UK Police Test 'Temporarily Blinding' LASER

[IainB]

Good to see that the UK are leading the way to improved civil disturbance control.
Fromm Slashdot: UK Police Test 'Temporarily Blinding' LASER

esocid writes:
"Called the SMU 100 it costs £25,000 and sends out a three-meter 'wall of light' that leaves anyone caught in it briefly unable to see. Designed by a former Royal Marine Commando, it was originally developed for use against pirates in Somalia. While tasers and CS gas work well over short distances the laser is said to be effective at up to 500 meters (1,640ft). Being targeted by the beam has been compared to staring into the sun before being forced to turn away. Paul Kerr, managing director of Clyde-based Photonic Security Systems, which came up with the design, said 'If you can't look at something you can't attack it.'"

It's probably got some as-yet-undiscovered therapeutic benefit for peoples' retinas as well.

[40hz]

Right up there with tasers, snapflash grenades, rubber/wooden bullets, and that perennial favorite: pepper spray. All are 'technically non-lethal.'

Sad to see how many Western police departments are being transitioned from "keepers of the peace" to "armies of occupation" thanks to failed 'representative' political parties bent on maintaining their positions of power at any cost.

All that this new 'police tech' will ultimately end up doing is start an arms race on the streets. Right or wrong, you push hard enough and people start pushing back. Fire a temporarily blinding laser at a crowd and it's only a matter of time before someone fires back at the police with one whose effects are not so temporary. It's your basic tit for tat.

The only real way to deal with civil disturbance is to get to the root of the problem rather than deal exclusively with the symptoms and manifestations that folllow from it. Because once the cop toys come out of the box, any hope for a peaceful and constructive outcome is pretty much lost.

[rgdot]

If they test it on themselves first then I may, just may, consider maybe somewhat think about it.

[Renegade]

The only real way to deal with civil disturbance is to get to the root of the problem rather than deal exclusively with the symptoms and manifestations that folllow from it. Because once the cop toys come out of the box, any hope for a peaceful and constructive outcome is pretty much lost.

I made a "demotivational" for that:

[attachimg=#]

Sigh...

But it does kind of sound like a form of accelerated sungazing (2)...

[cranioscopical]

I thought the boys in blue with pointy hats were supposed to arrest flashers!

[Renegade]

I thought the boys in blue with pointy hats were supposed to arrest flashers!

I don't think they're that bright~!

[Stoic Joker]

Right up there with tasers, snapflash grenades, rubber/wooden bullets, and that perennial favorite: pepper spray. All are 'technically non-lethal.'

Sad to see how many Western police departments are being transitioned from "keepers of the peace" to "armies of occupation" thanks to failed 'representative' political parties bent on maintaining their positions of power at any cost.

All that this new 'police tech' will ultimately end up doing is start an arms race on the streets. Right or wrong, you push hard enough and people start pushing back. Fire a temporarily blinding laser at a crowd and it's only a matter of time before someone fires back at the police with one whose effects are not so temporary. It's your basic tit for tat.

The only real way to deal with civil disturbance is to get to the root of the problem rather than deal exclusively with the symptoms and manifestations that folllow from it. Because once the cop toys come out of the box, any hope for a peaceful and constructive outcome is pretty much lost.

Amen to that one! 

Not to mention that the 'non'-lethals tend to make the fuzz just that much (less responsible) more trigger happy. Shooting somebody is a lot of paperwork ... But if you just _____ed them a little.... (that's just an extra line on the evening's report)

[Stoic Joker]

I thought the boys in blue with pointy hats were supposed to arrest flashers!

No I believe you're thinking a flash arrestors. But those are for hiding the location where the cops is shooting at people from.

[cranioscopical]

I believe you're thinking a flash arrestors.

  See, I knew retarded came into this somewhere!

But those are for hiding the location where the cops is shooting at people from.

Those are bushels.

I don't think they're that bright~! tongue

A fine example of lightening wit! 

[zridling]

Right up there with tasers, snapflash grenades, rubber/wooden bullets, and that perennial favorite: pepper spray. All are 'technically non-lethal.' Sad to see how many Western police departments are being transitioned from "keepers of the peace" to "armies of occupation" thanks to failed 'representative' political parties bent on maintaining their positions of power at any cost.

Yes, but if you use any of those on a cop, it's always a felony attempted homicide charge. Funny how the law isn't consistent.

[attach]

[IainB]

Yes, but if you use any of those on a cop, it's always a felony attempted homicide charge. Funny how the law isn't consistent.

I looked at the cartoon and thought it was a bit "over the top", until I happened to read this (and listened to the attached sound clip: A Canada Border Crossing Mini-Drama

It's apparently an "assault" on a law enforcement officer" if you pull away from him when he grabs you. One wonders what sort of crime would it be if you hugged him.
I guess this is "your America today" all right.
Depressing.

[Renegade]

Yes, but if you use any of those on a cop, it's always a felony attempted homicide charge. Funny how the law isn't consistent.

I think you're suffering from the same mistaken notion that I used to suffer from... rule of law...

Yep. Some animals are more equal than others.

[IainB]

As the person who made the original post in this thread, I feel that I hold some responsibility for continuing to provide relevant material on the subject.

And I have found some: As it was the UK police who were apparently testing this "SMU 100" or PG ("Photonic Gun") or TBL ("Temprorarily Blinding Laser"), I had been left with the question as to what it took to qualify you to select your target(s) and operate the TBL on that/those target(s).

In a moment of serendipity, the UK's Mail Online offers a possible answer, in a post: The criminals in uniform: Almost 1,000 officers with convictions from drug dealing to perverting justice are still in the police

Now I know that - from what she has written elsewhere - Carol Haynes probably regards The Daily Mail as an unreliable source, and I too think they are rubbish, but I consider that in this instance we can safely assume the Mail Online's post to be truthful. I say this because the Mail Online would not publish this about the police if there was some doubt as to the veracity of what they were publishing - and the police themselves apparently corroborate the facts.

What the Mail says includes the statement that:

"The Metropolitan Police, Britain's largest force, came top with 356 officers and 41 PCSOs with convictions"

Now, one of the key difficulties that held back the deployment of tazers amongst police forces has been that the officers had to be subjected to a tazer in order for them to be fully appreciative of what the thing did to the victim. Understandably, not all policemen would necessarily feel desirous of such an experience.
Apparently, according to unconfirmed reports, the Met have circumvented this exact same type of implementation/deployment difficulty, by selecting qualified TBL operators from amongst the above population pool of the Met's 356 officers. It will be unnecessary to subject members of that pool to exposure of the TBL, because it has apparently been demonstrated that they categorically will have already seen the light.   

[Renegade]

Now, one of the key difficulties that held back the deployment of tazers amongst police forces has been that the officers had to be subjected to a tazer in order for them to be fully appreciative of what the thing did to the victim. Understandably, not all policemen would necessarily feel desirous of such an experience.

Apparently a few police officers have died doing that. I read about another recently, though I forget where. When you think about it, it's pretty amazing that the 72 year old lady that got tazed survived.

The "non-lethal" weapons aren't really all that safe.

[IainB]

The "non-lethal" weapons aren't really all that safe.

Well, tazers, like guns, may kill you, but they wouldn't do that if there wasn't someone holding the thing and triggering it in the first place.
It's they who aren't "all that safe" - or legal.
And they know it.
And they don't want their actions to be scrutinized.
Here you go: Seattle Sues Attorney For Requesting Police Dash-Cam Footage

I find that to be quite amazing - kinda scary too. The Renton police cartoons fiasco were bad enough, but at least that fiasco is kinda funny, not scary.

[f0dder]

All that this new 'police tech' will ultimately end up doing is start an arms race on the streets. Right or wrong, you push hard enough and people start pushing back. Fire a temporarily blinding laser at a crowd and it's only a matter of time before someone fires back at the police with one whose effects are not so temporary. It's your basic tit for tat.

Even in relatively peaceful & quiet (and "we have strong laws against that") .dk it's not that hard to get hold of a gun. I shudder to think what could happen in the .uk or... ugh... .us.

The only real way to deal with civil disturbance is to get to the root of the problem rather than deal exclusively with the symptoms and manifestations that folllow from it. Because once the cop toys come out of the box, any hope for a peaceful and constructive outcome is pretty much lost.

Amen. I wish politicians in power would have even a quarter of that level of insight... kinda scary that they don't, considering that it should really be common fscing sense. Yes, they want to stay in positions of power, control and large wads of cash - but can't that be achieve without such blatant disregard of basic rights?

[Renegade]

The "non-lethal" weapons aren't really all that safe.

Well, tazers, like guns, may kill you, but they wouldn't do that if there wasn't someone holding the thing and triggering it in the first place.
It's they who aren't "all that safe" - or legal.
And they know it.
And they don't want their actions to be scrutinized.
Here you go: Seattle Sues Attorney For Requesting Police Dash-Cam Footage

I find that to be quite amazing - kinda scary too. The Renton police cartoons fiasco were bad enough, but at least that fiasco is kinda funny, not scary.

Over the past few months I've been working EXTREMELY hard at changing myself and I've made an incredible amount of progress.

Now, that isn't to say that some of the more violent thoughts still don't come to mind, but at least I'm not screaming on the outside anymore (yes -- sometimes I would literally start screaming at some things like this), and even better, I can simply let the initial shock wash over me without screaming on the inside, or at least not for long, or at least infrequently, though I still have that gut reaction...

The link you have there is definitely one of those that would have sent me into a screaming fury before.

Sue for asking for information? Ahem... This is what we call pure, unmitigated evil. It's like walking into a room, shooting someone, then shooting the first person to scream, then asking if anyone else wants to express outrage/shock/whatever.

It's really over the top.

The video there was quite good as well. Some good info and references too.

[IainB]

Hmm. We really seem to demonstrate a need to control other people don't we?
Not just the British, but the Japanese apparently also seem to be doing some worthwhile research in disturbance control: Speech-Jamming Gun Silences From 30 Meters

Speech-Jamming Gun Silences From 30 Meters
by samzenpus

MrSeb writes "Japanese researchers have created a hand-held gun that can jam the words of speakers who are more than 30 meters (100ft) away. The gun has two purposes, according to the researchers: At its most basic, this gun could be used in libraries and other quiet spaces to stop people from speaking — but its second application is a lot more chilling. The researchers were looking for a way to stop 'louder, stronger' voices from saying more than their fair share in conversation. The paper reads: 'We have to establish and obey rules for proper turn-taking when speaking. However, some people tend to lengthen their turns or deliberately interrupt other people when it is their turn in order to establish their presence rather than achieve more fruitful discussions. Furthermore, some people tend to jeer at speakers to invalidate their speech.' In other words, this speech-jamming gun was built to enforce 'proper' conversations."

I always thought Shintoism was their most effective tool for this sort of thing - and so it was, up until the point when the interfering Americans identified and addressed two systemic causal problems in Japanese society - the Shinto religion and the emperor's state rites, both being embedded in the Japanese paradigm, along with "patriotism".

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The politicization of Shinto was typified by a Japanese Ministry of Education ruling of 1932 which acknowledged that Shinto shrines were non-religious establishments for fostering patriotism. State Shinto became a mouthpiece for the militarist regime of the 1930s. After Japan's defeat in 1945 the American Occupation authorities decreed Shinto's disestablishment, ending State Shinto. The emperor's state rites were recategorized as the private rites of the imperial family. End of problem - apparently.