"Less lethal" riot control ray gun to be deployed in Iraq next year
By Donald Melanson 
posted Jul 21st 2005 12:35PM
posted Jul 21st 2005 12:35PM
The US military plans to deploy the Active Denial System weapon, a "less lethal" pain gun, in Iraq next year, but the system is already causing concern among scientists. The weapon is intended to be used as a riot control device, firing a 95GHz microwave beam at a crowd, causing heat and intolerable pain in less five or fewer seconds. But in tests at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico, it's been reported that participants were told to remove eyeglasses and contact lenses to protect their eyes, and take any coins or other metal objects out of their pockets to keep "hot spots" from developing on their skin. Yikes, what do you have to do to draw that assignment?
I have heard from numerous sources that the military was using similar weapons in a lethal capacity during the 2003 invasion. Specifically, a plasma (lightning) device that melted a schoolbus full of people.
These devices were of course discussed at length in the thirties by our favorite mad scientist (Tesla). I HIGHLY doubt these will be used in a non-lethal manner. Now that we know over 25000 civilians died in the last two years in IRAQ. (great way to make friends...)
I wonder what you could use as a shield, presumably not a tinfoil hat...
If only our technologies to help ppl or make free energy were as fast moving as tech to harm.
Woun't that be like putting a baby on a microwave?
Sounds dangerous, as in.. Permanent damage...
#2
What about a mirror? That always works in the comics.
time to buy that wearable faraday cage
this puts a whole new spin on "drive-bys"
"Specifically, a plasma (lightning) device that melted a schoolbus full of people. "
wow...you've been reading too much science fiction. maybe you should brush up on some physics, and get some background info on the real plasma weapons the US military is researching. because i don't think they are making "bus-melting guns."
#2: Actually aluminum foil would work well, microwaves cannot penetrate metal at all and will reflect off of it. Due to the wavelength you don't even necessarily need a solid sheet.
Perhaps a metallic dye or thread in fabrics worn would be enough to stop most of it.
OMG! They can Cook Baked Potatoes now in mass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
wouldnt that just make it really hot?
They've got to test this somewhere before they use it at home when the citizens get wise and want their freedom back.
Why test it in New Mexico, do the world a favor and test it on Bush's Ranch or even better on the Pentagon.
clicclic
1. Um, there is no Tesla "lightning" weapon currently in use by the military. Nice argument fallacy, though, (appeal to authority: "I have heard from numerous sources". Oh yeah? Who?) and way to throw in "melting a school bus" (of course, because the military routinely targets "school" busses with classified lightning weapons. The military abandoned the Tesla research long, long ago as impractical.).
2. The Active Denial weapon has zero to do with this, and is based an a 95GHz wave. It's specifically designed to NOT be lethal; that's it's very purpose. Arguing that a non-lethal weapon is secretly designed for lethal use flies in the face of logic. We've already got plenty of very effective lethal weaponry.
3. According to Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, 100,000 Iraqi civilians were dying per YEAR as a direct result of the 12 years of UN sanctions. (Remember, continuing sanctions were the only alternative offered by war opponents. And we're just discovering the full scale of corruption in the UN Oil for Food Programme and its contract administrators in France, Germany, and Russia, who profited to the tune of tens of billions of dollars.)
4. Even if we take estimated civilian death toll since March 2003 and *quadruple* it, there's actually been a quantifiable net PRESERVATION of life since before the action began, when using the Amnesty and HRC numbers! The comparatively minimal improvements in sanitation, access to medical care, clean water, food, electricity, services, and other critical infrastructure components just as a matter of course by entities such as the Army Corps of Engineers (whose very purpose this is) have actually resulted in a mitigation of the large numbers of deaths in rural areas that were due to neglect by the old Iraqi regime. The preservation of life due to infrastructure and services improvements in general in Iraq, coupled with the fact that since the initial stages of the invasion there are virtually no statistically relevant death amounts (just look at iraqbodycount.net's own figures to confirm this - they've dropped to near zero, and those that exist are mostly due to fanatical Islamic suicide bombers killing their own Arab Muslim brothers and sisters!), and you get a fairly significant net preservation of life even including unintended civilian death in the initial invasion.
This is part of a long term strategy to change the face of the mideast. Even John Kerry got it:
"To destroy our enemy, we have to know our enemy. We have to understand that we are facing a radical fundamentalist movement with global reach and a very specific plan. They are not just out to kill us for the sake of killing us. They want to provoke a conflict that will radicalize the people of the Muslim world, turning them against the United States and the West. And they hope to transform that anger into a force that will topple the region s governments and pave the way for a new empire, an oppressive, fundamentalist superstate stretching across a vast area from Europe to Africa, from the Middle East to Central Asia.
The American people have a right to hear the answer to a fundamental question: How are we going to win this war? What is our strategy for eliminating the terrorists, discrediting their cause, and smashing their forces so that America can actually be safer?
The jihadist movement that hates us is gaining adherents around the world. An estimated 18,000 al Qaeda trained militants are operating in 60 countries around the world in a dangerous and more elusive network of extremist groups. Al Qaeda shouldn t be hitting us anywhere. They should be losing, everywhere. We should be winning, everywhere.
That will take time. It will not be easy. But it can be done."
And before anyone says "How is being in Iraq *stopping* terrorism? It's actually strengthening their cause!!" Yes. It is. In the SHORT term. This is a LONG term strategy to create environments of freedom, and critically, free flows of information, in the mideast at large, making their peoples intolerant of the kind of religious fanaticism and hatred that is the fundamentalist Panislamic movement. If you're not willing to take the initiative necessary, New York, Madrid, and London (twice now) are only the tip of the iceberg.
And instead of the "Ray gun worries scientists" bullshit in the news.com article (which is baseless, and is based only on the fact that test subjects were asked to remove contacts and metal as a precaution, since they're, um, TEST SUBJECTS), here's some actual information:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/v-mads.htm
http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news-releases/2005/def-nonprolif-sec/active-denial.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Denial
Dave, This is not your political sounding board.
You could have just called cliccic an idiot and be done with it instead of busting out the Kneepads and fellating the administration on a tech messageboard.
Just as aside your argument concerning the sanctions is idiotic because most people knew the sanctions were ineffectual and in essence empowered saddam by making Iraqis more dependant on his police state.
It's not a binary situation where it's either war or starvation.
Also my question to you is do really think burning people with rayguns as a means of crowd control is a good idea in a country whose people we are attemping to befriend.
"This is a LONG term strategy to create environments of freedom, and critically, free flows of information, in the mideast at large, making their peoples intolerant of the kind of religious fanaticism and hatred that is the fundamentalist Panislamic movement."
Some would argue that is a gamble that essentially can be lost.
What happens if you create the environment for a democratically elected islamic state?
You know shia majority and whatnot?
You would have essentially gone from a secularist to Iran part II
"If you're not willing to take the initiative necessary, New York, Madrid, and London (twice now) are only the tip of the iceberg."
similarly there are some who would argue that these attacks are at least in part inspired by Iraqi "collateral" damage.
It is now a known fact that Islamic terrorism has gone up dramatically in the years since the war on terror has begun. The fact is this war is an idealogical experiment , grounded in nothing other than fancy.
also I find it interesting that you excoriate the original poster for his idiotic appeal to authority and then follow with your own idiotic appeal to authority "even john kerry" I won't even comment on the blatantly partisan mindset that spawns such a comment.
Thanks for ruining moment of geekdom at work.
LOL @13 ....you actually took all that time write such a ridicilously long comment on a GADGET blog?!?! There's this thing I have to tell you about...its really cool. Its called "outside".
I think that building ray guns to burn people en mass is a good sign that your country is way too full of assholes.
History has never looked kindly on societies that pioneered novel ways of causing pain.
I guess after China surpasses us economically, Fiji has more mathematicians, and India becomes the chief exporter of culture to the world, at least we'll be the biggest pricks around.
I wonder who the ray guns will be pointing at then?
To commenter #15 whom said:
"Dave, This is not your political sounding board.
You could have just called cliccic an idiot and be done with it instead of busting out the Kneepads and fellating the administration on a tech messageboard. "
Yeah Dave, stop spreading quantifiable information that doesn't further the libral agenda! Your not supposed to be educated, your supposed to just resort to name calling like us librals do. Excuse me why I kiss the buttocks of Michael Moore, George Soros and the US media at large.
I understand that human rights groups need to keep an eye on new weapons.....but when the alternative is bullets, it seems like much of the criticism is a bit moot.
I still say they should just spray valium / Nitric Oxide / pot as a weapon. Just chill everyone out.
Christopher:
I didn't make this a political sounding board; the VERY FIRST poster did, with a false assertion that the US military is melting school busses and a pass at how we just love oh-so-much to kill innocent civilians indiscriminately (also false).
In answer to your question: I'd much prefer NON-LETHAL (or "less lethal", if you prefer) technology to be used in the place of spraying a crowd with an M60 or blanketing it with tear gas.
Mortimer J. Jackleson:
You are an unadulterated idiot.
This technology is designed SPECIFICALLY to avoid killing. It's primary purpose isn't simply to cause pain; it's to AVOID killing and maiming. Your mistake is that you think it can be avoided altogether; to pretend that the conflicts that make governments and police forces attempt to disperse crowds, in the hopes of quashing MORE violence (which equates to possible more pain/death/destruction/etc.), do not exist.
Except they do.
And to attempt to find non-lethal methods of dealing with potentially very dangerous situations is a perfectly reasonable endeavor.
Of course, if you're under the mistaken assumption that if it weren't for the evil US, we'd all be living in a Star Trek world government utopia with no poverty or conflict, then you'll likely disagree with my statements.
And in closing:
The device isn't designed to burn people to death, nor even to burn people. It's designed to disperse crowds. As deployed (and no, the military can't just change this in the field), the duration of the pulse does not allow it to cause harm. It's a black box device that is employed as-is, arguing that the military and/or police will disregard proper usage is tantamount to saying that the military will in the field disassemble a missile to make it more deadly. The device is NOT DESIGNED to cause harm, or to kill. It is designed only to disperse a crowd. The fact that it is surprising that pain or discomfort is used as the dispersal method is somewhat astounding to me. How would you suggest they be dispersed? Gun? Napalm? Bomb? Flamethrower?
And to say that they shouldn't be dispersed at all; to presume that any such desired dispersal is automatically wrong is erring on the side of anarchy, which is a slightly wrongheaded approach to analyzing a situation. You might first want to consider there are legitimate reasons to disperse a riot.
"Yeah Dave, stop spreading quantifiable information"
This is amusing, do you even know what quantifiable means?
"Your not supposed to be educated"
are you implying that he's educated and i'm not?
Why because he agrees with you?
"your supposed to just resort to name calling like us librals do."
You might want to learn to spell liberal before attempting to cast aspersions.
"Excuse me why I kiss the buttocks of Michael Moore, George Soros and the US media at large."
By U.S media at large do you mean Fox news the #1 Cable channel? or Rush Limbaugh the #1 rated talk news network, or perhaps you mean the New York post the newspaper with the highest circulation in new york (a liberal state intererestingly enough)
The liberal media has long since expired and people who continue to make the argument are clearly simply repeating someone like O'reilly who claims to be a victim of the Media while being the #1 on the #1 News Channel in the world. The irony is mind bendingly stupid.
Wait, experimental governmental testing of irradiating human beings? Heh, it's backstories like this that super heroes are made from.
"I didn't make this a political sounding board; the VERY FIRST poster did, with a false assertion that the US military is melting school busses and a pass at how we just love oh-so-much to kill innocent civilians indiscriminately (also false)."
In my mind it wasn't even worth addressing, the first poster is obviously a complete idiot and thus not worth the typing and CPU cycles, the rest of your post was essentially cheerleading. I don't log onto this site to argue politics (I log onto other sites for that)
I guess it really was inevitable that I would live to see my world equivocated into oblivion.
It's a forgone conclusion: we really ARE witnessing the events leading-up to the last (and most certainly, final), global conflict, WW3, and I'm not just talkng about the so-called war on terrorism. It's merely a symptom of a much more profound problem, that of New Man comming to terms with Old Man. Quite literally, the reptiles on the right and the gonzoes on the left, in their bald-faced self interest are, either deliberately or in ignorance, destroying the relative paradise that sane and rational people have created in our modern civilization. The modern world belongs to the sane and rational, and those that cannot live within its confines have, like wild animals, decided they will destroy ths world in which they know they have no place.
We are seeing is a catharsis, sad but neccessary in order for our species to progress to a higher level of developement. The irrational on either side must be gotten rid of - the reptiles and the gonzoes *must* be allowed to pit themselves against each other, as is ther tendancy, so that they might be mutualy destroyed. Only after they're gone may humankind move on to a saner, stabler, and more peaceful existance, free of this insanity.
If you can relate to what I've said here, stay out of the way of these monsters, and stay under their radar, or risk being subsumed by them.
Dave,
using non-sequiturs does not strengthen your argument in fact they make you look silly.
"In answer to your question: I'd much prefer NON-LETHAL (or "less lethal", if you prefer) technology to be used in the place of spraying a crowd with an M60 or blanketing it with tear gas."
Again the choice is not "Experimental raygun" or "Exterminate with Extreme prejudice". The choice is "Experimental raygun" or "Other non-lethal technology" Like water cannons, Bean Bags, tear gas, or foam.
The fact that I don't like the idea doesn't imply that I embrace anarchy it simply means I don't like the idea.
A melted school bus? That sounds great.
What comic book had that shit in it?
Back to the topic, it would be great to drive that thing around and randomly turn it on at people.
They should just drive it through the mountains of Afghanistan and roast everyone. Maybe they can attach it to a helicopter. See how many rpg's you get off the ground then you commie scum. Just follow the screams and then we can take care of some of the Afghanistan issues.
HOW 'BOUT THEM METS?
Christopher:
"In my mind it wasn't even worth addressing, the first poster is obviously a complete idiot and thus not worth the typing and CPU cycles, the rest of your post was essentially cheerleading. I don't log onto this site to argue politics (I log onto other sites for that)"
Well, I don't come here to read the crap, whether worth responding to or not, that #1 posted.
And I didn't vote for Bush, so I'm not cheerleading anything except the fundamental idea that, via some method, radical Panislamism (i.e., the belief that there should be one true Islamic government in the whole of the mideast that is the seat of government for the globe, and that anyone who disagrees with their twisted interpretation of Islam be subjugated or killed) be defeated at all costs.
That the DoD might be looking to deploy a non-lethal crowd dispersal technology in Iraq is hardly surprising to me. As for other non-lethal techniques, which have varying degrees of dispersal effectiveness (indeed, some disperse, some immobilize, some annoy), sure; but note also that we have thousands of different varieties of all manner of tools, including weapons, some more effective in certain circumstances than others.
If creating new weapons technology, lethal or no, rubs you the wrong way, I can respect that. But to jump to the conclusions some of the other posters have, along the lines that the US is just thirsting to find new ways to gravely cause pain, is just ridiculous, and quite honestly downright offensive, when the purpose of the device is quite the opposite.
Dave Schroeder said:
> Mortimer J. Jackleson:
>
> You are an unadulterated idiot.
Hey Christopher, he took your advice! Who says that debates don't lead to a change of views? He even one-upped you with the "unadulterated" bit.
Dave, I'm glad you trust the military and our government so much. Let's see if you're right. Post back in 50 years or so.
Looking back on the last 50 years or so, it seems that most governments eventually went on to abuse their own citizens with one weapon, technology, bacteria, virus, policy, edict, etcetera or another. Must we repeat other's (and our own) mistakes year after year. You argue yes. Yet I'm the dum-dum. Forgive me if I disagree with you.
I was melted in a school bus once - but it was by something far more powerful than wimpy gun. It was by a large fusion device positioned 1 A.U away from the earth.
Yay military. Keep up the work. Just make sure that it is "non-lethal" when it's deployed.
I'm all for this.
You wankers want to turn everything political, like your beliefs are revolutionary or make an impact on someone else.
Please take that shit to some dark empty coffee house on open mic night in Seattle, NY or San Francisco.
This is engadget bitch. We want techno porn and non-politically correct commentary. We want to know when the cell phone companies are going to rape us with their new cell phones with half of the features turned off or non-functional due to a shit network. We want to know how the progress is coming on robot companions that fold laundry and know which drawer my underwear go in. I want to hear news of a cappuccino machine that wakes me up, tells me the news and weather, makes me good espresso and lets me know if there is a criminal waiting for me outside my front door. No one wants gobbledeegook political hoo haa fluff on engadget.
Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the exact use case here?
A) A group of hostile people with weapons intent on killing US soldiers? -- Clearly not, since it's a crowd dispersion device.
B) A group of protesters who aren't hostile? -- I hope not, that seems like a recipe for escalating future protests (i.e. in the form of terrorism)
Then again, "American Foreign Policy" seems to escape me ...admittedly my two scenarios are extremes, but what honestly is a scenario where this would be useful?
ha less lethal looks like it will desenegrate an elephant its so big!
If the UN didn't give Palestine away in the late 40s and the US didn't go to bat for Israel no matter what for (when they never return the favor), then there'd BE no "terrorists". This war is disgusting. Christianity and Judaism are in bed with each other leaving the Muslims the odd man out. I'm not a Muslim. I'm a realist. It's time this country wakes up and gets out of the Middle East.
Dave Schroeder or whatever your name is, are you a stay-at-home-blogger, or do you telecommute?
The play on words here is great (sarcasm). They call it a less than lethal weapon. Sure, it won't kill you, but you'll be left with burns and bruises, not to mention possible brain damage.
How can you people be so stupid as to spin an idea that is designed to save people live's into something bad/evil/wrong??? This is a crowd control mechanism that doesn't cause any actual physical injury only a sensation of being burned without actually burning. The cited article asks:
"How do you ensure that the dose doesn't cross the threshold for permanent damage? Does the weapon cut out to prevent overexposure?"
YES! The device is designed to cut out/ as to prevent overexposure. For a "scientist" you would think they would do some research before spouting off. As pointed out earlier, the requirements to remove glasses and coins were because they were TESTING. They later tested them with glasses and everything was safe. This frequency was picked because it is a safe frequency.
This non-lethal and non-injury inducing form of deterant seems like a much better idea than pointing guns at people and shooting pellets/bean bags/tear gas/bullets at them. This is a good thing, not a bad thing.
Microwave radiation scares the hell out of me. If anyone ever points something like this at me Im going to use whatever lethal response I can come up with.
A political argument on a tech blog? I thought geeks were monolithically libertarian technocrats, but maybe thats just out west. Im going to save my breath and only say Im hawkish on defense but believe invading Iraq was an enormous mistake. Check out the Libertarian exit strategy
http://www.lp.org/cgi-bin/plan/plan.cgi
This is part of my buddys website (I build his boxen) I dont always agree with him but his work is thoughtful.
http://www.chrisvalentines.com/projects/USpageintro.html
More robots and MP3 players, Less ray guns please.
Boo hoo. They would even be complaining if instead of a heat ray it blared out one of the Dixie Chicks albums. I would consider the latter a more a war crime than the former. Oh, and maybe the 'enemy' can meet us half way and do some non-lethal beheadnings. That would be swass.
I can spell. I swear.
39,
You're quite correct it is intended as a less lethal means and yes they should be applauded for it, but as another poster put it "Microwave radiation scares the hell out of me" as an scientific enthusiast I know that good intentions is the mother of all fuckups, whose to say they won't figure out ten years from now that this thing causes brain cancer.
Even better not all crowds are created alike.
Rowdy protestors, Soccer hooligans, and incensed islamists entirely different demographics and the methods used to control them should be different and that means exploring the entire range of scientific options. Theres a non-lethal weapon that essentially fires glue. Theres one that uses sonic blasts, I'm a technophile but the idea of blasting people with microwaves simply does not sit well with me.
"Jason,
They would even be complaining if instead of a heat ray it blared out one of the Dixie Chicks albums."
This is already being employed, not the dixie chicks but some hoohaa equivalent.
"I would consider the latter a more a war crime than the former."
will it still be a war crime when it gets out of the testing phase and is used here to control college kids, or is it only acceptable when used on those filthy raghead bastards intent on destroying western civilisation ( or get reliable electricity whichever comes first)
"Oh, and maybe the 'enemy' can meet us half way and do some non-lethal beheadnings. That would be swass."
So people who protest now are the enemy?
The enemy doesn't protest they shoot. If you look at Iraq people have been protesting for all sorts of things including lack of running water and electricity, If they get rowdy that sure does Justify blasting them with microwaves.
holy christ. guys, give it a rest.
If the US learns to stay at home there is no need for non-lethal weapons at all. If it was about the Iraqi people, then there was plenty of time to remove him during the first gulf war. The second war was about getting the fingers on the oil. Nobody in Washington cares a damn about the Iraqi people. Don't forget who did enforce that silly embargo which only killed civilians. And if you are at it, look at the old pictures where Rumsfeld was shaking Saddam's hand after delivering him the latest weapons.
So Mr. Schroeder if you stay at home in the first place there is no need to try to cover up the mess that US foreign politics causes all over this planet all the time.
But instead of using the brain, new weapons need to be developed. Do a google on the numbers of US military bases outside of the US. Think about how you would feel if China sets up some military bases in the US and starts telling you what's best for you. Maybe after that you might get a small insight why the US is having these "acceptance problems" all over the planet ;-)
Having something like Guantanamo and still talking about freedom and democracy one must be
already a victim of such a non lethal weapon.
Schroeder a bit from US history:
The American rebels called themselves patriots. They called British supporters Tories. Patriots often seized Tories' property to help pay for the war. They also kidnapped Tories' slaves to be used as laborers for the army. Many Tories were forced from towns in which they had lived all their lives. Some were tortured or hanged. In New Jersey, Tories and patriots fought one another with guns, and sometimes burned each other's houses and farms.
Funny isn't it ? The Iraqi who do the same today are all called terrorists and not patriots.
omfg you guys are just supposed to talk about the ray gun. It's a RAY GUN, = gadget! Cool down fellas. One political post and this whole thing gets inflated until I'm the 46th post.
Hmmm..let see...the majority of the 9-11 terrorists were Saudis. Bin Laden is a Saudi. Saudi Wahabi fundamentalism is preached throughout the world and is responsible for inciting terrorist attacks in Turkey, Bali, Spain, and London. So why did the Americans attack Iraq? Why not invade Saudi Arabia? Anyone read House of Bush and House of Saud?