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
Blouise,
I was actually testing the log in system here while mocking myself by quoting Daffy Duck from the 4:45 mark here:
That is right Gene and Lotta. As Deep Throat said, follow the money.
Gene, right, always folow the money.
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.
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.
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.)
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.
Ikity akity ook; ah, ah squeek, ah, ah squook.
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.
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.
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.
Oh, also try to avoid the appeals to emotion and the authority. Those were logical fallacies the way you deployed them as well.
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.
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.
Breipart speaks from the grave. BEHAVE YOURSELF AND STOP RAPING PEOPLE.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.