Posted on 03/03/2005 3:20:24 AM PST by snarks_when_bored
Only one problem - use of this sort of weapon will just fuel the abuse/torture crowd.
You just have to get it - nothing we do is going to satisfy the anti-American world.
The New Scientist is trying to make this seem like some expose only recently unearthed through the diligent efforts of activists using FOIA, while I've been reading for a few years about the efforts to make these kinds of non-lethal weapons. This type of information has been out in the public for a while.
You shoot him with a non-non-lethal weapon.
This is not a joking matter.
Such a weapon would need to be focussed, and would require a significant power source. Moreover, it would be a sitting duck for an attack by stand-off missile. Only a well-protected agent/agency (police, military) could use such a weapon effectively for any extended length of time. Hence the idea that terrorists are going to get any mileage out of it doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Let me give you a scenario that maybe will cause you to rethink:
It is 2011. President Hillary Clinton (God forbid) is way down in the polls.
Due to her incompetent leadership America is more vulnerable to terrorist attack than it has ever been.
The Clintonistas stage a massive terrorist attack on a midwestern city. The Clintons declare marshal law and the left takes control.
Now, given the prickliness the left has with shooting protestors, will President for Life Clinton have an easier time supressing mobs with bullets or a long-range pain infliction device?
Once a weapon gets built, everybody gets one.
I sounds to me more like a MASER than a LASER.
After wading through a lot of garbage I think I found the answer. I found one that uses the energy to quickly vaporize water on the skin causing an intense feeling of heat, but not actually causing a burn.
What am I missing here? When armies and cops fight wars and mobs, aren't they allowed to use things that actually deter the misbehavers from inflicting more harm on the good guys? And isn't the threat of that deterrent just as important as actually using it?
I mean, come on, the next thing you know we'll be making barb wire without the barbs!
Nahhh. A Greenie. Trust me on this one...
If we don't laugh at them the terrorists will have won.
This is great - no more problems with the unruly demonstrations like pro-lifers or anti-war. And we can eliminate abuse of the Miranda laws, the Fifth Amendment and need for the lenghty trials. All accused to plead guilty in no time!
And it is perfectly legal since "only organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death constitute torture"
America will become a very ordered place. Even more with the other countries which will be glad to follow American lead. Well spent taxpayers money!
The Constitution is an old XVIII century document. We live in another times when there is War on Terror and War on Drugs. We face many annoying troublemakers who disobey the government and many suspects who refuse to admit guilt. Besides it will be very enjoyable to see the vermin squirm.
Non-lethal means of control will serve as the foundation for an authoritarian state. The State can use the means of repression without fear that the deaths it causes will create resentment and revolution.
Ya think it is legal to use on animals?
....?
Good Question.
?What's a animal?
/abortion?
/British State Religion of Darwinist Evolution....
/sarcasm
Thanks for the ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.