The Military's new "Pain Ray" -- how do you feel?

small axe · Aug 30, 2007

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Denial_System

The ADS works by directing electromagnetic radiation at a frequency of 95 GHz [3] toward the subjects. The waves excite water molecules in the epidermis to around 55 °C (130 degrees Fahrenheit), causing an intensely painful burning sensation. While not actually burning the skin, the burning sensation is similar to that of a light bulb being pressed against the skin.[3] The focused beam can be directed at targets at a range of just under half a kilometer, or 500 yards[4]. The device can penetrate thick clothing, although not walls

Non-lethal ... and yet for how many of us is there the eerie (and unsavoury?) image of Martian tripods unleashing raygun pain (if not death)upon the man in the street?

Obviously I can see the benefit of avoiding military or police having to fire deadly bullets into protesting crowds ...

But what about the temptation to use "pain rays" on people who just want to protest a government's policies etc? (Anti-Global Capitalism protests, or anti-War protests, or Civil Rights protests?)

Some governments would never dare shoot bullets at their citizens ... but to what extent will "control" be used to prevent demonstrations when the issue isn't "blood in the streets" but rather "we only made them feel uncomfortable enough to go home" etc?

Anyhow, I was just wondering what do folks here think about a "pain ray" and its possible uses?

Where's the threshold between "non-damaging control" and "torture" here? Is inflicting PAIN without dealing with the consequences acceptable?

Lhun · Aug 31, 2007

Pretty damn stupid if costly crowd control device actually.
A prepared protestor can easily armor himself against that stuff, the right kind of metal weave (depends on frequency) will protect you. And if the energy is turned up to still effect those who just put some tin foil on the insides of their jackets it can seriously injure any unarmored bystanders. It's not really safer or better than old fashioned tear gas or wax bullets. Though as can be seen with tasers, the more high tech the weaponry the less reluctant the people using it seem to actually shoot at other humans.

Popeyesays · Aug 31, 2007

It's certainly an easier moral decision to tase someone rather than shoot to possibly kill.

Regards,
Scott

DocBrown · Aug 31, 2007

I heard about this last summer. The biggest issue I have with it is the likelihood that it'll get used on people who are peaceably demonstrating.

Though I do find the thought of "microwaving" people appalling, I suppose it is better than rubber or even real bullets.

Monkey · Sep 14, 2007

I agree that it's better than the rubber bullets they have now...those can still kill.

But I also agree that there may be temptation to use this when it isn't really appropriate.

I can easily envision the military/police/gov org of your choice deciding that, although the crowd/bystanders/whatnot weren't doing anything bad enough to warrant a potentially deadly dispersal (riot batons/rubber bullets/ect) it would be nice to send 'em a little pain and get them out of the way.

All the /'s just go to show how many situations this new tech could impact.

And there *is* something inherently creepy about a "pain ray".

If water boarding is no longer considered torture by the US, would extensive use of a "pain ray"?

III · Sep 14, 2007

Rats, I thought someone had harnessed Ray Wong's power in weapon form.

RumpleTumbler · Sep 14, 2007

small axe said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Denial_System

Non-lethal ... and yet for how many of us is there the eerie (and unsavoury?) image of Martian tripods unleashing raygun pain (if not death)upon the man in the street?

Obviously I can see the benefit of avoiding military or police having to fire deadly bullets into protesting crowds ...

But what about the temptation to use "pain rays" on people who just want to protest a government's policies etc? (Anti-Global Capitalism protests, or anti-War protests, or Civil Rights protests?)

Some governments would never dare shoot bullets at their citizens ... but to what extent will "control" be used to prevent demonstrations when the issue isn't "blood in the streets" but rather "we only made them feel uncomfortable enough to go home" etc?

Anyhow, I was just wondering what do folks here think about a "pain ray" and its possible uses?

Where's the threshold between "non-damaging control" and "torture" here? Is inflicting PAIN without dealing with the consequences acceptable?

I want Hillary to shoot me in the balls with it.

ChunkyC · Sep 14, 2007

Protection is easy. Just drape yourself in bags of Orville Redenbacher. It has the added bonus of covering your retreat too.

benbradley · Sep 14, 2007

small axe said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Denial_System

Non-lethal ... and yet for how many of us is there the eerie (and unsavoury?) image of Martian tripods unleashing raygun pain (if not death)upon the man in the street?

Obviously I can see the benefit of avoiding military or police having to fire deadly bullets into protesting crowds ...

But what about the temptation to use "pain rays" on people who just want to protest a government's policies etc? (Anti-Global Capitalism protests, or anti-War protests, or Civil Rights protests?)
...

If ultraleft organizations such as "Democracy Now!" are to be believed, this (people being harrased/arrested by Government forces for perfectly legal protests) has already been going on for many years. There were some "puppet" protestors carrying effigies of Bush and others near the Republican Convention in 2000 who were allegedly arrested with the charge that they had piano wire they could have strangled people with.

I forget what details I knew back then, and I didn't hear "all sides" but that's what I recall, and I have no idea if the charges (that the protesters were being unfairly harrassed by police) were true or if it was a conspiracy theory or what.

Ordinary_Guy · Sep 15, 2007

ChunkyC said:
Protection is easy. Just drape yourself in bags of Orville Redenbacher. It has the added bonus of covering your retreat too.

LoL!

...Of course, they can still follow your trail...

Hillary · Sep 15, 2007

RumpleTumbler said:
I want Hillary to shoot me in the balls with it.

*sputters*

I thought you were a eunuch. YOU'VE BEEN LEADING ME ON!

RumpleTumbler · Sep 15, 2007

Hillary said:
*sputters*

I thought you were a eunuch. YOU'VE BEEN LEADING ME ON!

Shut up and fire.......tease!

Hillary · Sep 15, 2007

Negative! No shot... The target appears to be moving.

JoNightshade · Sep 15, 2007

Lhun said:
Pretty damn stupid if costly crowd control device actually.
A prepared protestor can easily armor himself against that stuff, the right kind of metal weave (depends on frequency) will protect you. And if the energy is turned up to still effect those who just put some tin foil on the insides of their jackets it can seriously injure any unarmored bystanders. It's not really safer or better than old fashioned tear gas or wax bullets. Though as can be seen with tasers, the more high tech the weaponry the less reluctant the people using it seem to actually shoot at other humans.

::Jo puts on her tinfoil hat::

I knew these would come in handy.

The Military's new "Pain Ray" -- how do you feel?

small axe

memento mori

Lhun

New kid, be gentle!

Popeyesays

Now departed. Rest in peace, Scott, from all of us

DocBrown

Hopes to one day write for food.

Monkey

Is me.

III

rockin the suburbs

RumpleTumbler

Loves Joni Mitchell

ChunkyC

It's hard being green

benbradley

It's a doggy dog world

Ordinary_Guy

Industrial Strength

Hillary

Neural Trailblazer

RumpleTumbler

Loves Joni Mitchell

Hillary

Neural Trailblazer

JoNightshade

has finally arrived