Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

China Buying US Directed Sound 'Weapon'

Posted by samzenpus on Wednesday May 14, @07:48PM
from the people's-sound-cannon dept.
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."

Related Stories

[+] Directed Sound 251 comments
yawningyellowyak writes "Technology Review has an interesting article on directed sound. Ultrasonic 'sound' is sent out from a 'speaker' and the distortion encountered on hitting the air produces hearable sound, but only in certain spots. You could be standing right next to someone and they would hear nothing. One step closer to the cone of silence!"
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • by somersault (912633) on Wednesday May 14, @07:51PM (#23411840) Homepage Journal
    the Chinese have stolen Country and Western!
  • by QuantumG (50515) * <qg@biodome.org> on Wednesday May 14, @07:52PM (#23411854) Homepage Journal
    While stocks last.

  • by joggle (594025) on Wednesday May 14, @07:58PM (#23411948) Homepage Journal
    I don't know if it's such a bad thing to provide China with safe crowd control devices. If China wants some form of crowd control they will use whatever they have, including deadly force (such as back in Tienanmen Square).

    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.
    • by Red Flayer (890720) on Wednesday May 14, @08:22PM (#23412186) Journal

      However, China is not Burma and by and large the population is content with their government.
      Without getting into a big discussion about the philosophy of government, I just want to point out that China has a long cultural history of obedience to authority. My understanding is that the common perception is that there is nothing to be done about government, so the best thing to do is to either bend it to your needs (via bribe, etc) or just accept it as an immoveable constraint.

      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.
    • by soren100 (63191) on Wednesday May 14, @09:14PM (#23412644)

      I don't know if it's such a bad thing to provide China with safe crowd control devices
      It depends on what you all "safe". These weapons sound like the dream of a totalitarian state. For example, all they have to do for a truly vicious weapon is to turn up the volume on the sound weapon, instantly rendering the victims totally and permanently deaf. Then you have no gory pictures to upset anyone with, and you render the victims pretty much incapable of organizing and protesting for quite a while.

      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.

      However, China is not Burma and by and large the population is content with their government.
      China has a very effective ability to stifle dissent -- Tiananmen square is an excellent example. How are you going to know if anyone is unhappy if everyone is too scared to say anything? When you surf the internet in China they love to have little animated policemen popping up on your screen to remind you that you are being watched. People are scared enough there already of doing the wrong thing -- imagine what would happen if deaf people started showing up as not-so-subtle reminders of what happens to people who complain?

      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?
  • Did anyone else read the headline as China is buying Sound Weapons directed at the US? I felt bad for people living in California for a moment.
  • New from Ronco! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Jane Q. Public (1010737) on Wednesday May 14, @08:21PM (#23412164)
    If it's not a weapon, so that these laws do not apply... then I want one!

    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:Yes let's... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by willyhill (965620) <.pr8wak. .at. .gmail.com.> on Wednesday May 14, @07:59PM (#23411958)
      most of which have been peaceful

      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.

        • Re:Yes let's... (Score:5, Interesting)

          by willyhill (965620) <.pr8wak. .at. .gmail.com.> on Wednesday May 14, @08:34PM (#23412284)
          I very much doubt "the vast majority" are. I'm sure the ones that live in the large cities and have well-paying jobs are, but the actual vast majority of Chinese still live at or below subsistence levels. I'm also pretty sure that the members of Falun Gong and all those people that got nailed during the Tiannamen square protests would not agree with you. And let's not forget the millions who are victims of widespread corruption, the families of criminals that are executed for petty crimes, the ones that are sick because of rampant environmental problems caused by unchecked industrial growth, etc.

          The images of pretty affluent Chinese living in modern-looking cities we've come to enjoy in the Western media are not exactly indicative of what actually goes on over there. It's a big country with a billion people.

          In any case, it's illegal to express negative feelings about the glorious Communist Party or its leaders, so I'm not sure who you've been talking to over there. Just about every Chinese I've ever met here in the US love their country, but they've rarely had anything but negative things to say about their government, regardless of the era they happened to leave.

        • Re:Yes let's... (Score:5, Interesting)

          by WindowlessView (703773) on Wednesday May 14, @08:55PM (#23412478)

          the vast majority of Chinese are very happy with their government at the moment

          On the other hand, it was recently reported that there were over 85,000 protests in China last year, some of them violent. That is a staggering number. I suspect these sound machines will see a lot of action.

    • by lymond01 (314120) on Wednesday May 14, @08:04PM (#23412002)
      I think anything used with intent to harm (and stunning would be "harm") is defined as a weapon under most U.S. laws. See Ms. Green in the library with the candlestick for more details.

      Not to start a slashwar, but our government has redefined many standard terms in the past 8 years, so a weapon may be classified as anything more destructive than the Death Star. Everything else is called "French Toast" and is clearly non-threatening in the greater scheme of things.
    • by Overzeetop (214511) on Wednesday May 14, @08:05PM (#23412024) Journal
      I'd say if it has the ability to disable a person (even temporarily) or cause significant/severe discomfort at the press of a button, it could be a weapon. Tasers, rubber bullets, and tear gas don't kill (many) people either.

      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.
    • by UncleTogie (1004853) * on Wednesday May 14, @08:20PM (#23412156) Homepage Journal

      I say sell Beijing whatever it wants, and quit caring about how Asians handle internal affairs.

      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.

      We have no duty to sacrifice for others, and our own prosperity should be our first consideration.

      If humans are to survive as a species, we'd better start thinking of others...

        • by LeafOnTheWind (1066228) on Thursday May 15, @12:24AM (#23414028)

          World War 1 - The upper-class of Europe gets a bit excitable and millions of people die, although in the long run (after WW2) it effectively removed the European upper-class from power which is a good thing. It had nothing to do with economics whatsoever.
          This is wildly inaccurate - I do not know where you gathered your knowledge of history, but it is sorely lacking. WWI was a product of a slew of different things, specifically, an escalating arms race between Britain and Germany, a shadowed and complicated alliance system, the overactive nationalism in Europe, and (of course) ethnic tensions. In fact, the backing of Austria-Hungary could be blamed largely on the international relations before the war. Germany was a new country, just united from its individual states, with no empire and practically no supporters in Europe. It's biggest supporter, economically and politically, was Austria-Hungary. When war came between Austria-Hungary and the Triple Entente, Germany had little choice but to give a blank check - its only significant partner in Europe was in dire straits. I won't extrapolate as I'd rather not write a 10 page paper on Slashdot, but there's an economic precursor for you.
      • The problem is, it takes a lot more justification to fire a bullet than it does to use one of these.

        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.
    • Non-lethal? (Score:5, Informative)

      by celtic_hackr (579828) on Wednesday May 14, @09:31PM (#23412760)
      Your incredulous attitude is troubling.

      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.
      • Re:Non-lethal? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Fishead (658061) on Wednesday May 14, @11:32PM (#23413738)
        The LRAD (Long Range Acoustic Device) that I assume they are talking about is far from lethal. Loud? Yes. Annoying? Oh yeah. Kickass speaker for AC/DC Thunderstruck? Yeaaahhhh!!!

        I had the pleasure of playing with one of these in a previous job, and the pain of having it turned up too high while I was in front of it. The LRAD is good for causing extreme discomfort, and disorienting a large crowd of people, and though it may cause permanent hearing damage if abused, I can't see it killing anyone.
        • by Txiasaeia (581598) on Thursday May 15, @12:58AM (#23414210)
          Ah, that's because they didn't turn it up to 11.
        • by Jesus_666 (702802) on Thursday May 15, @05:29AM (#23415370)
          Unless of course you turn it to the untested highest setting, which releases a bouncing sonic blast that destroys one building and causes another to partially collapse on top of a marine whose legs are smashed, causing her to team up with another marine who likes to wear a goofy selfmade iron suit and wave around a big hammer. The two of them will then operate out of a junkyard to foil your sceme of selling the sonic weapon to some Nazis nd Ché Guevara.

          That's really what happens. I recently saw a documentary about this on TV.
      • Re:Non-lethal? (Score:5, Informative)

        by LynnwoodRooster (966895) on Thursday May 15, @03:08AM (#23414734) Journal
        How this got modded "informative" is anyone's guess...

        160 dB CANNOT kill. It can rupture your eardrums, but not kill. See, sound is measured in dB SPL - deciBels of Sound Pressure Level. The reference is 0 dB = 20 uPa (micropascals) of pressure.

        Do some math, and you'll find out that 194 dB SPL is one atmosphere of pressure. Meaning that 160 dB SPL is about 1/1000th of an atmosphere. You experience more pressure by swimming 0.5 meters under the surface of the water.

        160 dB CANNOT kill. Pressures - sounds - of 194 dB cannot kill (that's the pressure level of the NASA sonic test weapons). That's 10 meters under water, one extra atmosphere, and harmlessly encountered on a daily basis by millions of divers.

        And for the record, yes I am an acoustician, and yes I have worked on sonic weapons.

        • by dotancohen (1015143) on Thursday May 15, @04:37AM (#23415152) Homepage

          Do some math, and you'll find out that 194 dB SPL is one atmosphere of pressure. Meaning that 160 dB SPL is about 1/1000th of an atmosphere. You experience more pressure by swimming 0.5 meters under the surface of the water.
          And if you stay at 0.5 meters under the surface of the water long enough, you die. Point?
      • by ahabswhale (1189519) on Wednesday May 14, @10:56PM (#23413478)
        wtf are you talking about?? There's a huge difference between the military and the police in the US. For starters, I never even see the fucking military except on TV. Secondly, the military is not allowed to engage civilians unless they are the National Guard and they are ordered by the Governor of the state to do so which is extremely rare. The military also don't give a flying fuck whether you're speeding down the highway, ripping off the grocery store, or having sex with animals.

        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.