less than lethal (unless you try your best) weapons conference in dublin october

chewy

there had been rumours about his but the sunday tribune was the first paper to have the story coudnlt find it mysef when i looked round the web but here the programme

http://www.janes.com/security/conference/llw2004/programme.shtml

ReefBreak

And your point is...?

Are you for or against "less-lethal" weapons? Personally, I think there's nothing wrong with it. Weapons that can "bring down" a criminal without harming him/her is far more perferable to firing a bullet in a leg.

chewy

the phrases non-lethal or less than lethal give the impression that these weapons cannot or will not be used to kill or do serious injury to someone...

there was video just a couple of months ago of a cop purposely using cs spray too close to someone they were taken down

also conferences like this will be used to promote weapons to to countries with far worse human rights records then us

ReefBreak

How do you know the conference will be used to promote weapons to "countries with far worse human rights records then us"

chewy wrote:

the phrases non-lethal or less than lethal give the impression that these weapons cannot or will not be used to kill or do serious injury to someone...

there was video just a couple of months ago of a cop purposely using cs spray too close to someone they were taken down

That's all very well, but unfortunately "asking nicely" sometimes doesn't work, nor would the Asking Criminals Nicely Convention be of much use to anyone.

chewy

so it ok for cops to misuse such weapons

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/04/64835.html

ReefBreak

chewy wrote:

so it ok for cops to misuse such weapons

No, I never said that, and it's not okay for cops to misuse such weapons. But I am saying that it is okay to hold a conference in Dublin about weapons that can be used in dangerous situations, but have the bonus of being less likely to cause serious injury or death.

bonkey

chewy wrote:

so it ok for cops to misuse such weapons

Would you prefer that they misuse properly-lethal weapons instead?

This is the first time I can recall someone trying to say that encouraging a solution that is on the whole less likely to lead to loss of life is a bad thing.

It may not be the ideal solution....but unless you can suggest what cops should be armed with instead (which will still allow them to do their job) this seems like misplaced outrage.

jc

chewy

the industry themselves changed it from non-lethal to less than lethal these weapons can and are used to injure people its not misplaced rage it raising awareness of the fact

Saint

Quite frankly I could use my shoe to beat you to death, If I had to. So what's your point here. Is it that you don't think gardi should have the resources to properly protect property and individuals. Gun crime is on the increase in Ireland, the days of an unarmed police force are already coming to an end. At least this way the changes of accidentally killing someone, are using extreme force are reduced. Of course if someone wants to murder someone, then lethal less then lethal doesn't really matter.

Mighty_Mouse

Cops should only be allowed to gently talk to suspects. They should
1: ask them if they would like some tea or coffee
2. play nice from now on

only if a suspect rebukes this offer can a policeman take the drastic step of gently encouraging a suspect to accompany him to the nearest police station!!

MrPudding

No. I think they should be allowed to use harsh language. Of course each usage should be strictly monitored, possibly with a tribunal to make sure no-one was harmed.

Seriously what do you want? As has already been pointed out pretty much anything can be lethal. The gardi have a fairly nasty job to do, as do most police forces. I personally welcome anything which will allow them to carry out their job whilst minimising the likelihood of them suffering at the hands of a scumbag. It does not matter what police force you look at there will always be someone who abuses the power that he has and the tools he is provided to carry out his job. I think in general these persons are in the minority and to reduce the effectiveness of a force simply because a small minority cannot control themselves is stupid. Lets ban cars cos a small minority of drivers insist on driving dangerously and killing people. Same thing. makes no sense.

MrP

bonkey

chewy wrote:

the industry themselves changed it from non-lethal to less than lethal

You'll probably find that it was some marketing wiz trying to appeal to some PC faction, or else it was done for legal reasons. Personally, I fail to see the difference.

Non-lethal == not designed to be lethal.
Less than lethal == not designed to be lethal.

Given that - in both cases - the comparison is made to lethality, I personally think it would take a ridiculous leap of the imagination to be able to construe either as being "non-damage-causing" or "harmless".....but then again.....look at the warnings some products have been forced to carry and its no different really.

these weapons can and are used to injure people

Yes indeed they are - by some of their users. I'd go so far as to say that its deliberate in some/many of those cases as well.

its not misplaced rage it raising awareness of the fact

Awareness of what?

The fact that non-lethal / less-than-lethal weapons can actually cause damage? Like I said...I'd take that as inherent in the name. Otherwise they'd be called "harmless", wouldn't they.

The fact that some people will deliberately use these to cause damage? Again, I'd take that as a given - because no matter what you have, someone will try and abuse it.

The fact that we're having a part in organising a conference that promotes non-lethal over lethal weapons? Well gosh...If someone's gonna abuse their weapons.....a lethal one has a far wider damage-capability than a non-lethal one.

Ultimately, I'm just confused that you seem to be negatively critical of this event, rather than "raising awareness" of it. Maybe I'm misreading you....but I get the impression you think its a bad thing [tm] which we shouldn't be involved in. If so.....then what would you suggest we promote instead? Harmless weapons (if thats not an oxymoron)? Lethal weapons? Unarmed police?

If you're not actually saying its a bad thing, then maybe you should make that clearer - so far, you've not said a positive word, and your "so its ok for cops...." comment just read like someone deliberately misconstruing a point to be excessively negative. I mean...its the cop who's at fault here, not the weapon......and if he doesn't have a non-lethal weapon, maybe he'll use a lethal one, or just be forced to improvise.

Like I said...I just don't see the issue you're making.

SkepticOne

bonkey wrote:

You'll probably find that it was some marketing wiz trying to appeal to some PC faction, or else it was done for legal reasons. Personally, I fail to see the difference.

Non-lethal == not designed to be lethal.
Less than lethal == not designed to be lethal.

The phrase used for the conference was "Less lethal" not "Less than lethal".

Less lethal is probably slightly more accurate than non-lethal since any form of device that constrains or incapacitates, no matter how well desigend, can kill given the right circumstances.

bonkey

SkepticOne wrote:

The phrase used for the conference was "Less lethal" not "Less than lethal".

Ah. My bad.

In that case, its almost definitely a legal thing, for the reasons you mention. You sell something as non-lethal and someone dies from it...the relatives of the victim will take you to the cleaners and then some....and then the user can get you too, for misleading them...

jc

SkepticOne

bonkey wrote:

Ah. My bad.

Chewy's fault, of course.

In that case, its almost definitely a legal thing, for the reasons you mention. You sell something as non-lethal and someone dies from it...the relatives of the victim will take you to the cleaners and then some....and then the user can get you too, for misleading them...

Unless you take out the relatives too.

frodi

A slight side track.
How could these companies bring them into Ireland when most of them would be considered as offensive weapons. Would possession and import of these non-lethal weapons be legal?

chewy

Following the anti-war demonstration at Port of Oakland, California, on 7 April, where at least 21 people were injured, Amnesty International called today on the Chief of Police to conduct a full inquiry into allegations of excessive force by police.

Police reportedly fired non-lethal weapons, including bean bags, wooden bullets and sting ball grenades at demonstrators, causing injuries to at least twelve protesters, and nine by-standers who were not involved in the demonstration. Those injured were reportedly hit in the back, arms, necks and faces.

from amnesty international


Tasers Saving Lives; Departments Equipping More Officers, But Some Still Worry
By Ron Nissimov, The Houston Chronicle

read please

http://www.policeone.com/police-products/less-lethal/taser/articles/90098/

vibe666

wouldn't they have complained more if the police had taken the hard line and shot a few of them?

honestly you can't please some people.

do you want law enforcement or not?

Moriarty

vibe666 wrote:

do you want law enforcement or not?

Only when it's used against people that are averse to their ideals.

The irony is indeed delicious.

Saint

Your problem is with police brutality (if it even was that) not with less-lethal weapons.

Nuttzz

chewy wrote:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/04/64835.html

you call that a source? Indymedia are just of bunch of infighting paranoid anarchists (SWP vs SP, the army will shoot us all on mayday etc etc)

you may as well put up a stromfront link as to use Indymedia....

chewy

but all i hear fomr you guys is

"atleast it's not a gun",
"atleast it's not a gun"

this is the problem with less than lethal weapons it gives the impression that they are ok, that once there introduced we can worry less, when it is clear these weapons have and can kill and we should of course have an independent police board to monitor police and there sue of these weapons... im sure very few other countires have had independent research and approval of these weapson before they were introduced...

"It's possible to use anything for torture", says a US manufacturer of electro-shockriot shields, "but it's a little easier to use our devices." 1

1 John McDermit, president of Nova Products, Inc; quoted in interview with Anne-Marie
Cusac, The Progressive, September 1997 (http://www.progressive.org/cusac9709.htm)

Saint

chewy wrote:

but all i hear fomr you guys is
this is the problem with less than lethal weapons it gives the impression that they are ok,

It is ok to use them, and TBH I'd be more worried about the criminals with fully lethal weapons then the gardai with less - lethal weapons. All you're arguments and you haven't yea put forwards a reason why gardi should put themselves in danger by not having the right equipment.

Meh

chewy wrote:

im sure very few other countires have had independent research and approval of these weapson before they were introduced...

So surely you should be all in favour of a public conference to discuss the legal and medical issues associated with these weapons?

They even have a presentation from a human rights organization.

chewy

So surely you should be all in favour of a public conference to discuss the legal and medical issues associated with these weapons?

infavour of proper research and use (and proper restriction of sale to dodgey countries) not in favour of the corporate promotion of such products as this conference is

They even have a presentation from a human rights organization. ... a token effort...

"It is ok to use them, and TBH I'd be more worried about the criminals with fully lethal weapons then the gardai with less - lethal weapons. All you're arguments and you haven't yea put forwards a reason why gardi should put themselves in danger by not having the right equipment."

criminal unfortunately are not responsible to the public cops are supposed to be but are not in this country or many other countries...

chewy

Review urged on CS sprays

James Meikle, health correspondent
Tuesday August 24, 2004
The Guardian


the indymedia source stated something that was true that a conference was coming to dublin, anything else in the document. well i believe stormfront sooner then i belive the indo?