It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How effective is our right to bare arms against weapons like these?

page: 1
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   
wimp.com...

Just think of your chances to get a shot off against weapons like this used in conjunction with armed soldiers?

We could be herded like sheep right into those fema camps, As the soldiers laugh at our feeble attempts to get a shot off.




posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Great video although that system has been posted here before but that's a new video of it being tested.

Good find



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 06:47 PM
link   
Interesting... I would love to play with this.... try out an aluminum foil covered shield to see how that works.. LOL

Does a Mirror reflect the waves?

I hope that they test possible easy / cheap countermeasures before wasting a ton of money on this.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 07:23 PM
link   
If there is an armed protest going on in the US it would probably have afew sniper hiding around.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   
I thought about this a while back. It's microwave based so the pain is due to it heating the water molecules in the skin. Best defense I could come up with was a roll icee pop armor. A layer of water above your skin is what is necessary though I guess wet clothes might suffice...

I'm adding a few boxes to my BoB. And yes thats a joke ;-)

Obsidience



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 08:33 PM
link   
Interesting video and display of the technology. I was wondering what could block or deflect the beam to defeat it so I did some searching and came across this





By combining the lethal and nonlethal technologies on a vehicle, [Marine Corps Col. Wade] Hall said a warfighter would be able to discriminate the noncombatants from insurgents by first employing the nonlethal capabilities and then progressing to the use of lethal force.

For example, if a convoy led by a Project Sheriff vehicle was moving through an urban area, a crowd may form to divert the convoy into an “ambush zone,” according to Hall.

If this were to happen, the first thing the crowd would hear is the Long Range Acoustic Device either telling the crowd to move or giving off a noise that would “bother their hearing.” Next, the Lazzer Dazzler would scan the crowd looking for a flicker from the scope of a possible sniper.

If the crowd was still in place, troops would employ the active denial technology [AKA the pain ray].

“If they try and deflect beams then we will kill them because we know what their intentions are,” Hall said. “Now I know what your intent is. I just told you to move, I just flashed some light in you that said ‘hey get away from me.’ I just put some effect on you that said ‘please move or its going to get worse’ and you continue to tell me that you have an ill intent for me and my fellow Marines. So now I will bring some lethal force to bear if it satisfies my [rules of engagement].”

Source


Now I realize that's the military and not the police, but that give's you an idea of how it will be used.

This could be a technology that saves lives, but what I worry about is the police using it domestically on people. The potential for using it as a torture device is definitely there. Just think it can cause excruciating pain, but doesn't cause any permanent damage or even really leave a mark!

Does anyone know how wide or narrow the beam can be focused, and if it can be adjusted? I'm also wondering if the power output can be adjusted to deliver more or less pain



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 08:42 PM
link   
That is just it. Bare arms. Use a grounded screen.

2nd line



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 08:50 PM
link   
I have questions...

If it s microwave based and heats up water in the skin, what keeps it from doing permanent damage? Is it just the fact that most people will have limited exposure in that they can run from it? What happens if you can't run from it?



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 09:59 PM
link   
I'm not worried about it.

There are no two armies combined on this planet that could subdue an American resistance permanently. It's not because they lack the firepower. It's because they lack a proven strategic framework for such an operation.

A resistance is obliged to take manuever warfare to heart, at the strategic level, and "hit them where they aren't" if it is to be successful. This is because they are already so heavily outgunned. Changing the firepower ratio even further to the extreme wouldn't make much difference. A successful resistance will seldom strike where such weapons are emplaced.

Rather than defeating an enemies hardware you must defeat the enemies logistics and communications, so that you not only "get there the firstest with mostest" but in fact are the only side that gets to the objective at all.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 10:05 PM
link   
I forgot what the thread was about because Tentickles icon has completely freaked me out... Oh yea, that crowd control weapon. They definitely need those on boats off the coast of Somalia. or what if it causes them to grow tentacles?



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 10:54 PM
link   
Don't worry guys, doesn't tin-foil reflect microwaves? Just use the stuff you've been making the hats out of to construct full body foil.

I kid, I kid... sorry. We all know it's a serious matter. The nefarious PTB in the tin-foil industry are using this and the ensuing subjugation/resistance to boost their market share through to unprecedented levels.

Ok, Ok... I'm done. Sorry. I am only joking.

reply to post by Pauligirl
 




If it s microwave based and heats up water in the skin, what keeps it from doing permanent damage? Is it just the fact that most people will have limited exposure in that they can run from it? What happens if you can't run from it?


It doesn't cause permanent damage because it's at a much higher frequency than what you'd get in a microwave.* It only reaches the nerve endings on the very top layer (about 1/64th of an inch) of skin - well within the Epidermis, the uppermost layer of skin - and for most areas of the body, within the Stratum Corneum - the uppermost layer of the epidermis, which is mostly comprised of dead cells anyhow. Yes, the idea is that you will get out of it's path as soon as possible, but even in the event where you cannot get out it's way it would take quite a long time for the heat to build to a high enough temperature to affect the lower skin levels. It's unlikely that you'd be in it's path for the extended duration long enough before finding SOME way to writhe your way out of it's path or be apprehended by the force firing it. You'd be in excruciating pain the entire time, and probably develop superficial blisters, but no permanent damage. Over 10,000 servicemen and women (as well as civilians and Raytheon employees) have willingly volunteered their bodies to testing this. One of the safety mechanisms built into the machine is that it fires in 1-6 second bursts, allowing the skin to "cool" and help prevent burns while still being a long enough duration to provide an effective deterrent.

I would be far more worried about these devices being used as a form of torture, rather than their use on civil unrest. For a resistance fighter, a conventional firearm such as a sidearm or a shotgun would be useless. They'd be at too great a distance and likely armored against explosives/projectiles. They're also currently capable of being carried by a single operator, and will eventually shrink enough to the point where they COULD be mounted on a rifle. It's hard to aim and counter-attack when you're immobilized by pain, making you an easy target if the intent is to kill. However, no technology is a perfect offense. Knowledge is power, and a means of combating these and other high-tech deterrent devices will come from a well educated populace.

It should be noted that these devices have been "field ready" for quite some time. The stated reason for it's, thus far, non-deployment is due to the social repercussion of firing "Beam Weapons" on a civilian population. Even if they're far, far, FAR, less lethal than tear gas, rubber bullets, or tazers - the idea just doesn't sit right with people yet.


Edit: * = (Water absorbs microwave energy better at high frequencies. The ADS operates at about 95Ghz. In contrast, your microwave oven operates at about 2.4Ghz on average. This lower frequency allows the microwaves to penetrate further into the food for (fairly) even heating - rather than rely on the transference of heat from the surface inward).

[edit on 2-2-2009 by Lasheic]



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:07 PM
link   
This is probably something Obama would love to use on Rush.
Keep it away from the man.

What happens if the person has a pace maker?



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Lasheic
 


Thanks for the detailed explanation, it makes a lot more sense now.
I can understand the concerns on its use for torture, especially if there an override for the 1-6 bursts. Don’t want to give a new meaning to “crispy critters”.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pauligirl
reply to post by Lasheic
 


Thanks for the detailed explanation, it makes a lot more sense now.
I can understand the concerns on its use for torture, especially if there an override for the 1-6 bursts. Don’t want to give a new meaning to “crispy critters”.


Indeed. There have been malfunctions and errors in the testing process. I recall a story of one serviceman who got too close to one of the machines which was operating at a lowered frequency and ended up needing skin grafts. However, I don't recall if the story was sourced or just hearsay. I'll try to look into it.

Insofar as torture, I certainly wouldn't recommend being TOO concerned over it's potential for abuse. Certainly any new method of torture devised should be grounds for concern, but if someone is out to hurt you - they're going to hurt you. It's status as a non-lethal weapon which doesn't cause permanent damage merely provides some ambiguity on whether it could be officially recognized as torture. Example, water boarding. It's in this ambiguity, not the actual effects, that the REAL danger for abuse is present. I think a clear framework for it's proper usage and appropriate situations should be established before it's ever sent into action.

Further, if you accept the NWO/FEMA camp conspiracy theories then this won't matter much - but even though the potential to mount this device on weapons is present, I don't see the international community endorsing it's use. Indeed, it's use in this fashion may be seen as a grievous war crime as it essentially disarms your opponents. It'd be no different than offing POW's, which IS a war crime. The thing is, you'd have to prove that they were capable of retaliating either by actively trying to shield themselves from the ray or by blind firing. This layer of complexity may prevent their widespread use by the military. However, this means little to black operations which are officially disavowed.




What happens if the person has a pace maker? ~ Alxandro


Nothing. The beam doesn't penetrate deep enough to have any impact on the pacemaker. However, if you want to easily and discreetly kill someone with a pacemaker, you could always just hack into it with a computer to either shut it down or send it into overdrive.

Pacemaker Hacking Demonstration (not a tutorial)



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:47 AM
link   
Good news. The right to bare arms is inalienable to all Americans and no one will arrest you for it, ever. So roll up your shirtsleeves and bare those arms.

Now when we're talking about the right to bear arms, i.e. to carry weapons ... well that's a different story.


MF



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 02:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Lasheic
 


Appreciate the explanation, but I'm not trying to hack a pacemaker.
I hope nobody takes you up on that demo.

One more question, if someone is wearing a watch or maybe thick jewelry, will the metal act as a waveguide somehow and concentrate the heat on the surface of the skin, causing a nasty burn?



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 08:09 AM
link   
What a shame a device like this couldn't be defeated by something like... oh, I don't know.... aluminum foil wrapped around cardboard. Or a metal shield (like riot police have).


The problem with angry mobs is that they don't THINK AHEAD. If I was going to join an angry mob, the first thing I would do would be to BRING A GAS MASK.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   
A bullet to the beam operator's head should do the trick



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by The Strategist
 


You sure live up to your name!


Second line



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by warpboost


This could be a technology that saves lives, but what I worry about is the police using it domestically on people. The potential for using it as a torture device is definitely there. Just think it can cause excruciating pain, but doesn't cause any permanent damage or even really leave a mark!



Well first off the same argument could be made for "fire" it can be used as a torture device second if it is a microwave weapon there is no telling what the long term effects will be sure there will be no visible scars but what is it doing to chromosomes etc? cancer? Thyroid problems? Sterilization?



[edit on 3-2-2009 by SLAYER69]



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join