Lairs has one of those, he said so when i listened for 4 hours today.

I saw that tested on a journalist once. It was pretty cool.

It's still not better than the crap cannon, though...

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/protesters-fear.html

First, folks are outraged that police response is limited to (1) verbiage and (2) lethal force.

Now, folks are outraged that police want the same nonlethal tools the military have to increase their range of response. Humans have worked to develop more and lethal weapons for thousands of years; we've only been working on "less than lethal" force for, tops, a few decades.

Does an ability to increase the use of force without resorting to lethal options increase the potential for police to use excessive force? Yes. Does it allow police to resolve situations where, without the ability to use less than lethal force, the situation would have warranted lethal force? Yes.

Would this be more effective on crowd dispersal than the current options of tear gas and riot police? I hope so.

And do I think we're shallow when we are only concerned with the technology when it could be used on us, but we're okay with it when its used on citizens of other countries? (yes)

Cool, an anti-hippie ray.

I was thinking more charettes and closed-door budget meetings.

I hope I can get one mounted on my car so I can scatter those darn hippies when they protest downtown.

funny, i thought the "Active Denial System" had been in use by the White House since 2000.

Unfortunately, the "Active Denial System" has been vigorously used by all of my first dates over the past year.

When this thing comes into use, say goodbye to the First Amendment.

Bringing these things into widespread use for, say, turning back protests against an unpopular president and his perpetual war machine will result in a lot more people carrying lethal weapons to fight back.

I actually prefer that police have to chose between lawful orders and causing me permanent harm and death. It makes them more accountable for their poor decisions.

If what I'm doing is really so incredibly dangerous and harmful, SHOOT ME! If I'm merely annoying, well then, tell me to go away, write me a ticket, arrest me... but don't you dare harm me because I have not initiated force against you or anyone. The ONLY justification for violence is against someone who has initiated force!

The rise of the non-lethal weapon is going to make the choice to shut people up quick, easy, and far too frequent. A few dead college students got people's attention decades ago (no one can deny blood on the ground). The current trend in our military--and consequently, police force--is toward legal means of torture that leave little evidence. This way, reports of torture and harm can be dismissed as the ravings of a crazy radical.

the PoPiggy's would dearly love to have this