Posted on 03/03/2005 11:09:09 PM PST by NationSoConceived
Scientists have reacted angrily to the revelation that the US military is funding development of a weapon intended to deliver an "excrutiating bout of pain" from over a mile away. The "Pulsed Energy Projectile" (PEP) device "fires a laser pulse that generates a burst of expanding plasma when it hits something solid", the New Scientist explains. If you happen to be that something solid, then you get temporarily incapacitated without suffering permanent injury.
That's the theory, but pain reasearchers fear that the proposed riot control weapon could be used for torture, and further doubt a solid ethical basis for the research. Andrew Rice, a consultant in pain medicine at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital in London, said: "Even if the use of temporary severe pain can be justified as a restraining measure, which I do not believe it can, the long-term physical and psychological effects are unknown."
What those physical effects might be is the subject of a University of Central Florida in Orlando study which aims to "optimise" the effect of PEPs as noted in a 2003 US Naval Studies Board review of non-lethal weapons. The review outlined how PEPs produced "pain and temporary paralysis" in animal tests, apparently as a result of "an electromagnetic pulse produced by the expanding plasma which triggers impulses in nerve cells".
The new study was exposed by biological weapons research watchdog the Sunshine Project, which obtained papers relating to the programme under the US's Freedom of Information Act. One research contract between the Office of Naval Research and the University of Florida in Gainsville is snappily entitled: "Sensory consequences of electromagnetic pulses emitted by laser induced plasmas".
New Scientist notes that the contract was heavily censored before release, but reveals that researchers are requested to investigate "optimal pulse parameters to evoke peak nociceptor activation", ie, how to cause the maximum pain possible without killing the subject.
One scientist working on the project - Martin Richardson, a laser expert at the University of Central Florida - declined to comment to New Scientist. Another - Brian Cooper, an expert in dental pain at the University of Florida - attempted to downplay his involvement by saying: "I don't have anything interesting to convey. I was just providing some background for the group."
According to John Wood of University College London, an expert in how the brain perceives pain, both Richardson and Cooper and all those working on the PEP research project should face censure because any weapon resulting from the programme "could be used for torture".
Set phasers to stun!
Set beebers to pun!
There's also the whole "dead men don't provide intel" thing.
That said, what do these people propose as an alternative? 120mm canister rounds from an M1????
I'd rather (no pun intended hahaha) see them shot than stunned, whom ever the bad guys are. Why have more of them around for later? It's like the death penalty, Use it now, save money later.
Scientists, just STFU.
Removing non-lethal options, drastically increases the chance of lethal options being used. It's one thing to say how terrible it is to inflict pain, it's another to imply we shouldn't consider it because killing it much better. Is that the type of "ethics" the scientists are advocating?
But my second thought is along second amendment lines. The whole point of an armed populace is to prevent the government from usurping their God given freedom. If we allow our police and military to have such a weapon, it ought to be available to every citizen on the street. Obviously it wouldn't be, and that presents the problem. At some point, weaponry will be so advanced, no armed populace will ever be able to preserve their liberty. We're probably already there. Reno proved you can use the troops on Americans with impunity. So when Bill is running the UN and Hill is running the White House--well, I'll leave the argument there. Bad things, man.
I am still in favor of banning the crossbow.
Unlike electricity. Fire. Rope. Metal. Little shoots of bamboo. Sticks. Dripping water. Better ban those.
Don't have the common sense nature gives puppies...
Is this reporter a total idiot?
Never mind.....
Of course, the long-term physical and psychological effects of a grenade might just be a tad worse......
I was taught there is no such thing as shooting to kill or to disable. You shoot to stop. I know I am splitting hairs, but there is a difference when explained by people with more training than I have.
Nope! Americans are very inventive, and should never, ever be under-estimated.
On reflection, however, the bigger threat is the hard left.
Stune the beeber
Time to ban knives, cigarettes, water, and electricity, all used for torture.
Set panties to torture....if that doesn't work, then
Set plasma to @!&#*&%#*!#&%#*%#)(##*&$^^$!*&*
We've got to ban panties too!
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.