Flashlight Weapon Makes Targets Throw Up

  • Thread starter Thread starter b_justb
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

b_justb

Guest
It looks like a big flashlight — but it’s really a nonlethal weapon designed to make you sick.



Intelligent Optical Systems, Inc., of Torrance, Calif., has been granted a contract by the Department of Homeland Security to develop what it calls the “LED Incapacitator,” according to a DHS online newsletter.

The handheld device using light-emitting diodes to emit super-bright pulses of light at rapidly changing wavelengths, causing disorientation, nausea and even vomiting in whomever it’s pointed at.

| STORY |
 
Such devices are designed to trigger epileptic seizures. “Hostage grenades” are designed to do the same thing, by rapidly emitting bright pulses of light. Their use is pretty much a last resort – since all sorts of damage can result.
 
I would think shooting someone with a gun would be a last resort. Sure any weapon can be dangerous to some people. Heck, not everyone can even eat peanuts or take the same medicine.

But if there is a weapon that can incapacitate a person without seriously harming most people, that is a good thing. Not all people react to a tazer and some people have died after being tazed. Not everyone can be knocked down with a shot from a bean-bag gun and a few have been seriously injured. Certainly not everyone will be suseptable to this and some may be hurt. But for goodness sake, it is better than shooting someone!

The more NLW (non-lethal weapons) at the disposal of the law-enforcement and the military, the fewer deaths there will be. Sure, injuries may go up, but those who will be injured are the ones who, today, are being killed. Isn’t that a step in the right direction?
 
rpp said:
I would think shooting someone with a gun would be a last resort. Sure any weapon can be dangerous to some people. Heck, not everyone can even eat peanuts or take the same medicine.
Click to expand...
“Shooting someone with a gun” is already adequately covered by law. If you use a gun – even if you miss – you are culpable of using deadly force. You can only use deadly force when in reasonable fear of death or grevious bodily injury and have no other choice.

Will this device be under the same strict controls?
rpp said:
But if there is a weapon that can incapacitate a person without seriously harming most people, that is a good thing.
Click to expand...
Or a bad thing – since without controls on its use equal to those on guns, it will be used much more often.
rpp said:
Not all people react to a tazer and some people have died after being tazed. Not everyone can be knocked down with a shot from a bean-bag gun and a few have been seriously injured. Certainly not everyone will be suseptable to this and some may be hurt. But for goodness sake, it is better than shooting someone!
Click to expand...
Not if thousands are victimized by it because there are no controls!
rpp said:
The more NLW (non-lethal weapons) at the disposal of the law-enforcement and the military, the fewer deaths there will be.
Click to expand...
Or perhaps more – many people have been killed by “non-lethal” weapons who would never have been kileld at all had only guns been available – since guns would not have been used.
rpp said:
Sure, injuries may go up, but those who will be injured are the ones who, today, are being killed. Isn’t that a step in the right direction?
Click to expand...
No, it’s a step in the wrong directioni – putting more power, with fewer controls into the hands of government.
 
Any type of device like this that can have unintended victims is going to leave the user open to lawsuit. If the officer uses it to subdue a kid in a crowd who’s throwing rocks or whatever, and it happens to dazzle the guy next to him who’s an epileptic—and the latter goes into a seizure and dies, who are the lawyers going to go after?

In any of the departments that I’ve worked in, we’ve always been told that even using tear gas was a last resort, because if you fire a tear gas capsule into a crowd, and somebody in there is asthmatic and dies, you can rest assured the lawyers will come oozing in, looking for somebody to sue.

At least if you’re using good old-fashioned bullets, you’re going to use a lot more restraint, and you know fully well what’s going to happen if you draw your weapon.
 
Wolseley said:
At least if you’re using good old-fashioned bullets, you’re going to use a lot more restraint, and you know fully well what’s going to happen if you draw your weapon.
Click to expand...
Exactly right!

As I said, most of the people killed by “non-lethal” weapons would not have been killed had that weapon not been available – because the situation did not justify the use of deadly force.
 
Hmm… :hmmm:

These responses, especially fro Wolseley, gives me pause.

The fact that Mirdath and Vern agree on something :eek: 😉 make me think even more that perhaps my initial response was premature.

I am not a dunderhead who believes himself to always be right. You have given me some good reasons to rethink this.

The fact that an officer may think he is not going to inflict serious harm may lead him to use this when he would hesitate to use his billy-club or especially his gun.
 
Not to take things off subject, but I guess it is weapon related.

I was noticing Wolseley’s signature:
St. Michael carries a sword instead of a bouquet of daisies for a reason.
Click to expand...
and it reminded me about what I see in my church. We had a priest for a couple years, he was a good one, now gone to his own parish. Anyway, he had received a gift, a statue of St Michael the Archangel. It was the classic image Michael’s left foot on the neck of the devil, his left hand holding a chain that binds him, and of course in his right hand: A sword? A Spear? no: NOTHING!

Sometimes it’s a flaming sword, sometimes a spear, sometimes a regular sword, ***but someone, apparently thought they should remove the weapon from his hand! ***

AUGH!

So they disarmed the archangel and now it looks like he’s about to roll dice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top