Army's secret 'people zapper' plans

The Observer (U.K.) ^ | 11/03/2002 | Antony Barnett

[Korth]

The weapons as described above seem to have a strong similarity to something civilized nations have frowned upon for quite a while--torture.

Our rulers apparently don't see anything wrong with that.

[Jonathon Spectre]

Installing these zappers along our borders may be the only way to stop illegals.

Pish posh. Hook up a couple hundred M60s to motion sensors and drop them randomly along the border. Plant signs all along the border that say:

WARNING: IF YOU PROCEED YOU MAY BE SHOT TO DEATH BY ROBOT GUNS. CONTINUE AT YOUR OWN RISK. THE NEAREST LEGAL BORDER CROSSING IS X MILES THATAWAY. PLEASE TURN AROUND. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

[SauronOfMordor]

The weapons as described above seem to have a strong similarity to something civilized nations have frowned upon for quite a while--torture.

Have you seen what a human abdomen looks like after a guy's been shot in the gut with a .223 bullet?

What they're describing is something that could be used to convince somebody to go away, before you get to the point of having to shoot.

[independentmind]

Emotions aren't always a bad thing, Pardek. But I think I'll forgo the pleasure of further discussion this evening.

[Darksheare]

Does it kill thousands of people indiscriminately? No? then it isn't a WOMD.

[Darksheare]

I used to be in an artillery unit. I wonder how many of the WIMPS here would like to see what a good salvo of HE can do?
Doesn't matter if it's 105mm or 155mm. It's better to make the bad guys all nice and toasty warm and comfy in the dark. (Blind 'em and cook 'em. Trust me, it's more humane.)
If we had these weapons in actual field use, it would save alot of our soldiers lives. Bet the WIMPS haven't thought oif that one. Or do they, like the Democrats, like the thought of dead US soldiers?

I agree with ya here....

[Jeff Chandler]

In a large demographic segment of humanity (which I will not name), emotion always trumps logic.

I think I know who you're refering to. Hmmm, let me see... has this demographic segment been known to squat when they pee?

[Korth]

I've seen purported pictures of individuals hit by a microwave weapon. The skin surface looked like a piece of chicken breast left on the grill too long. Lots of black charred areas. The soldier's clothing was completely unaffected.

I can see where this weapon would facilitate the mass confiscation of firearms in the future. Gun owners are fighting against the door to door searchs for illegal guns? Just fry them with this weapon. It can be done with a clear conscience; after all, it may horribly disfigure them for life, but it is non-lethal.

[Korth]

There is a school of thought that these futuristic types of weapons are O.K. for us to use, but criminal if anyone else uses them. If some foreign country used such a weapon against American soldiers or civilians, those who are supporters of our having this type of weapon would be horrified and would demand punishment for the weapon's users.

[jedwardtremlett]

pbbbbbbt!

EMP bursts, followed by sonic weapons, are the way to go if you want to disable an enemy in a fairly non-lethal fashion. Anyone flying or operating heavy machinery when the bursts go off is toast, of course, but everyone else can lie on the ground soiling their pants and unable to move until hostilities cease.

J

[America's Resolve]

Isn't it amazing the intolerance that some people show for the use of certain weapons when people aren't going to be shooting at them, 'just' at other American citizens?

I suspect that that intolerance fades dramatically when you're the shootee instead of the one sitting back in your living room watching the war on CNN/FOX.

Godspeed

[Dan Day]

Several years ago I saw a fascinating TV show on one of the "info" cable channels (TLC, TDC, PBS, I forget which). Its topic was non-lethal weapons, both existing (e.g. pepper spray, rubber bullets, etc.) and experimental/theoretical.

One of the points the show made was very profound: It said that the good news was that with such weapons people could be deterred without having to kill them. The bad news was that since you're *not* killing them (and in some cases causing no lasting harm at all), governments would be far more willing to use them, since they wouldn't have to worry about the backlash that simply mowing down a crowd would cause.

The reason this is troubling is because it would encourage governments to use oppressive measures to "keep the peace" or simply suppress dissent whenever it arose. It's easy to picture a government developing a "if anyone causes trouble, zap 'em until they quiet down" policy. It makes the slippery slope towards a police state and/or dictatorship that much steeper and more slippery.

[Diddle E. Squat]

Army's secret 'people zapper' plans

I believe the admin moderators are already employing such a weapon:

[JusticeLives]

"Have you considered the possibility that this weapon may be used to repel an enemy without permanently injuring him? That it could, in fact, end up being more humane than current weaponry?"

Yes, one can consider that, but these non-lethal weapons are technologies for political control. You might be interested in the following article. Yes, it was prepared by the Scientific and Technological Options Assessments for European Parliament, but it also includes what the U.S. has come up with as far as torture weapons and who makes them here. Names names, IOW. BTW, these weapons are not in the planning stage, many are in use as we speak.

[JusticeLives]

Heh heh I hope this link still works. This article has been taken down from the net too many times to count and the URL gets longer each upload:

http://www.heise.de/tp/deutsch/inhalt/te/1393/s1.html

[strela]

It's simpler to just kill your enemy.

Perseus had the Medusa's head. All I have is this:

[Jeff Chandler]

 

"Ho, ho, ho, ho, hoooo.. your Jedi mind control tricks don't work on me."

[chuckles]

...."slippery slope towards a police state and/or dictatorship that much steeper and more slippery."....

You stole my thunder. I saw the same show. I believe it was on TechTV. At first, I thought, ...how cool! Then, they talked about a police state. I thought of what it would be like if Barbra Boxer or Hillary were in power. You might protest their policy a time or two, but then you might think long and hard about protest again after suffering through these "Non-leathal" weapons. Most people would just submit after a time or two, convinced that giving up the 2nd amendment ain't so bad. Who cares if you pay 80% taxes, after all its for the children. We would be just mindless robots for them to control. Any resistance would just be met yet again, with "minimal force." If they can get "Hate Crime laws" passed, they can make everything illegal.

[Myrddin]

I don't think the example I saw was non-lethal. The power levels were high enough to turn the man into a crispy critter without doing any damage to his clothing. The non-lethal power level plants a first degree burn on the surface of your skin that stings like a very bad sunburn.

I saw some descriptions of infrasonic weapons as well. Relatively low technology devices that blast the hell out of their targets. No radiation. Very focused destruction.

[TigerLikesRooster]

Re #17

How about the underground tunnels ?