Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

Maximum pain is aim of new US weapon

29 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

UM-Bot

news icon rThe US military is funding development of a weapon that delivers a bout of excruciating pain from up to 2 kilometres away. Intended for use against rioters, it is meant to leave victims unharmed.

But pain researchers are furious that work aimed at controlling pain has been used to develop a weapon. And they fear that the technology will be used for torture.

news icon View: Full Article | Source: New Scientist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hbd777

Nice article, I would like to raise a defence orientated perspective here.

The use of non lethal weaponry, I believe is a fantastic idea. Force protection, ie protection of ground troops, ships etc is a high priority when operating in areas of any considered threat, current protection measures consist of a few people hanging of 50 cal machine guns and a few armed sentries scattered around, now when you face a swarming threat, for example, rioters or multiple boats/cars, it is very difficult to maintain a safe distance in order to protect that asset.

Think back to USS Cole operating in Yemen, having to rely on the above method is obviously insufficiant, many of your service men died in that incident as an efficient method of protection had not been researched, another example the Ranger and Delta team in Somalia (Black Hawk Down). Both major occurences and the many that occur to US and its allies that you never hear about show the need for this technology to be made available, hell I know I would rather suffer 1st degree burns and a monstrous headache then cop a 12.7mm round through the chest, and im sure the next guy in Iraq with a 100 pound of explosives strapped to him would think twice if he was hit by a force protection method as mentioned in the article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scorpius
It concerns so-called Pulsed Energy Projectiles (PEPs), which fire a laser pulse that generates a burst of expanding plasma when it hits something solid, like a person

Would this technology be devised to construct some sort of defensive shield?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Walken

Great article, white wizard.

This has a lot of moral problems. Can you justify this kind of pain? And what if it IS used for torture?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hbd777

Would this technology be devised to construct some sort of defensive shield?

511113[/snapback]

Sort of, the mentioned article is talking about a directed energy weapon, like a laser, I was a bit vague in my post. The DoD (department of defence) is in the testing stages of a defensive shield, based on RADAR theory, which is an antennae that emits electro magnetic energy. The defensive shield uses a controlled output of microwave energy that transmits at a certain frequency, (mega watts, hertz etc)

This then creates an invisible barrier that if tissue, ie your skin comes into contact, you will receive 1st degree burns to the exposed part. The thing about this unless you have protective shielding, it will pass through any fabric, glass, aluminium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kabutarian

Crap crap CRAP >< We all know how anti-dissent Bush and the current USA government is. I see this as the next step, going above and beyond intimidation and legal action, all the way to a physical threat. The ramifications for the country's 1st Amendment will be huge, I guarentee it. I don't care what excuses they come up with, there is no possible justification for this, and we all know that it will be used on peaceful protestors encompassed in a decidingly large definition of "rioter".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LittleIrishVampiress

they tested it on animals..? crying.gifcrying.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hbd777
Crap crap CRAP >< We all know how anti-dissent Bush and the current USA government is. I see this as the next step, going above and beyond intimidation and legal action, all the way to a physical threat. The ramifications for the country's 1st Amendment will be huge, I guarentee it. I don't care what excuses they come up with, there is no possible justification for this, and we all know that it will be used on peaceful protestors encompassed in a decidingly large definition of "rioter".

511399[/snapback]

So what your saying is the rioters from the example of somalia were 'peacful'?

that was 13 of your nations finest that where sent there and died.

there is no peacful protests, pack mentality gains ahold of anyone protesting fanatical causes. This is an effective way to prevent this from occuring. Whats temporary pain compared to say a 500 lb bomb dropped in a middle of a group.

If the protest is peacful then rules of engagment prevent the soldier from taking action, as soon as the crowd steps up by pelting rocks, molotovs and gunfire then that crowd becomes engagable to protect the soldiers interests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stormbringer

I think the disadvantages outweigh the advantages on this new tool *(cough.weapon.cough)*First the advantage.the ability to interdict a threat before it arrives at the front door.Second the ability of non-lethal actions to incapicatate rather than kill.The disadvantages are.no medical proof that it will leave vital organs unaffected.The technology can be stolen or sold on the black market thus putting everybody at risk.And the biggest disadvantage is Big Brother has a bigger stick now so get in line and do as you are told like good little sheep.I think this subject warrants an in-depth study,at least on moral grounds anyway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kabutarian
Crap crap CRAP >< We all know how anti-dissent Bush and the current USA government is. I see this as the next step, going above and beyond intimidation and legal action, all the way to a physical threat. The ramifications for the country's 1st Amendment will be huge, I guarentee it. I don't care what excuses they come up with, there is no possible justification for this, and we all know that it will be used on peaceful protestors encompassed in a decidingly large definition of "rioter".

511399[/snapback]

So what your saying is the rioters from the example of somalia were 'peacful'?

that was 13 of your nations finest that where sent there and died.

there is no peacful protests, pack mentality gains ahold of anyone protesting fanatical causes. This is an effective way to prevent this from occuring. Whats temporary pain compared to say a 500 lb bomb dropped in a middle of a group.

If the protest is peacful then rules of engagment prevent the soldier from taking action, as soon as the crowd steps up by pelting rocks, molotovs and gunfire then that crowd becomes engagable to protect the soldiers interests.

511426[/snapback]

I'm talking about protesters right here in the US of A, buddy. Mayhap you should reread the Bill of Rights, see what it says on the matter -.o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aquatus1

Considering that the alternative is using firearms, don't most of those disadvantages become somewhat moot? We have vast medical proof of the effect bullets have on vital organs. Guns are commonly available on the black market. And Big Brother, whoever the heck he is, has always had a big stick. If anything, this stick isn't as heavy as the one he normally carries.

Moral grounds? The alternative is shooting the bad guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AztecInca

^True!

Testing on animals is wrong, we should be testing these on criminals not innocent creatures!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. Blonde

I never thought ol' Uncle Sam would outdue that dish that shoots rays at you that makes the water below your skin boil. Its this giant satalitedish thing that sits on the back of a truck. Siccck.

Edit; removed obscenities

Edited by SaRuMaN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bathory
This has a lot of moral problems. Can you justify this kind of pain? And what if it IS used for torture?

the alternative is putting holes in someone:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Walken

I'm very against animal testing. Read Vernon Coleman's books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stormbringer
Considering that the alternative is using firearms, don't most of those disadvantages become somewhat moot?  We have vast medical proof of the effect bullets have on vital organs.  Guns are commonly available on the black market.  And Big Brother, whoever the heck he is, has always had a big stick.  If anything, this stick isn't as heavy as the one he normally carries.

Moral grounds?  The alternative is shooting the bad guys.

511547[/snapback]

You are right I was just trying to be the devil's advocate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ashley-Star*Child

I cannot see this as being the solution. It could very easily be used for all the wrong reasons. And, like has been said here, there is no evidence that future medical repercussions will not exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aquatus1

So we should just stick with the riot guns, then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmgspycat
Crap crap CRAP >< We all know how anti-dissent Bush and the current USA government is. I see this as the next step, going above and beyond intimidation and legal action, all the way to a physical threat. The ramifications for the country's 1st Amendment will be huge, I guarentee it. I don't care what excuses they come up with, there is no possible justification for this, and we all know that it will be used on peaceful protestors encompassed in a decidingly large definition of "rioter".

511399[/snapback]

Yeah I have to agree. The leaders must know that there will be more civil unrest the more we all learn. This would be a perfect crowd control weapon used against protesters. To be honest with you all I thought this technology has been around for about 10 years now. Ever heard of" Silent weapons for QUiet wars" ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nirwana
Crap crap CRAP >< We all know how anti-dissent Bush and the current USA government is. I see this as the next step, going above and beyond intimidation and legal action, all the way to a physical threat. The ramifications for the country's 1st Amendment will be huge, I guarentee it. I don't care what excuses they come up with, there is no possible justification for this, and we all know that it will be used on peaceful protestors encompassed in a decidingly large definition of "rioter".

511399[/snapback]

Yeah I have to agree. The leaders must know that there will be more civil unrest the more we all learn. This would be a perfect crowd control weapon used against protesters. To be honest with you all I thought this technology has been around for about 10 years now. Ever heard of" Silent weapons for QUiet wars" ?

512848[/snapback]

Completely agree with you both, what's the need of this kind of weapon anyways? maybe US's gov is expecting riots to break due to his future actions.. kind of perfect dictator weapon, and why the need to cause maximum pain? the idea for this weapon seems out of the mind of some sicko ph34r.gif

Edited by Nirwana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MedicTJ

Yeah. It seems sicko. Just as it seemed sicko when thousands of innocent people became victims at the hands of idiots during the Los Angeles riots.

Makes me wonder what those people would think about this technology..............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zukie&jim

devil.gif well we have been down this non-leathel thing before, and it has always had several limitations from a technological standpoint.

this device , and this is a big assumption that it works . will have problems right off the bat.

1 your blasting microwaves around ? huge amounts of microwaves ? what kind of effect is that going to have ?

it might kill grandma--like 20 miles away because it "killed her pacemaker " .

2 if this thing is turned up high enough to be effective enough to TKO young healthy people how many people who are in ill health in the area are going to be killed by it ?

this just another attempt to be PC and spend billions on some useless junk.

they will do some testing and put it in a warehouse because it will be unusable in the real world. alien.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ROGER

I can see my opinion will be in the minority here, but here go's. The Laser guided magnetic pulse weapon is being looked into by the Military and Civilian services as an up grade to the Taser now used by law enforcement officers.

In the news not long ago a 14 year old was being placed under arrest when he decided to fight the officers. They had a Warrant( though it was issued on BAD information) and it was their job to bring him in. He was very large for a 14 year old and could have hurt himself or the officer trying to do his job. The officer used a Taser to subdue him to be hand cuffed. Now people are trying to take the Tazers away because they might hurt some one with a medical condition. Like a bullet would make their medical condition better!

Any way the Tazer is limited to the length of wire used to carry the stun effect. A light transmitted charge will simply extend the range. And as a weapon on civilian aircraft are safer because they wont puncher the walls of the plane. Explosive decompression is deadly. I am for these new guns, and would even like to see them in civilian hands for personal defence.

OK, Now yell at me, I can take it! Rog. blush.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ROGER

I see that no one has posted here in a while, but if you read the BBC News you know of the man in Atlanta Ga., USA who took a gun from a court guard and killed the Judge, recorder, and another guard. This is another GOOD reason for having none lethal side arms. An if the Judge had lived, I am sure he would agree. huh.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle

You're right ROGER...so many people complain about gun issues and when an alternative is presented they whine about the concequences of the alternative weapon. hmm.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.