| ▲ | icegreentea2 2 hours ago |
| The system in question is basically just a directed microwave emitter. It is designed to heat up the first ~0.5mm of your skin. It's safety is basically completely a function of the operator. Since the beam will keep depositing energy (ie heating), if the beam is held on a target, it will incur more and more heating (and potentially harm). In proper usage, safety is ensured through the combination of operator training, selection of proper settings, and induced compliance. If you have a shitty operator, risk of over exposure increases. The nature of this device means that it's not a barrier, it's a beam. During earlier testing, they were able to induce second degree burns on a test subject due to incorrect power and duration settings. |
|
| ▲ | footy 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| for certain types of tools (and I'd certainly class weapons as this type) you have to assume that a certain number of operators will be, as you put it, "shitty". Whether it's because they're having a bad day, are genuinely incompetent, are malicious, whatever the reason---some percentage of the operators will be using your tool in a way you'd discourage for PR reasons. Maybe I am too cynical, but I don't think the people making these tools actually care about this either, not beyond the potential for bad publicity. |
| |
| ▲ | scottyah 17 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | There's also the escalation timeline. In a hypothetical situation where nonlethal force is being used, but there's a threat that requires more than a gentle "please don't" type of heating, I don't think we'd want it to be limited. Gentle crowd suppression is great till someone pulls out a gun or knife, and though it's debatable opinion and there are a lot of factors to consider, I think a few collateral 2nd degree burns beats switching to a rifle and opening fire into the crowd. | |
| ▲ | nonethewiser an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | hilariously an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Most people fleeing across the border have braved significantly worse, this is just another way to harm people we see as lesser for the accident of where they were born. | |
| ▲ | stvltvs an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Every individual has their own risk tradeoff calculation. People already risk death to cross the border, so it's not clear how much this would move the needle. | | |
| ▲ | 24 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | irishcoffee an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > People already risk death to cross the border At what percentage would you say? 1%, 3%, 87%? Does the country they are fleeing have no culpability? Why are they leaving? | | |
| ▲ | nielsbot 42 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Crossing the border illegally (for now) is a civil misdemeanor and seeking asylum is legal under US and international law. > Does the country they are fleeing have no culpability? The US definitely has some culpability for making other places harder to live in. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r... > Why are they leaving? They're not doing it just for funsies. | |
| ▲ | hilariously an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | A man runs out of a burning building.
You shoot him.
Dang, that building really should have had more culpability. | | | |
| ▲ | no-name-here 23 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >> People already risk death to cross the border > At what percentage would you say? Why do you ask? If it was the lowest figure you mentioned, or halfway between the lowest and highest, would one of those make it better? Is the argument that this new tech will only kill n people on top of those that already die, so whether we fry less than 1% or a far higher figure, that one of those is better? | |
| ▲ | stvltvs an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Focusing on the specific death rate doesn't change that crossing the border is risky, and some people will take their chances with or without the heat ray. It's one more variable in the calculation. Wikipedia is available if specific mortality rates matter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migrant_deaths_along_the_Mexic... |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | bijowo1676 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| knowing the kind of people who sign up for ICE/CBP enforcement, I have no hope that a trained or decent operator will be behind this machine. I expect a lot of severely traumatized people from this device |
|
| ▲ | Zigurd 37 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Oh goody. Let's give cops another toy before we have tamed the use of pain compliance tools already in their hands. We are breeding a class of casual torturers. |
|
| ▲ | everdrive 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Also try not to think about contact lenses, piercings, jewelry, pacemakers, etc. |
| |
| ▲ | busssard 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | i wonder what would happen if i am wearing a layer of aluminum foil under my shirt... | | |
| ▲ | scottyah 16 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | This must be a New World Order device because they can't get past my foil hat! Nice try, lizard people. | |
| ▲ | bijowo1676 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | put it into microwave, aluminum will spark and will burn like the thermite |
|
|
|
| ▲ | 10111001 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > The system in question is basically just a directed microwave emitter. It is designed to heat up the first ~0.5mm of your skin. So what happens when it's shot at someone's eyes? |
| |
| ▲ | realo an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | It is "non-lethal"! Be happy you are just blind for the rest of your life. Such a shitty government you have today in the USA, it boggles
the mind. | | |
| ▲ | scottyah 14 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | They grew up watching Batman breaking people's backs and giving severe concussions, but because he didn't kill he was Good. | |
| ▲ | jauntywundrkind 34 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | The Business Plot people who want to tear down the United States, the rebel faction trying to destroy democracy and the nation from within has really figured out how to keep driving fear and conspiracy into our hearts (the less mind the better). They're just such amazing aggitants, able to make people so willing and ready to throw this whole nation in the wood chipper. I wish we could identify, grapple with how bad what a terror America has become against itself. Against its history. Against in so many cases reality. There doesn't seem to be any regulating functions in red America, anything other than ever increasing war drums against democracy, against union, again the constitution, the declaration of rights, reason, kindness, and possibility. To make itself the foe of the nation has been the only thing this political faction has been able to lead by, and we are so far past the unhinging, never to come back seemingly, never to be able to have any learning moments, never to recognize a loyal opposition again, never to compromise. Just shrill shrieking bedlam and din forever. |
| |
| ▲ | icegreentea2 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The innate blink reflex is supposed to be enough to limit risk of damage: https://web.archive.org/web/20130216134111/http://jnlwp.defe... (go to page 14/28). | | |
| ▲ | euroderf an hour ago | parent [-] | | So if I can't keep my eyes closed (because of a riot situation, or friends in trouble) am I risking permanent eye damage, with no government responsibility for it, because some cop shouted something into a bullhorn that I couldn't make out ? | | |
| ▲ | icegreentea2 an hour ago | parent [-] | | Possibly yes. The device works through line of sight, so blocking line of sight from the emitter to your open eyes (for example, by looking away and shielding with your arms) may be helpful. Testing indicates that test subjects reached their pain threshold in ~5 seconds (typically reacting within 3). Proper application of this device in a riot situation likely involves pulsed application, at sufficient standoff range (between targets and a barrier or your riot police/troops), precisely to reduce the risk of operators feeling that they need to dwell, with the standoff range providing enough buffer to allow operators to feel like they can illuminate, wait for initial reaction, shut off, and then read the full reaction. In your general scenario, you can replace this weapon with any other riot control tool, and get basically the same shitty situation. Once the government/police/whatever have decided that you are in a riot/mob, then you're not going to be treated as an individual, you're going to be treated as an element of a threat. This is true of dudes with shields and batons, beanbags, water cannons, tear gas, horses, whatever. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | slowin an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > It is designed to heat up the first ~0.5mm of your skin. Oh, is that all? > US officials had also considered deploying the system during moments of domestic unrest, including at the end of President Donald Trump’s first term when protests erupted over the murder of George Floyd, according to a former US official familiar with those discussions. This is for "the border" (because you know we should be able to torture people there), but really this will imperial boomerang back to US citizens in the blink of an eye. |
|
| ▲ | 2932o94ui an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| And that's exactly the problem. We (and users) have known for decades that you can kill someone with a rubber bullet. And they have been used to intentionally kill on many different occasions. |
| |
| ▲ | MengerSponge 38 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Rubber bullets are supposed to be aimed at the ground, but we've seen (pun sadly intended) plenty of officers aiming at faces/eyes of protestors. This can kill, and if it doesn't kill it maims. They're trained to not maim or kill. More training won't fix it. More money and more resources won't fix that systemic rot. 40%, after all. |
|
|
| ▲ | pstuart 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There's no way I'd trust this in the hands of anyone, especially those operating in the service of the current administration. They say they want to use it to "protect the border" but there are reports that they'd used it domestically already. Considering the non-tolerance of public protest and the "promise" of non-lethality, I could imagine this becoming a regular tool in population control if things don't change. |
|
| ▲ | danparsonson 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| ...and one need only watch videos of "trained officers" hosing people with pepper spray to envision how that will turn out. |
|
| ▲ | pull_my_finger an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > If you have a shitty operator, risk of over exposure increases. Good thing border control isn't full of rejects and nonhackers from the military and real law enforcement \s |
|
| ▲ | srean an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > If you have a shitty operator Well, we are talking about US border patrol folks. Trust me, they are the nicest guys around /s. |