China Buying US Directed Sound 'Weapon' 350
holy_calamity writes "The directed sound weapon made by US company ATC is being exported to the Chinese police, despite the public law banning sales of weapons to China. Turns out that such 'non-lethal' technologies are not covered by this law — an omission that may become more widely known if they are used to quell high-profile protests during the Olympics."
Gotta keep them upiddy Tibetans in line. (Score:2, Insightful)
Mixed feelings on this (Score:5, Insightful)
Giving them something safe to use is probably a good idea and could save peoples' lives.
I think the counterargument would be something to the effect that the US shouldn't help a government such as China's to maintain control over its people. It's a difficult moral dilemma to be sure. However, China is not Burma and by and large the population is content with their government.
Re:Yes let's... (Score:5, Insightful)
Once they finished slaughtering the objectors it sure got quiet over there for a while, didn't it?
and completely ignore the US occupation of Iraq
You're right, I wonder what became of that whole thing? I haven't seen that come up in the media lately... oh wait.
Might as well make a buck... (Score:1, Insightful)
We don't need more adversaries than we have already, and the cultural war with Islam is a greater concern than how the Middle Kingdom deals with its subjects. We have no duty to sacrifice for others, and our own prosperity should be our first consideration. I say sell Beijing whatever it wants, and quit caring about how Asians handle internal affairs.
Re:Is it really a weapon? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's not to say it can't be used for legitimate purposes; there are just many people who just don't trust China. Honestly, there are a lot of countries who might not be trusted with such equipment. The US is not necessarily excluded from that list, but it's mostly determined by whether you approve or disapprove of the policies of the people behind the trigger.
Re:Mixed feelings on this (Score:2, Insightful)
But of coarse. (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Might as well make a buck... (Score:4, Insightful)
Sure, because their work with laser technologies [afpc.org] now have given the world weapons to use against us.
Considering their arms exporting practices, [stoparmstosudan.org] I'd rather not give them more money, thanks.
If humans are to survive as a species, we'd better start thinking of others...
New from Ronco! (Score:4, Insightful)
But really, this Chinese thing looks like a mess waiting to happen. More reason to hate / distrust the United States government... for both Americans and Chinese.
Re:Mixed feelings on this (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason I bring this up is that lack of protest is not necessarily a sign of contentment with government. And without access to specific kinds of foreign media, there is no way for the Chinese public to become aware that government is, in fact, a mutable thing.
IOW, most Chinese are content with their government because they know nothing different or because they have been indoctrinated with propaganda about their government. By the way, this applies to a lot of people all over the world, including Americans [1].
And here come the kneejerk flamebait mods. Sorry if I've offended some of the super-patriots haunting the halls of Slashdot, but we are all products of what is around us -- and being taught from age 5 that your country is the best is hard to overcome.
Re:Mixed feelings on this (Score:2, Insightful)
This isn't supposed to be a direct comparison. My point is that perspective is the only thing that seperates these situations.
Re:Gotta keep them upiddy Tibetans in line. (Score:5, Insightful)
One of these and 2 or 3 people can effectively fight a crowd of thousands. In fact there is no reason for any government NOT to use these to quell their population and keep them goose stepping in line... except for morals.
Furthermore, if a group or government is willing to use a cheap bullet in a situation they would be highly unlikely to purchase, train crews, and deploy these expensive non-lethal weapons.
While these weapons definitely have their uses, they can also easily be abused. Perhaps even more easily than lethal weapons, since there is supposedly no lasting damage done. (Unlike rubber or plastic bullets which cause moderate too severe damage, can be deadly and are inaccurate.) I expect China to get a lot of use out of their purchase from now on.
And on a final note, a lot of these weapons CAN be adjust to cause permanent damage. A lot of the R&D for these weapons was to design a targeting system to keep them from doing that. Change some settings and depending on the weapon large portions of a targeted crowd may never hear again or may never see again.
Easier for totalitarian govts, but not better (Score:5, Insightful)
The "pain ray" the US has developed is pretty well suited for a totalitarian government as well. It leaves no marks, so you could also just round up anyone at a protest and subject them to microwave beams that activate the pain nerves in the skin just enough to be able to cause agonizing pain without leaving any marks . You have the double bonus of driving your victims insane from the pain without any ugly wounds to photograph and get people upset.
Imagine the scenario of one man in a truck with a sound weapon shutting down a whole protest without any ugly pictures to shock anyone into action, with no effective recourse by the protesters. This kind of thing is the way that your typical 'nightmare dystopian science fiction movie' would become reality. Once the people are unable to complain or protest, how nice would the government have to be?
Omission? (Score:4, Insightful)
police = military (Score:3, Insightful)
An easy example of this is how law enforcement and military tradeshows are now one in the same.
I don't have all the answers (wait, this is
Re:Gotta keep them upiddy Tibetans in line. (Score:2, Insightful)
There have been a several confirmed deaths from the use of Rubber and Plastic rounds, as well as serious injuries.
So while the likely result of a properly trained solder using a rubber/plastic round is knocking someone down and making them have no wish to get back up. There significant chance of a more serious injury and a slight chance of fatality.
"stun damage" it makes it sound like "Oh, gee I can't move" when the reality is that the weapon causes so much pain that you can barely move. It is more pain then most people have ever experienced.
Paul, I currently trying to guess witch roleplaying game rule book you quoted for your post.
I am going to hell. T.T
Re:Non-lethal? (Score:4, Insightful)
So if I fired an M1 Garand rifle [wikipedia.org], which produces 168 db at a distance of 1 metre [wikipedia.org], then it would kill me instantly?
Maybe that's why the US didn't do so well in the Vietnam war.
Re:police = military (Score:5, Insightful)
Finally, the reason the sale is allowed is because it's a non-lethal weapon as explained in the OP. It's probably an oversight but not anywhere near as shocking as you make it out to be.
Re:Might as well make a buck... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Non-lethal? (Score:4, Insightful)
If it's the latter, then yeah, it's no wonder we weren't so hot. If it's the former, you've got a bigger problem than the sound wave, namely, your new ventilation shaft.
Re:New from Ronco! (Score:4, Insightful)
Are you going to tell me that you do NOT see the hypocrisy in that??
Re:Yes let's... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:police = military (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Might as well make a buck... (Score:3, Insightful)
Because... they did not want to "Give up on their imperial and economic ambitions.", therefore they were forced to "Take it [oil] from someone".
I am not justifying their actions, particularly as in the short to medium term they proved to have disastrous consequences.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor [wikipedia.org]
"The intent of the strike was to protect Imperial Japan's advance into Malaya and the Dutch East Indies -- for their natural resources such as oil and rubber - by neutralizing the U.S. Pacific Fleet."
"In 1940, under the Export Control Act, the U.S. halted shipments of airplanes, parts, machine tools, and aviation gasoline, which Japan saw as an unfriendly act.[6] Nevertheless, the U.S. continued to export oil to Japan, in part because it was understood in Washington cutting off oil exports would be an extreme step, given Japanese dependence on U.S. oil exports, likely to be taken as a provocation by Japan. In the summer of 1941, after Japanese expansion into French Indochina, the U.S. ceased oil exports to Japan, in part because of new American restrictions on domestic oil consumption."
Do you think the USA would be "forced" to do something if the oil producers they relied on refused to sell them oil?
Re:Non-lethal? (Score:3, Insightful)
The sound weapon being sold may be non-lethal, but who is to say they won't RE the device and make lethal sound weapons. Sound can kill. If you stand next to a speaker when 160db of sound comes out of it, you'll be dead. NASA uses sound to test the tiles on the shuttle, anyone caught inside that tester would be killed instantly when the sound came on.
2) because the device is fairly simple, they dont need to buy one to RE it.
Re:Might as well make a buck... (Score:1, Insightful)