win a democratic election then democracy is flawed and they can overthrow the representative system.
Another unrelated point: I think it completely demeans the Holocaust to misrepresent it whether in fact, in magnitude or in perception. As far as I remember the figure for the victims of Jewish persecution was 6 million. The figure quoted before by a parent post was for victims of all categories of religious or ethnic murder, and that apparently was 11+ million. That's quite a big leap after someone factors in the deaths of Muslim, Negro, gypsy, Romany, Slavic and other peoples who were slaughtered because of their difference from the racial purity of the Nazi effort, or because they were lame or infirm. And that's still an inaccuracy if you use the creative accounting practice of keeping the ticker going after the second World War and counting the deaths of all Jews in Europe since that war ended.
I feel compelled to complain about this use of figures because it taints the memory if the memory is misrepresented, as much as, and in the same way that, Israel's actions against Switzerland tarnished the memory of Jewish suffering during and after World War Two by effectively conning Switzerland out of a huge amount of money, and using the Jewish suffering as the lever for the con.
Re:The answer is: TINFOIL! (Score:5, Interesting)
All the outside special effects, sparks and lightning, just make the demonstrators look like they have been attaced by The Dark Lord of Sith (tm). Great way to get prime time TV-coverage for the cause.
Re:Wow this is stupid (Score:2, Interesting)
Be alert, the world needs more lerts
Re:Coming to America (Score:5, Interesting)
Because shotguns can't be used by one or two people against tens of thousands.
Because shotguns aren't (usually) used to deny large crowds their fundamental right to assemble in peaceful process.
Because shotguns weren't developed for crowd 'control'.
Because before George "Fucking Haliburton" Walker Bush there were no "Free Speech Zones", and hence no "No-free-speech zones".
Media turning a blind eye to protests/abuse (Score:2, Interesting)
Maybe the "active denial" microwave gun will be used on protesters. It's hard to guess because there has been so damn little coverage of protests. So without it's hard to gauge what's going on elsewhere.
Recently, there were major protests [proinnova.org] at Spanish universities, including faculty, against sw patents. No coverage.
The other year, there were hundreds if not thousands of protests against the war in Iraq going on around Europe. Many had record turnout. Almost no coverage of them in Europe after the first few, no coverage in the US.
Or take the WTO protests in both Europe and the US. Very, very little coverage. In the US, the coverage only extended to the small number of violent protesters, not the topic of the protest nor the days of peaceful manifestation.
Or take coverage of May Day protests. Very little coverage, if any. One BBC report cover it, but used one sentence to say how peaceful they all were and then used the rest of the report to say how hard it was to track down an unruly protest whilst playing the sounds of violence and breaking glass in the background. That's not news anymore that's spin, almost as good as Faux News or CNN.
Re:The answer is: TINFOIL! (Score:4, Interesting)
So, this countermeasure would require an extra-ordinary measure of dedication on the part of the activist. It converts "a gun that causes momentary (but severe) pain, but leaves no trace" into "a gun that leaves causes lasting pain, along with burns".
So, best wear some sort of heat protection underneath your tinfoil suit.
Re:Coming to America (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Health implications (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Media turning a blind eye to protests/abuse (Score:3, Interesting)
But mass public demonstrations haven't done anything but confirm the complacent expectations of every ideology, for at least a generation. They used to work, because 10,000 people dropping everything to march in the streets was so unusual, that the rest of the people knew they were serious. That some exceptionally bad thing must have happened to galvanize such exceptionally collective response. But now we're used to it, people believe that "professional protesters" need conflict to keep their careers.
What really can work now is, again, to use the telecom infrastructure to really affect "regular people". A few demonstration organizers can collect phone#s by Bluetooth as people show up at distributed, even changing, locations. They send talking point messages via Bluetooth to everyone who shows up, along with a map of a section of town to cover. Then everyone goes door to door, canvassing a block or so, fanning out simultaneously to cover a whole town. They don't even have to get the talking points right. Just talking at all to their neighbors will have the effect of bringing people together, destroying the alienation that works for the fascists every day. If some of them are also videoblogging people getting "radicalized" when they get a neighbor at their door, letting them know what's happening downtown, the effects get globalized.
If I were an active demonstrator, or an organizer, I'd be working this technique every month. We're already familiar with the basic operation, from flash mobs. Now it's time for smart mobs to mobilize the rest of the population. We have to raise the ante, and use more of our freedoms, to take P2P politics above the centralized efficiency of the fascist corporate government. Once we do, they can't fight the power of a people armed with as sophisticated communications as the fascists have.
Re:Coming to America (Score:2, Interesting)
A few years back here in Seattle, during the WTO riots/protests we had, police stationed "paintball snipers" at various points whose job it was to mark troublemakers with paint, which could then be picked out of the confusion for arrest. It arguably prevented more escalation from taking place.
It also sounded like the closest thing to a real guilt-free first person shooter you could get, "Hippie Tagging, 3D"
tech always used for other than intended purposes. (Score:2, Interesting)
For those who think this device's use will somehow be limited to rioters, I want you to look up Victoria Snelgrove [answers.com]
She was killed by non-lethal technology (second hand shot from a pepperball gun to the temple) less than one year ago.
Technology always gets used for things other than what it was intended for. From people scratching on turntables, to aircraft, to video game music, to internet over cable, etc.
Those who suggested the emergence of "acceptable casualty rates" have the most foresight. That being said, this thing is pretty powerful. I wouldn't cry chicken little about it yet. The government doesn't get that scary that quickly. However, this is the kind of thing where we really ought to recognize that we can create any kind of technology we want to. Is this "heat ray" what we really want? What if we could instead, say, transport prepared food in minutes between here and other countries? You could feast on different food every night from around the world!
Probably one of the scarier things about this is it looks easy to build. Just a high-powered oscillator and Fresnel antenna (look closely at the pics). Now that the US has put the idea out there, I can imagine all kinds of people making their own...and forgetting to ask people to take off their glasses and remove their keys and pocket change and turn it off after five seconds.
And for those who might say 65 GHz oscillators are difficult, I thought they were too, until I just looked [st-andrews.ac.uk] them [adtest.co.za] up [ntecusa.com] and found [mcm-inc.net] parts.
Remember, it feels like heat, because it IS heat.
And finally: "After her death [ogrish.com] , Boston Red Sox outfielder Trot Nixon said he would have traded back Game 7 Of The 2004 ALCS to have her back."
2006? (Score:3, Interesting)
Never have I been less proud to be an American (well, maybe during the last two elections)
Re:Health Risks (Score:3, Interesting)
Problem solved, right?
Or, if you have health problems that put you at additional risk, leave the rioting to others.
m-
Re:This reaction surprises me (Score:3, Interesting)
There are two caveats.
Looking at the posts, I'm getting the sense that most of folks are more worried about civilian crowds here in the US, and what something like this would do to a group of peaceful protesters that the police or National Guard have been ordered to disperse. As a commander, you surely remember the incident at Kent State, where lethal force was used against a crowd of students. Giving local authorities this kind of "non-lethal" weapon does not give any citizen in the US a warm fuzzy about our right to assemble peaceably.
The second point concerns the US appearance before the world. This weapon, in the hands of uncontrolled troops, could conceivable save the lives of soldiers at the cost of indiscriminately killing the civilians. Given that our military (Well, the Army, anyways) has already admitted losing control of their troops at Abu Gareb, it's not that much of a stretch to see any new "area of effect" weapon being misused at some point. Heck, it's hard enough to get the job done in the best of circumstances, so please forgive us if we show some wariness when a new technology is announced that will provide a "shortcut" for troops.
As I said, any new weapon that gives US troops more options in the field should be considered. Please remember however, that there are plenty of video clips floating about that show some US troops to be less than responsible- not every grunt is in the Corps and can be expected to have Marine discipline, but every US troop on the ground still represents the entire country, and some of them are not demonstrating the professionalism we hope to see, even under averse conditions.
Don't think that the average slashdot user wants to see anyone killed, but posters do have higher awareness of the potential side effects of new technology. In some respects, whatever is said here on /. won't matter at all. If the new weapon is made available for you guys, the military will use it or not, as the situation dictates. You'll modify how it gets used according to your experiences with it in combat, and if it makes a difference, it will keep being used. Nothing anyone here says will make a difference in that.
The bottom line is this: As long as the Marine Corps, and the rest of the military remember that they represent all of the U.S. in their actions, we will cut you guys more than enough slack to get the job done. Semper Fi.
Re:This reaction surprises me (Score:3, Interesting)
What you describe, unfortunately, is exactly reflective of most (sensible) peoles' concerns over this weapon. I can definitely see the utility in an anti-insurgency operation. Not sure where the snipers are? Microwave 'em. In a few moments you'll have a pack of screaming guys rolling on the floor (and maybe one will have the solenoids of his improvised explosive device cook off -- sucks to be him) who, a few moments ago, were trying to kill you. Round them up and lock them away and they better be damn grateful that they're still alive, if a bit cooked. (The actions of certain members of the Abu Gharib staff notwithstanding, I consider most all of the military personnel over there to be reasonably compassionate people at heart who would rather incapacitate their enemy than kill outright.)
Unfortunately, this weapon is not being billed as an anti-insurgency weapon (though it will doubtless be used as one.) It is being developed to counter riots and rowdy protests (before they turn into riots.) This is what has most posters here up in arms. it isn't about the potential military/anti-insurgency used of this weapon; it's about the eventual domestic use of it on protesters. To many people, it's just a few steps between using this... and tanks rolling in Tianmien Square.
Think that kind of response to protests can't happen in the US? Well... it can happen, period (it DID happen) and thus it CAN happen, even here. I like to think that the citizens of the US are proud enough that they won't let it ever get to that point, but that faith is being eroded away bit by bit. Things liek this ray-gun, which are intended to be used domestically, are part of that erosion.
If it will help you do your job on the ground better, and help to bring home our troops, and allow you to continue to perform your jobs honorably, I'm totally for it. But as I said, this is being developed for use domestically. that same device that saved your platoon, sitting atop the cupola of an Hummer... will be on the turret of a riot control truck attached to your local police department when you get home.
Can you really see the bad guys? (Score:3, Interesting)
Another use for the microwave beam might be to disrupt IEDs. Useful - you could zap a guy and if he's a suicide bomber he blows up, if he's not he just gets a headache.
Re: Coming to America (Score:2, Interesting)
Do you know why we hold America to a higher standard? Because what America does IS IN OUR NAME.
What the USSR did WAS NOT IN MY NAME.
What France does IS NOT IN MY NAME.
I am an AMERICAN and goddamn it this country should start acting like the paragon of liberty, virtue and justice that our mythical history books claim it is.
NOT IN MY NAME. NOT NOW. NOT EVER.
Re:Coming to America (Score:3, Interesting)
There are two types of native Hawaiian people, the peaceful shorter, darker skinned folks who lived there prior to 800 AD, and the taller, lighter skinned Polynesians who conquered the islands around that time. The legends of "menehuna" or little people refer to these original inhabitants or more likely their gods, much like the Tu'atha de Danann of the Celts became fairies and elves to later conquerors.
The Polynesian descended Hawaiians were certainly a sovereign nation, but let's not put them on a pedestal. They were a feudalistic hereditary aristocracy where the serfs had very few rights. They were very warlike, with local warlords from the various islands launching frequent raids on their neighbors until the outright conquest of all the islands by King Kamehameha with the help of his white allies and their cannons.
As a footnote, there are basically three pacific cultures, the warlike feudal Polynesians, the clan based Micronesians, and the merit based Melanesians. Polynesians were the Vikings of the Pacific, when youger sons of landed nobles didn't inherit land, the would frequently pack up a bunch of plants, animals and warriors in a double hulled sailing ship of up to 100 feet in length and go of to find some uninhabited or easily conquered island to settle. The Micronesians are matrilineal , clan based and peaceful. The Melanesians are merit based as I said, meaning the leaders are whoever is the best at a particular thing. Likely the original Hawaiians were Micronesian, or possibly Melanesian though the Melansian Islands are much further away than either the Polynesian or Micronesian Islands.
Re:This reaction surprises me (Score:2, Interesting)
You're in an all-volunteer army invading a country that has done us no wrong and wasn't a threat to us or their neighbors. Congress hasn't even declared a war (authorizations of force are not declarations of war and actions this long aren't covered by the war powers act), Article 51 can't begin to cover the case for invasion and it completely flies in the face of just-war theory on the reciprocity princlple alone. When you, as a volunteer soldier, kill somebody in a war that has no legal basis, then you are a murderer by definition. Nobody has forced you into the marines, you're resonsible for your own actions. You don't have to join the marines, therefore you don't have to kill. There wasn't a gun to your head until you decided to put it there. It's that simple. What d'ya think you were gonna do when you signed up, bake cookies and rap about Jesus? And saying our leaders lied about Iraq is not an excuse since the lies were unbelievable right from the start. Nobody was duped unless they wanted to be.