(Untitled)

[snarkhunter]

So the Army has a ray gun.

I...don't know how to react to this. On the one hand, I say, "DUDE! We have a RAY GUN! That's so cool!" On another hand, I totally support the idea of non-lethal technology in Iraq and similar situations. On the last hand (apparently I have three? Maybe one's a foot)...there's this: The beam penetrates the skin slightly

Comments

[valancy_s]

Is that the one that makes people think they're on fire? I read about that a while back. It's kind of... twistedly ingenious.

how long before it is deployed against the American public, as well?

Well, considering police in Boston killed a girl with the current supposedly non-lethal crowd-dispersing technology (bean-bag guns), that may or may not be a bad thing.

[snarkhunter]

And I agree to a certain extent, b/c anything that's non-lethal and reasonably safe is, IMHO, a good thing.

But I'm disturbed by the intense pain component. Again, I don't know how else you could keep crowds back, so I get it, but...yeah. I don't know. What scares me is the idea that they could use it for sustained acts of torture. It's one thing to use it to get people out of the way and to subdue a riot. That makes sense, and it probably needs to be used in such a manner. I just see it being abused, though.

And, honestly, I keep thinking "crucio." Maybe that's why it bothers me.

Of course, I keep coming back to RAY GUN OMG. SO COOL.

[valancy_s]

I agree that the potential for abuse is there, and is frightening. And the parallel to Crucio is certainly not in your imagination! It makes me curious about the physical construction of the thing though... if it's like a cannon with a long, wide range, it may simply not be practical to use on a single person for torture. (Not that that's wholly comforting, but you know.)

[anxietygrrl]

The lack of availability to outside scrutiny bothers me, for one thing. And the potential torture applications as well, especially if it doesn't leave marks, although it's probably way too expensive to ever find a practical use in that vein

[bear]

Ray gun!

I'd definitely be pro in a stateside law enforcement context -- it's a good thing for the same reasons tasers are: namely, you're better off giving law enforcement a spectrum of options wrt force, rather than jumping straight from "what my muscle-y arms can do" --> Glock.

(Maybe people wouldn't set cars on fire after football games if a GIANT HUMVEE-MOUNTED RAY GUN were patrolling the streets after the game?)

And, seriously, there are all kinds of things that have the potential to be used to torture people. Tear gas, pepper spray, beanbag guns -- all nonlethal crowd-dispersing tools -- probably aren't all that great in concentrated doses on a single person.

Basically, I *do* trust (most) cops.

[baked_goldfish]

I'd actually prefer that to the tear gas/pepper spray dispersal methods that we currently use. I had a friend who had mild asthma and was at a basketball game where the police ended up using pepper spray, and he had to be hospitalized. Ray Gun may be painful like crazy, but I'm assuming the pain wears off with no nasty side effects.

And tear gas is just gross.