Please don't mind me saying this, but didn't Hitler try this once :eek:

Air Force chief: Test weapons on testy U.S. mobs


"WASHINGTON (AP) -- Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before being used on the battlefield, the Air Force secretary said Tuesday.

The object is basically public relations. Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions from others about possible safety considerations, said Secretary Michael Wynne.

"If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation," said Wynne. "(Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press."

The Air Force has paid for research into nonlethal weapons, but he said the service is unlikely to spend more money on development until injury problems are reviewed by medical experts and resolved.

Nonlethal weapons generally can weaken people if they are hit with the beam. Some of the weapons can emit short, intense energy pulses that also can be effective in disabling some electronic devices".


I wonder which ethnic minority group would he choose to "experiment" on :@@:




Heres the whole story http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/12/usaf.weapons.ap/index.html

Please don't mind me saying this, but didn't Hitler try this once Air Force chief: Test weapons on testy U.S. mobs

I wonder which ethnic minority group would he choose to "experiment" on [/url]I think what he meant was that if we are truly claiming these things are non-lethal, then the government or contractors should put up or shut up.
This way you know you are getting a product we believe is safe.
Anyway, these weapons are well past the experimantal stage at this point (don't you watch Discovery Channel?)

I didn't read anything about minorities in the article. Where did you see that?

Water cannon, bean bag launchers, rubber bullets ... for the most part hurt like hell, yet are not lethal. Better than catching lead poisioning from a bullet.

microwaves???? anybody say kentucky fried human innards?

I wonder which ethnic minority group would he choose to "experiment" on :@@:

I'm sure they'd be more than happy to try it out on all of the white college kids who protest at WTO meetings.

Take out the damn protesters!!! Vive la WTO!


Oh yea, and on another note; don't microwaves have long-term negative effects on humans, and if they can stop electronics wouldn't that be lethal to someone with a pacemaker?

I think there are different levels of microwaves. Many of the towers you see around town are microwave antennaes.

That's an interesting idea. If they managed to make a wave that hurts people enough to stop them from rioting, wouldn't that deal enough damage to have long-term effects though? Or at least stop a pacemaker?

Oh, btw Dunkirk; just because Hitler did something doesn't mean that it is necessarily wrong. Relating an issue to someone like Hitler is an attempt to discredit an idea by referencing an evil person who did it too. I could say that going to church is evil because Hitler did it (and I believe he went nearly every Sunday and was quite religious).

I could say that going to church is evil because Hitler did it (and I believe he went nearly every Sunday and was quite religious).

Agreed. So unless you want to stop driving on the interstate highway system Dunkirk, don't get too caught up in that line of thinking.

[I] "WASHINGTON (AP) -- Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before being used on the battlefield, the Air Force secretary said Tuesday.



"If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation," said Wynne. "(Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them...[/QUOTE]
================================================== =====

These are the most stupid statements that I have ever heard.
Battlefield, some one will complain it injured them???
Wartime situation? What the frig??
Use on fellow citizens??
Has the world gone crazy????????
I would have never thought Americans would put up with this kind of crap.
He is actually on the tax payroll?
He should be taken out and hung!
Its gone to hell, bubba.

(and I believe he went nearly every Sunday and was quite religious).


Hitler was Roman Catholic (so was Goebbels) but I don't think either one of them went to Mass much.

Hitler was Roman Catholic (so was Goebbels) but I don't think either one of them went to Mass much.
A thousand apologies; I should have said, 'being religious is evil because Hitler was religious'. :)

Translation

"The American public are guinia pigs for our weapons. Whose gonna stop us?"

Why do you hate Americans so much?

Go on YouTube or similar sites and see how other countries deal with protesters.
I can't believe we live in a country in which we actually spend the time and money to develop non-lethal weapons, and are criticized and compared to Hitler.

There is no precedent at any other time or place in history in which such great lives have been lavished on people who don't appreciate them.

Go on YouTube or similar sites and see how other countries deal with protesters.
I can't believe we live in a country in which we actually spend the time and money to develop non-lethal weapons, and are criticized and compared to Hitler.

True, other countries are worse in that regard, but I don't think we should really compare our country to theirs. If someone tried to compare the US to the Middle East, I think I'd want to smack em. :slap:

btw Dunkirk's Hitler comparison was to the methods that the article suggested we use, not all americans.

I can't believe we live in a country in which we actually spend the time and money to develop non-lethal weapons, Oh thank you for shooting us with Microwaves that make it feel like our skin is melting off...

Gimmie a break.

Wind Wip has the goods. You complain about comparisons then make one of your own. Yeah I mean God forbid the country actually supports freedom of speech or anything...

So brooks, since you are so sure this thing is safe I'm sure you'll be the first in line to have it tested on you repeatedly right?

People seem to be concentrating on rubber bullets and microwaves. There are many different non-lethal methods available to the authorities besides these. There are noxious smells, irritating sounds, super slippery foam, liquid that becomes very sticky when sprayed.

Wouldn't it be better to use these non-lethal methods rather than shooting people or simply allowing them to riot?

i like the sticky liquid idea.

Bring on the heavy duty silly string!

what color should be used?

1. Oh thank you for shooting us with Microwaves that make it feel like our skin is melting off...
2. Wind Wip has the goods. You complain about comparisons then make one of your own.
3. Yeah I mean God forbid the country actually supports freedom of speech or anything...
4. So brooks, since you are so sure this thing is safe I'm sure you'll be the first in line to have it tested on you repeatedly right?1. If a mob is about to cause great injury, what is your preferred method? These are the reasons we have non lethal weaponry.

2. I wasn't complaining about the concept of comparisons, I was criticizing a pointless and intentionally sensational one.

3. I know we've stetched the definition of speech to include offensive art and political contributions, but I don't think bottle throwing mobs are included yet.

4. No. That's why we have kittens and harp seal pups.

Wouldn't it be better to use these non-lethal methods rather than shooting people or simply allowing them to riot?

You'd think so, but at least in Cincinnati where too many shootings by cops led to riots, people now spend all their time complaining about getting tazed. So no one will ever be happy.

You'd think so, but at least in Cincinnati where too many shootings by cops led to riots, people now spend all their time complaining about getting tazed. So no one will ever be happy.

On the other hand, I do see the logic in not having the cops shoot people who are rioting over police shootings. ;-)

They don't like bullets, they don't like tazers ... use tranquilizer darts. Maybe then they'll look forward to getting shot.

Oh screw it, lets just beat em with billyclubs like they did back in the old days

WATER CANNONS AND ATTACK DOGS>>>>>> yeah boyeeeeee...........

4. No. That's why we have kittens and harp seal pups.
:D

Reminds me of a bumper sticker I once saw, Brooks.

Nuke the baby whales.

If a mob is about to cause great injury, what is your preferred method? These are the reasons we have non lethal weaponry. Tear gas works quite well. Shooting microwaves at people sounds extremely dangerous and it is as of yet untested. You're talking about this thing like its safe, like they know the long term effects of it. Its not. This AF jackass is saying use americans as guinia pigs. That implies slavery. Like the US owns its population and are free to do what they choose to them. Sorry, I'm not a slave.
I wasn't complaining about the concept of comparisons, I was criticizing a pointless and intentionally sensational one. Right and comparing the US to other countries is useless. It's like if all the other countries had slavery and we had indentured servitude you'd be shouting the glories of our wonderful freedom...just because it may be better than other countries in some respects doesn't mean that it is good, right, just etc.
I know we've stetched the definition of speech to include offensive art and political contributions, but I don't think bottle throwing mobs are included yet. Yeah. those damn liberals....we should be able to jail offensive artists...Stretch? are you serious? What kind of "sorta free speech" do you believe in? And bottle throwing mobs? yeah it happens in Europe all the time. Even Molotov throwing mobs.

Do the cops resort to military weaponry? No. They tough it out a prove they're hardcore.
Do they get killed on a regualr basis? No.
Are massive amounts of economic damage done to the countries? No because A. they don't use a completely ridiculous number of cops and B. the cops don't intentionally aggrivate the situation by using weapons on protesters.

But regardless of that tear gas works pretty well. Microwaves are completely unnecessary.

Microwaves may be unnecessary. Other "waves" have been experimented with, including very low frequency sound waves that can induce varying levels of nausea and high frequency waves that may induce headaches. Rather than having a water cannon used on crowds, sound cannon might be utilized.

On the other hand, I do see the logic in not having the cops shoot people who are rioting over police shootings. ;-)

You're a riot.:lolhit:

Other "waves" have been experimented with, including very low frequency sound waves that can induce varying levels of nausea and high frequency waves that may induce headaches. Rather than having a water cannon used on crowds, sound cannon might be utilized. From what I've heard the Israelis used anti-"aparteid wall" protestors for guinia pigs on this and it kind of failed to do much. Even though articles claimed it worked they also say they used club, gas and bullets....doesn't sound very successful if they had to resort of all of those.

1. Yeah. those damn liberals....we should be able to jail offensive artists...Stretch? are you serious? What kind of "sorta free speech" do you believe in? And bottle throwing mobs? yeah it happens in Europe all the time. Even Molotov throwing mobs.

2. But regardless of that tear gas works pretty well. Microwaves are completely unnecessary.1. You're the one who suggested that the weapons were being used because we don't support free speech. These things were designed for riots not speeches. Riots are not speech - yet.

2. The microwave gun can be aimed pinpoint at a specific person.
Tear gas affects everyone in the cloud, including passersby and non-violent protesters. People often run into objects and each other causing great injury.

The microwave gun can be aimed pinpoint at a specific person. Right and energy degrades at an expotential rate so how do you know "how strong" to make the radiation? What if other people are closer (they'll recieved something 20x's stronger...)

Tear gas affects everyone in the cloud, including passersby and non-violent protesters. People often run into objects and each other causing great injury. Cops don't seem to concerned with non-violent protestors (you saw the video from Miami). I think tear gas is good in the repect that it does effect other people not invovled with the protest. It means the cops have to think if using such force is acutually needed, rather then just attacking protestors for the hell of it.

This AF jackass is saying use americans as guinia pigs. That implies slavery. Like the US owns its population and are free to do what they choose to them.

You need to remember one thing, 500lb;

.....that is the way that the conservative faction LIKES it!!!!!

I think tear gas is good in the repect that it does effect other people not invovled with the protest. It means the cops have to think if using such force is acutually needed, rather then just attacking protestors for the hell of it.So put the cops in a difficult position which allows the violent protesters to continue. It's the same human shield strategy the brave men of Hezbollah employ. I'm not surprised you advocate it.

I love how Brooks instantly takes the side of the cops, 500lbs instantly sides with the protesters while FT throws in some anti-conservative blurb that doesnt really relate to the issue. It's like a soap opera.

I haven't sided with the cops in this case. I'm criticizing tear gas and advocating the developoment of better non-lethal means of crowd control.
I think that would be taking the side of the public.

I've long wondered why the law enforcement community is not supplied with tranquilizer guns. Hard to believe we've not the technology to come up with something that will effectively deliver 5 or 10 mg of Haldol (http://www.mentalhealth.com/drug/p30-h02.html) into a misbehaving individual rather than filling that same person with lead. I've seen a whole lot of crazies in my time, and have yet to see one that can resist the calming call of Haldol.

So put the cops in a difficult position which allows the violent protesters to continue. It's the same human shield strategy the brave men of Hezbollah employ. I'm not surprised you advocate it. But if tear gas isn't harmful then what do you have to worry about? My point is that a majority of cops I've met are sadistic fucks with control issues who place themselves in an oppositional nature with those they are suppossedly "serving and protecting". Most often a guilty till innocent "just to be on the safe side" non sense. We already say footage of the WTO pigs laughing about shooting non-violent, unarmed, completely innocent protestors using their 1st amendment rights. Most pigs are trigger happy when it comes to what they see as something they don't agree with ie:antithetical to free speech. Therefore the only way to keep them from crossing certain lines is for them to worry about pissing off the public at large. So if someone is doing something that requires non-lethal weaponry to stop then they ccan weigh it against the risk of pissing off the public with tear gas.

It's not using human sheilds when they have no right to attack you anyways. Its called being a pig. Breaking the law to fulfill your own whims and opinions rather then upholding the law and giving equal protection and treatment to all. If I'm walking down the street and thugs with clubs and guns start chasing me and I run into a restraunt to save myself am I using everyone in the restraunt as human sheilds? No because violent thugs should not be chasing me inthe first place. I am merely drawing attention and attemping to stop an unjust situation.

500lbs instantly sides with the protesters If by "instantly sideing with the protestors" you mean denying the military the ability to use American citizens as guinia pigs for untested technology then yes. But to me that sounds more like "Pro-freedom" or "anti-useing American citizens as guinia pigs for untested technology"

I haven't sided with the cops in this case. I'm criticizing tear gas and advocating the developoment of better non-lethal means of crowd control.
I think that would be taking the side of the public.

Well when you said - So put the cops in a difficult position which allows the violent protesters to continue. - it made the cops seem like the victims.


We already say footage of the WTO pigs laughing about shooting non-violent, unarmed, completely innocent protestors using their 1st amendment rights.
500lbs, I grew up in Seattle. I was there in the WTO riots, and I can tell you that they were NOT peaceful, they were violent and they most definitely were not innocent and quite a few of the protesters were armed as well. There were also cops that were using more force than needed, but it was not just a one sided beating as you described it.

What I mean by instantly siding with protesters is right there in your post; exaggerating to make the protesters look like the sole victims and cops as, well describing them as pigs shows how you think of cops.

1. But if tear gas isn't harmful then what do you have to worry about?
2. Most pigs are trigger happy when it comes to what they see as something they don't agree with ie:antithetical to free speech.
3. It's not using human sheilds when they have no right to attack you anyways. 1. The tear gas itself is not harmful in the long term. However, people's reactions when gassed (ie: running into walls, running into each other, running into traffic, blowing into passing cars) are very harmful.

2. Trigger happy - unnecessarily shooting. Free speech - legal expression of ideas.
So pigs shoot when they don't agree with someone's point. Hokay.

3. Individuals who break the law while among lawful protesters know that they are somewhat protected from police action while among the innocent. I'd say that qualifies as human shields.
Your idea would have some merit if EVERY time police took action they had no right to do so. But since that's not the case your point is, to quote Overdose, retarded.

Sorry I meant the FTAA protests in Miami.