The system in question is basically just a directed microwave emitter. It is designed to heat up the first ~0.5mm of your skin.
It's safety is basically completely a function of the operator. Since the beam will keep depositing energy (ie heating), if the beam is held on a target, it will incur more and more heating (and potentially harm).
In proper usage, safety is ensured through the combination of operator training, selection of proper settings, and induced compliance. If you have a shitty operator, risk of over exposure increases. The nature of this device means that it's not a barrier, it's a beam.
During earlier testing, they were able to induce second degree burns on a test subject due to incorrect power and duration settings.
for certain types of tools (and I'd certainly class weapons as this type) you have to assume that a certain number of operators will be, as you put it, "shitty". Whether it's because they're having a bad day, are genuinely incompetent, are malicious, whatever the reason---some percentage of the operators will be using your tool in a way you'd discourage for PR reasons.
Maybe I am too cynical, but I don't think the people making these tools actually care about this either, not beyond the potential for bad publicity.
There's also the escalation timeline. In a hypothetical situation where nonlethal force is being used, but there's a threat that requires more than a gentle "please don't" type of heating, I don't think we'd want it to be limited. Gentle crowd suppression is great till someone pulls out a gun or knife, and though it's debatable opinion and there are a lot of factors to consider, I think a few collateral 2nd degree burns beats switching to a rifle and opening fire into the crowd.
Most people fleeing across the border have braved significantly worse, this is just another way to harm people we see as lesser for the accident of where they were born.
Every individual has their own risk tradeoff calculation. People already risk death to cross the border, so it's not clear how much this would move the needle.
Why do you ask? If it was the lowest figure you mentioned, or halfway between the lowest and highest, would one of those make it better?
Is the argument that this new tech will only kill n people on top of those that already die, so whether we fry less than 1% or a far higher figure, that one of those is better?
Focusing on the specific death rate doesn't change that crossing the border is risky, and some people will take their chances with or without the heat ray. It's one more variable in the calculation.
Oh goody. Let's give cops another toy before we have tamed the use of pain compliance tools already in their hands. We are breeding a class of casual torturers.
The Business Plot people who want to tear down the United States, the rebel faction trying to destroy democracy and the nation from within has really figured out how to keep driving fear and conspiracy into our hearts (the less mind the better). They're just such amazing aggitants, able to make people so willing and ready to throw this whole nation in the wood chipper.
I wish we could identify, grapple with how bad what a terror America has become against itself. Against its history. Against in so many cases reality. There doesn't seem to be any regulating functions in red America, anything other than ever increasing war drums against democracy, against union, again the constitution, the declaration of rights, reason, kindness, and possibility. To make itself the foe of the nation has been the only thing this political faction has been able to lead by, and we are so far past the unhinging, never to come back seemingly, never to be able to have any learning moments, never to recognize a loyal opposition again, never to compromise. Just shrill shrieking bedlam and din forever.
So if I can't keep my eyes closed (because of a riot situation, or friends in trouble) am I risking permanent eye damage, with no government responsibility for it, because some cop shouted something into a bullhorn that I couldn't make out ?
The device works through line of sight, so blocking line of sight from the emitter to your open eyes (for example, by looking away and shielding with your arms) may be helpful.
Testing indicates that test subjects reached their pain threshold in ~5 seconds (typically reacting within 3). Proper application of this device in a riot situation likely involves pulsed application, at sufficient standoff range (between targets and a barrier or your riot police/troops), precisely to reduce the risk of operators feeling that they need to dwell, with the standoff range providing enough buffer to allow operators to feel like they can illuminate, wait for initial reaction, shut off, and then read the full reaction.
In your general scenario, you can replace this weapon with any other riot control tool, and get basically the same shitty situation. Once the government/police/whatever have decided that you are in a riot/mob, then you're not going to be treated as an individual, you're going to be treated as an element of a threat. This is true of dudes with shields and batons, beanbags, water cannons, tear gas, horses, whatever.
> It is designed to heat up the first ~0.5mm of your skin.
Oh, is that all?
> US officials had also considered deploying the system during moments of domestic unrest, including at the end of President Donald Trump’s first term when protests erupted over the murder of George Floyd, according to a former US official familiar with those discussions.
This is for "the border" (because you know we should be able to torture people there), but really this will imperial boomerang back to US citizens in the blink of an eye.
And that's exactly the problem. We (and users) have known for decades that you can kill someone with a rubber bullet. And they have been used to intentionally kill on many different occasions.
Rubber bullets are supposed to be aimed at the ground, but we've seen (pun sadly intended) plenty of officers aiming at faces/eyes of protestors. This can kill, and if it doesn't kill it maims.
They're trained to not maim or kill. More training won't fix it. More money and more resources won't fix that systemic rot.
There's no way I'd trust this in the hands of anyone, especially those operating in the service of the current administration. They say they want to use it to "protect the border" but there are reports that they'd used it domestically already.
Considering the non-tolerance of public protest and the "promise" of non-lethality, I could imagine this becoming a regular tool in population control if things don't change.
It's my understanding that this tool is for crowd control and area denial. While I can understand how this may useful along the border in fantasy, it appears to be literal atomic flyswatter to unreal problem.
DHS was founded in 2003, as was ICE. The country got along for 227 years without these organizations, they aren't some bedrock thing from time immemorial.
Recognizing that the current structure and mode of operation of these organizations is problematic and leading to bad outcomes also doesn't mean flipping to fully open borders with zero law enforcement as some imply every time this is brought up.
The biggest false flag of all time, which led directly to the fascist policies we're talking about and the death of millions of innocent people in the Middle East? I wonder who benefited from that huh?
DHS is brand new, has caused horror and terror, and soaked up tons of funding that could go to literally anything else.
It doesn't need to exist. Keep the customs checks, keep the border crossing folks. Keep port inspections. Run ourselves like a normal country and like we did for hundreds of years.
Re 2: There’s so many gov agencies with overlapping responsibilities that I’m actually surprised you ask this. You can totally close a number of them and still have a functioning government on paper. Reality might turn out different.
As per your second question, I have no answer. Dems are so dysfunctional it’s beyond parody.
My sweet summer child. You know how LRADs are deployed against US civilians? You know how chemical munitions are deployed against US civilians? (Specifically munitions that are considered illegal to deploy in war, but are apparently acceptable to deploy by police?) How flashbang grenades launched from handheld launchers are deployed against US civilians? How about the military personnel carriers and MRAPs?
You think those didn't start as restricted to some theater of war?
Go read up on the 1033 program. Or the DHS Grant Program, the Justice Assistance Grant program, or the 1122 program.
Wasn't there a relatively high-profile case of a journalist dying of "nothing" after whistleblowing recently? I only remember that a directed energy weapon was one of the proposed methods of their assasination.
just a hop step and jump to being used on (completely legal) protestors
there are already several recorded incidents of LRADs being used on crowds which do permanent damage but invisible so very handy for authoritarian governments
> The heat ray, officially known as the Active Denial System, is a nonlethal weapon that shoots an invisible beam of electromagnetic waves that can reach a little more than half a mile away, according to the US military.
Stun gun and electro shocks are also advertised as non-lethal. But the name is wrong; it should be called less-lethal at best.
the actual problem is that the 'pentagon' has zero authority to grant some jumped upp 3 letter agency the go ahead to test what is basicly an electronic flame thrower on civilian refugees, you know ,scared, hungry, tired, women carrying infants with absolutly no idea what is happening to them, and this by an organisation with a solid record of publicly executing american citizens and walking away saying 'fucking bitch'
put the pieces on one page and it looks full on gestapo high tech kill squad times.
It's safety is basically completely a function of the operator. Since the beam will keep depositing energy (ie heating), if the beam is held on a target, it will incur more and more heating (and potentially harm).
In proper usage, safety is ensured through the combination of operator training, selection of proper settings, and induced compliance. If you have a shitty operator, risk of over exposure increases. The nature of this device means that it's not a barrier, it's a beam.
During earlier testing, they were able to induce second degree burns on a test subject due to incorrect power and duration settings.
Maybe I am too cynical, but I don't think the people making these tools actually care about this either, not beyond the potential for bad publicity.
At what percentage would you say? 1%, 3%, 87%?
Does the country they are fleeing have no culpability? Why are they leaving?
> Does the country they are fleeing have no culpability?
The US definitely has some culpability for making other places harder to live in.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r...
> Why are they leaving?
They're not doing it just for funsies.
> At what percentage would you say?
Why do you ask? If it was the lowest figure you mentioned, or halfway between the lowest and highest, would one of those make it better?
Is the argument that this new tech will only kill n people on top of those that already die, so whether we fry less than 1% or a far higher figure, that one of those is better?
Wikipedia is available if specific mortality rates matter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migrant_deaths_along_the_Mexic...
I expect a lot of severely traumatized people from this device
So what happens when it's shot at someone's eyes?
Be happy you are just blind for the rest of your life.
Such a shitty government you have today in the USA, it boggles the mind.
I wish we could identify, grapple with how bad what a terror America has become against itself. Against its history. Against in so many cases reality. There doesn't seem to be any regulating functions in red America, anything other than ever increasing war drums against democracy, against union, again the constitution, the declaration of rights, reason, kindness, and possibility. To make itself the foe of the nation has been the only thing this political faction has been able to lead by, and we are so far past the unhinging, never to come back seemingly, never to be able to have any learning moments, never to recognize a loyal opposition again, never to compromise. Just shrill shrieking bedlam and din forever.
The device works through line of sight, so blocking line of sight from the emitter to your open eyes (for example, by looking away and shielding with your arms) may be helpful.
Testing indicates that test subjects reached their pain threshold in ~5 seconds (typically reacting within 3). Proper application of this device in a riot situation likely involves pulsed application, at sufficient standoff range (between targets and a barrier or your riot police/troops), precisely to reduce the risk of operators feeling that they need to dwell, with the standoff range providing enough buffer to allow operators to feel like they can illuminate, wait for initial reaction, shut off, and then read the full reaction.
In your general scenario, you can replace this weapon with any other riot control tool, and get basically the same shitty situation. Once the government/police/whatever have decided that you are in a riot/mob, then you're not going to be treated as an individual, you're going to be treated as an element of a threat. This is true of dudes with shields and batons, beanbags, water cannons, tear gas, horses, whatever.
Oh, is that all?
> US officials had also considered deploying the system during moments of domestic unrest, including at the end of President Donald Trump’s first term when protests erupted over the murder of George Floyd, according to a former US official familiar with those discussions.
This is for "the border" (because you know we should be able to torture people there), but really this will imperial boomerang back to US citizens in the blink of an eye.
They're trained to not maim or kill. More training won't fix it. More money and more resources won't fix that systemic rot.
40%, after all.
Considering the non-tolerance of public protest and the "promise" of non-lethality, I could imagine this becoming a regular tool in population control if things don't change.
Good thing border control isn't full of rejects and nonhackers from the military and real law enforcement \s
Well, we are talking about US border patrol folks. Trust me, they are the nicest guys around /s.
First the border, I don't see why they would stop there with the tech
Recognizing that the current structure and mode of operation of these organizations is problematic and leading to bad outcomes also doesn't mean flipping to fully open borders with zero law enforcement as some imply every time this is brought up.
Almost like something happened shortly before then that caused a seismic shift in our national security posture…
It doesn't need to exist. Keep the customs checks, keep the border crossing folks. Keep port inspections. Run ourselves like a normal country and like we did for hundreds of years.
Shit is just reactionary nonsense after 9-11.
As per your second question, I have no answer. Dems are so dysfunctional it’s beyond parody.
You think those didn't start as restricted to some theater of war?
Go read up on the 1033 program. Or the DHS Grant Program, the Justice Assistance Grant program, or the 1122 program.
there are already several recorded incidents of LRADs being used on crowds which do permanent damage but invisible so very handy for authoritarian governments
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmK-KZOiT-c
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-range_acoustic_device
Stun gun and electro shocks are also advertised as non-lethal. But the name is wrong; it should be called less-lethal at best.
edit: okay, first reaction, obviously not contributing to any conversation. This is barbaric and if I paid US taxes I'd be writing my government.
The lobby is louder.