Coming Soon To A Protest Near You . . .

Submitted by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger

It is a truism that most technology is a two-edged sword. Something created with a beneficial use can and (due to human nature) turned into something harmful is the way the scenario usually plays out. There are, of course, exceptions to this rule where the inverse is true and something harmful turns out to have a beneficial application. To illustrate this point, here is the Vortex Gun.

You saw correctly. This is a gun that can fire concentrated blasts of tear gas, pepper spray or any other aerosol agent moving at 90 miles per hour at targets up to 150 feet away.  The “smoke rings” are still moving at 60 miles per hour reaching targets over 90 feet away.  What possible benefit could come from such a weapon? Let’s look at the non-military application of the weapon before jumping the gun (pun fully intended).

It is an interesting side effect that the charges the smoke rings can serve a beneficial function for fighting fires. The rings can be used to clear smoke from the air because the ionizing charges in the ring causes airborne smoke particles around them to clump together like rain droplets and cling to surfaces. This could be very beneficial to firefighters. Smoke impedes both rescue and fire suppression actions as well is being inherently dangerous as an inhalation risk. Initial results seem to indicate this would be a more efficient way to clear smoke than the existing practice of using exhaust fans. The Vortex Gun is not the only electrically based fire fighting tool on the technological horizon either.  DARPA is funding experiments done by the Whitesides Research Group at Harvard University on using electrical fields to suppress fires by changing the shape of the flame to rip it from its fuel source. However, unlike the “fire wand” experiments, the primary design function of the Vortex Gun is as a weapon. Function follows form. The question of “what possible benefit could come from such a weapon” seems to be a boon for firefighting and public safety. But like any technology or science, it isn’t enough to do something just because we as a species can do it. That’s irresponsible. We need to ask and examine the question “Just because we can do a thing, does that mean we should do a thing?”

Does that potential benefit outweigh the risk to personal freedoms like free speech and assembly such a weapon poses? Is this a weapon – or indeed representative of the kind of weapons – that American’s concerned about oppression and the ever steady erosion of civil and human rights in this country should try to keep out of the hands of law enforcement? Is this another “pacifying weapon” like the Taser which could rapidly turn into an abusive and abused method of coercion? Although the articles stress the use of “non-lethal” aerosol agents, how difficult would it be to modify the weapon and/or provide users with appropriate safety gear to make using lethal aerosol agents practical?

These are all valid questions, especially now that the previously discussed “Anti-Protest Bill” – H.R. 347 – was signed into law on March 9, 2012 by President Obama.

What do you think?

Source(s): Innovation News Daily (1) (2), YouTube, The Inquistr

~Submitted by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger

44 thoughts on “Coming Soon To A Protest Near You . . .

  1. Good article especially in tandem with Mike’s….. Some of the sciences that came out of the crime family’s syndicate was the microwave…..the original purpose not so Nobel…..

  2. “Just because we can do a thing, does that mean we should do a thing?” (“Just because I can do a thing, does that mean I should do a thing?”)

    Good lord, Gene. That is the question at the root of every good and or evil act man has committed since time began.

    Law enforcement has many “pacifying weapons” available to them and have proven they lack the brains to use them appropriately. This newest would be no different. Outlaw its use as a weapon from the getgo strictly enforcing any violation with a sign that reads, “Welcome to the Prison Population”. It will be necessary to punish inappropriate modification and use because there are always those who will do a thing because they can. Thus it has always been; thus it will always be.

  3. This goes along with the new Active Denial Systems. It’s probably a coincidence that we are now seeing these systems unveiled for the first time after the start of the Occupy Movement. Glad to see it, it’s for the greater good.

  4. What Blouise said.

    As for the weapon itself, its trajectory seemed poorly predictable in a closed windless room. They’ll improve it for sure. Weapons fascinate and are profitable. Wonder why?

  5. Blouise,

    I always like the big questions. :mrgreen:

    **********

    Bdaman,

    You keep using the phrase “it’s for the greater good.”

    I’d like for you to explain to everyone how tools of oppression that are being used or are going to be used on people using their Constitutionally protected rights of free speech and assembly is for the greater good. Because in reality, such oppression only benefits the oligarchy (your beloved 1%) and oppresses the majority.

    This ought to be really funny. In a pathetic sort of way.

  6. Gene,

    The fact is police require tools to manage things like riot control. Simply because a tool can be used for oppression does not necessitate that it WILL be used for oppression.

    I do agree that simplifying crowd control, or perp control, does tend to induce abusive practices as we’ve seen with Tasers.

    What we need is a thorough analysis and revamping of the laws regarding the use of these tools so that people and organizations are held accountable and thereby preventing the oppressive use thereof.

  7. If the law enforcement of the 1960’s had today’s crowd control or riot suppression tools, do you really think the Civil Rights Acts would have ever been enacted? Goodbye million man march.

  8. Bdaman sez: “It’s probably a coincidence that we are now seeing these systems unveiled for the first time after the start of the Occupy Movement. Glad to see it, it’s for the greater good.”

    *********************************

    Sorry, your math evades me. Is that some of that New Math? The greater good is when the 1% use it to suppress dissent by the 99%?

  9. I’m starting to think that the survival of individual rights requires that a mob of unarmed citizens can overwhelm the local constabulary.

  10. Is Bob Esq now Bob Frog ?

    Gene unless you forgot, I keep using it because I got it from you. Thats what you said about the Occupy Movement hence the reason I coupled both together on your thread, DOOF,

    You said it at around the same time when the 81 year old woman was knocked down by an Occupy member who was at a political function of the right. You said it was her fault and she should learn to choose better friends. Your right Gene it is pathetic, FUCKING PATHETIC.

    Bob

    “The fact is police require tools to manage things like riot control. Simply because a tool can be used for oppression does not necessitate that it WILL be used for oppression.”

    This statement sounds like Obama’s signing statement in re to NDAA where he promises he wont use it. He might not but it won’t prevent the next president.

  11. Bdaman,

    What you fail to realize is that what is pathetic is your continual attempts to portray the interests of the 1% – those responsible for their being protesters in the first place – as being for the greater good. You wouldn’t know the greater good if it bit you on the ass. But you keep trying that “reverse psychology”. Your ineptness and transparency in application is just hilarious.

  12. Come on now, Bdaman.

    Explain to everyone how tools of oppression that are being used or are going to be used on people using their Constitutionally protected rights of free speech and assembly is for the greater good.

  13. Bdaman,
    Again you are missing or ignoring the point of the article. What impact, if any, will this weapon have on all of our rights to protest? You do realize that this kind of weapon could be used against climate change deniers, don’t you? The police do not need these kind of weapons if they are allowing protests to continue unimpeded.

  14. Gene I was being facetious. I was using your words as part of my comment. You know just like my copy and paste the other day. Just like about a month ago every other comment I made ended with it’s for the greater good. You obviously seen it because I haven’t used it in a couple of weeks yet you say I continue to use it. THEY ARE YOUR WORDS. How is it that Occupy protesters who continue to rape as recently as two days ago could be for the greater good. It’s a movement that you and others stood for even though time and time again I pointed out how they were infringing on the rights of others. The IDEA of the Occupy movement is great. The people involved in the movement at the street level not so much.

  15. The police do not need these kind of weapons if they are allowing protests to continue unimpeded.

    Exactly Raff and they let the Occupy Movement get out of hand by letting them go unimpeded for to long.

  16. Still lame and transparent, Bdaman. You’re simply not smart enough or a good enough writer to turn my words against me. Keep trying though.

    Now . . . back to the issue at hand:

    Explain to everyone how tools of oppression that are being used or are going to be used on people using their Constitutionally protected rights of free speech and assembly is for the greater good.

  17. Oh yeah! Way to double down on your oligarchical fascism, Bdaman!

    “they let the Occupy Movement get out of hand by letting them go unimpeded for to long.”

    Yeah, they (the police) should have crushed the majority protesters upfront and early to protect your beloved 1% from being called out on their crimes.

    You just don’t understand that the protesters have free speech and assembly rights even if the people who’s boots you lick don’t like it.

    Come on now. Make another claim that is a composition fallacy like “How is it that Occupy protesters who continue to rape as recently as two days ago could be for the greater good.” You’re so full of shit your eyes must be brown.

  18. Bdaman,

    Explain to everyone how tools of oppression that are being used or are going to be used on people using their Constitutionally protected rights of free speech and assembly is for the greater good.

  19. Gene they do have the right to free speech AND PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY but thats the part they were not, peaceful. Maybe some where but when you have a mob walking down the street breaking windows and trampling on the RIGHTS OF OTHERS day after day then no Gene, they can’t have that. When WOMEN who need their contraception continue to be raped in Occupy Camps then NO GENE THEY CAN’T HAVE THAT.

  20. March 14, 2012

    Police: Woman Raped At Occupy New Haven

    NEW HAVEN —

    Police have charged a city man with raping a woman while she was camped out with Occupy New Haven.

    England Gamble, 53, of Orange Street was charged Tuesday with first-degree sexual assault and first-degree unlawful restraint, police said. Gamble is not part of the Occupy movement, police said.

    According to a press release from Officer David B Hartman, several people involved in the Occupy movement had gone to check on the woman Tuesday afternoon because they hadn’t seen her yet that day. One of them looked into the tent and found the woman, but she wasn’t able to respond to her visitor. The woman eventually disclosed that she had been raped, Hartman said.

    Police were sent to the upper New Haven Green, where the Occupy tents are set up, at 3:25 p.m. The woman was brought to Yale-New Haven Hospital for treatment.

    Officers determined that sometime between Monday night and Tuesday morning, the woman was raped in a tent on the green, the release states.

    http://articles.courant.com/2012-03-14/news/hc-new-haven-occupy-rape-0315-20120314_1_woman-tuesday-afternoon-new-haven-green-yale-new-haven-hospital

  21. That’s not an explanation, Bdaman.

    That’s more rabid ranting and composition fallacy topped off with a tribute to the least credible source and appeal to authority you could possibly make – a known propagandist and liar.

    Explain to everyone how tools of oppression that are being used or are going to be used on people using their Constitutionally protected rights of free speech and assembly is for the greater good.

    Do so without making a composition fallacy.

  22. Don’t forget there have been 9 deaths, 5 found dead in tents, One found dead after 2 days and 2 murders not counting the protester who strangled his parents and stuffed them in a car. Those people don’t have freedom of speech anymore Gene.

  23. Oh, also try to avoid the appeals to emotion and the authority. Those were logical fallacies the way you deployed them as well.

  24. Again, with the composition fallacy and appeal to emotion. Keep ignoring why there are protesters in the first place: the crimes of the 1% going unpunished.

    Explain to everyone how tools of oppression that are being used or are going to be used on people using their Constitutionally protected rights of free speech and assembly is for the greater good.

  25. First, you defend the use of oppression as long as it is “non-lethal”.

    Second, you attack the protesters instead of addressing the issue of why they were protesting in the first place.

    Third, you’ve avoided answering the very question you raised by your comments.

    Forth, you’ve committed several logical errors in the process.

    Come on: Explain to everyone how tools of oppression that are being used or are going to be used on people using their Constitutionally protected rights of free speech and assembly is for the greater good.

    Or you can troll some more. Either way, your oligarchical agenda is exposed. It’s a win-win for me.

  26. You know Gene, let me say this, and I’m gonna step away from the computer for a bit after I say it.

    If you would like to talk about lairs and free speech. Lets talk about you for a minute. Maybe liar is a bit harsh so we could use denier. Either way I think you’ll get the gist of what I’m sayin.

    There once was a poster here that went by the name Buddha is Laughing. This guy was vicious, a fucking bulldog. He would sink his teeth in and there was no turning loose. Smart ? incredibly smart. He and I went back and forth and did not agree on anything. Well, maybe one or two. But you know what ? He wasn’t afraid to say anything. He said what he wanted, when he wanted, and how he wanted and I respected him for that. We may not have gotten along, but I knew, that when he said something, he meant it. The guy had free speech and he was free to say exactly how he felt when he felt it.

    Sometimes I miss that guy. Alot of times you remind me of him. Sometimes I try and provoke you because in a strange sort of way I’m hoping you will attack me in only the ways he could. It’s a shame you’ll never get a chance to meet that guy because like Vince Treacy and Slartibartfast they look like they are gone for good.

    I’ll let you figure the rest of it out.

  27. Bdaman,

    As for freedom of speech, I’m saying exactly how I think and feel. I’m not afraid to say anything. I say what I mean and I mean what I say. I say it how I wish to say it. If I’m not vicious enough for you, you should file that under your problem. I don’t write to please you. However, I could give a rat’s ass about your nostalgia.

    Now, back to the issue at hand.

    Explain to everyone how tools of oppression that are being used or are going to be used on people using their Constitutionally protected rights of free speech and assembly is for the greater good.

  28. Bob, Esq.
    1, March 17, 2012 at 3:31 pm
    Ikity akity ook; ah, ah squeek, ah, ah squook.

    ==============================================

    I see you have entered into the spirit of St. Patty’s Day.

    Just returned from a perfectly exquisite 3 hour repast at a loverly Italian restaurant. Being a protestant Scot … we do not celebrate the wearing of the green. (Don’t ask.)

  29. Oro Lee’s comments at 2:14 & 2:17 pretty well sums up how I feel every time I see a new crowd control (dissent suppression) weapon rolled out. Well said there OL.

    From article: “Is this another “pacifying weapon” like the Taser which could rapidly …”

    It always seemed to me that the most efficient tools with which to pacify the citizenry would be social and economic justice.

  30. LK,

    “It always seemed to me that the most efficient tools with which to pacify the citizenry would be social and economic justice.”

    That is the best solution. Always has been. Always will be. But peace isn’t as profitable to the oligarchs as war is so once again it appears the self-appointed elites in society are eventually going to learn the hard way that tyranny is no substitute for justice.

  31. Blouise,

    I was actually testing the log in system here while mocking myself by quoting Daffy Duck from the 4:45 mark here:

  32. “Ikity akity ook; ah, ah squeek, ah, ah squook.” -Daffy Duck

    Thank for giving credit where credit is due, Bob Esq. It’s a great quote. ;-)

    (Missing quotation marks in some recent comments (not yours, Bob, Esq.)… Merely oversights, I’m sure. Busy people…or something…)

  33. This Executive Order was posted on the WhiteHouse.gov web site on Friday, March 16, 2012, under the name National Defense Resources Preparedness. In a nutshell, it’s the blueprint for Peacetime Martial Law and it gives the president the power to take just about anything deemed necessary for “National Defense”, whatever they decide that is. It’s peacetime, because as the title of the order says, it’s for “Preparedness”. A copy of the entire order follows the end of this story.

    http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1906/406/Obama_Executive_Order:_Peacetime_Martial_Law.html

  34. Badaman, you have lost this argument today. Your record is not sterling, and continues to decline. I suspect you know this, as it fits your symptoms of flailing around madly, appealing only to rabid emotion, and hurling any old piece of mud, hoping it will stick.

    You cannot even answer a simple question, in your own words: Explain to everyone how tools of oppression that are being used or are going to be used on people using their Constitutionally protected rights of free speech and assembly is for the greater good?

    Your responses thus far have been pathetic, but then so it what passes for “thought” in the GOP these days. No amount of immature Brietbart nostrums is going to change THAT. Nor will your ignorance woo back women, which are now lost for a generation to your buddies, the old white angry men of the GOP, and their corrupt pastors and bishops who egg them on despite the clock reading 2012, not 1812

    Bdaman, you have lost your argument today, and on multiple fronts. I suspect it will not be the last, not by a mile. Those under 40 regard your arguments as a bad joke that is not being retold once the tellers die off.

Comments are closed.