×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Vortex Gun Coming Soon To a Protest Near You

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the don't-vortex-me-bro dept.

Technology 295

An anonymous reader writes "Vortex technology has been used in everything from rocket-powered fire extinguishers to Nerf guns, but neither of those things are capable of giving the beat-down to hapless protesters. By giving spinning vortices an electric charge, though, pepper spray can be sent over 150 feet at between 60 and 90 mph. A vortex gun uses a pressure wave and a carefully designed barrel to fire donut-shaped rings of air that can hold themselves together over long distances. The military (starting with the German military during World War II) has been running experiments with using vortex canons to knock things over, but it's not a particularly efficient or effective way to go. What the gas rings can be used for is transporting other gasses (like pepper spray or tear gas or pesticide) long distances with a decent amount of accuracy, holding their cargo inside the calm center spinning vortex."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

295 comments

First post (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239417)

so basically it will be pink nerf guns the cops use with pepper spray cargo?

"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (0)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239421)

there, fixed that for ya.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239461)

ya funny how tech that was designed for the nazi saucer craft is now being used to suppress free speech isn't it...WONDER are nazi scientists cheeringy et?

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239515)

The nazi scientists are all dead or senile, that's why NASA hasn't been doing much except reruns ;).

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (5, Informative)

ZankerH (1401751) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239585)

The German Wehrmacht (and the other regular branches of the German military in WWII) had little to do with the Nazi party. The only "Nazi" military was the Waffen-SS, whose notable accomplishments include running death camps and overall pathetic performance in actual combat. The American stereotype of branding anything related to Germany in the 1933-1945 era as "Nazi" is just wrong.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239627)

Ze German Wehrmacht (und ze other regular branches of ze Heer in WWII) had little to do mit ze Nazi party. Ze only "Nazi" military vas ze Waffen-SS, whose notable accomplishments include running ze death camps und overall pathetic performance im actual combat. Ze American stereotype of branding anything related to Germany in ze 1933-1945 era als "Nazi" is just wrong.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (1)

ZankerH (1401751) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239809)

Allright, I laughed. I speak English without an accent though.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (4, Interesting)

Nidi62 (1525137) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239691)

The German Wehrmacht (and the other regular branches of the German military in WWII) had little to do with the Nazi party. The only "Nazi" military was the Waffen-SS, whose notable accomplishments include running death camps and overall pathetic performance in actual combat. The American stereotype of branding anything related to Germany in the 1933-1945 era as "Nazi" is just wrong.

Even the Wehrmacht had to at least toe the party line. If I remember correctly, Rommel, arguably the best general of WWII(on either side) was punished for not being a Nazi. It is important to remember that the assassination plot that came closest to killing Hitler was planned out and executed by Wehrmacht officers. But yeah, your average Wehrmacht grunt was not a Nazi. And the Waffen-SS actually had a fairly strong reputation on the Eastern front, and were known as very effective and fierce fighters.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (2)

ZankerH (1401751) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239793)

And the Waffen-SS actually had a fairly strong reputation on the Eastern front, and were known as very effective and fierce fighters.

Effective and fierce at killing unarmed peasants, yes.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (1)

Nidi62 (1525137) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239855)

And the Waffen-SS actually had a fairly strong reputation on the Eastern front, and were known as very effective and fierce fighters.

Effective and fierce at killing unarmed peasants, yes.

They did that, yes, but they also often fought against and defeated Soviet forces that not only outnumbered but also out-equipped them.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (1)

okooolo (1372815) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239885)

Although Waffen SS did include camp guards and such it also had elite panzer & infantry divisions.. we're taking about over 900 000 soldiers that fought in all major battles of war world 2.Waffen SS divisions were some of the best trained military units in the conflict.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239883)

Even the Wehrmacht had to at least toe the party line. If I remember correctly, Rommel, arguably the best general of WWII(on either side)

|cough|El Alamein|cough|

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (1)

avgjoe62 (558860) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240379)

One bad game does not mean that the other quarterback is necessarily better in EVERY game.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (2)

CoderFool (1366191) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240003)

During the time the Nazis were in power, you had to be a member of the Nazi party just to have a job, so technically every working german at the time was a Nazi. So it makes it confusing to disentangle the real Nazis who did all the horrible things and the ones that just said they were 'Nazi' just to keep a job.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (1)

mpe (36238) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240519)

During the time the Nazis were in power, you had to be a member of the Nazi party just to have a job, so technically every working german at the time was a Nazi. So it makes it confusing to disentangle the real Nazis who did all the horrible things and the ones that just said they were 'Nazi' just to keep a job.

Much the same happens anywhere you have a totalitarian political system. e.g. in Iraq with the Ba'ath Party.

tell it to einstein (1)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240765)

the intelligentsia who were truly intelligent understood what was happening in the 1930s, and they left. or were kicked out. the people doing research on vortex cannons during wwii would not have been 'innocent bystanders', they were more like von braun , scientists who did not care about the social implications of their work or their relationship with mass murderers.

the avg grunt wasnt making vortex cannons (1)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240735)

and the nazi scientific community was controlled and/or infiltrated by the SS, as were most other parts of society, universities, corporations, research labs, radio societies, the youth groups, the judiciary, the hospitals, the churches, etc etc etc

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239835)

The only "Nazi" military was the Waffen-SS, whose notable accomplishments include running death camps and overall pathetic performance in actual combat

One of the Waffen-SS officers, Werner von Braun, had a few other notable accomplishments too.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (2)

paiute (550198) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239933)

The German Wehrmacht (and the other regular branches of the German military in WWII) had little to do with the Nazi party. The only "Nazi" military was the Waffen-SS, whose notable accomplishments include running death camps and overall pathetic performance in actual combat. The American stereotype of branding anything related to Germany in the 1933-1945 era as "Nazi" is just wrong.

I know, right? I mean, when we got there we couldn't find a single person who was a Nazi.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240105)

Well duh, you already killed all of them on the way there.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (1)

fnj (64210) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240535)

That is just an idiotic statement. The concentration and labor camps were run by the SS-Totenkopfverbände. The Waffen-SS were fighting units, and the two organizations were distinct. The Waffen-SS had elite training and indoctrination, but their duties were straight combat, which they conducted for the most part as honorably as regular army fighting units in Germany and other countries. Only someone truly clueless would characterize Waffen-SS combat performance as "pathetic". They were highly effective, They were respected and feared by all opponents. They were arguably the finest elite troops anywhere in the history of the world.

idiocy happens to coincide with the evidence (1)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240775)

of which there are several tons at the US holocaust museum. the situation is not as simple as you make it sound.

karl meinel begs to differ (1)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240727)

and a couple thousand other 'wehrmacht' people who suffered under the German High Command's alliance with hitler and the SS.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239667)

Gotta' love the attempted spin there by tying it to the Nazis... except that pretty much ALL of the tech in use today was also researched by the Nazis. You know: jet engines, radar, rockets, remote guidance, computers, cryptography, etc etc etc lol

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239839)

Their computer tech sucked - the British pwned them on that front. Likewise with radar. They did excel in rocketry, rocket guidance and Really Big Guns.

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240325)

Computers and cryptography you say? That's interesting, because when last I checked, it was an English mathematician who laid down the theory of computation, general purpose computers, software defined computation (as opposed to building a machine to compute problems or classes of problems), it was a Dutch linguist whose theory about secret keys became central to cipher design and an American engineer whose work on information theory became the basis of cipher design (at least for symmetric cryptography). I guess the Germans did an OK job with the Enigma machine, but they certainly did not invent computers or cryptography (not even modern cryptography).

Re:"Starting with the Nazi military during WWII" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240787)

I didn't say the Nazis were the best or invented it, just that they also researched it and most other useful technologies. Gotta' love watching people get defensive lol

I was simply pointing out that trying to paint a tech as evil because the Nazis were involved with it is ridiculous

As for computing, you might want to look up Konrad Zuse as his work was interesting

HA! take *that* (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239435)

silly OWS nosepickers!

Re:HA! take *that* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239593)

Spoken like a true bootlicker.

Great, what we really needed (5, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239465)

Another gun that lowers the inhibition of police to shoot at protesters.

Re:Great, what we really needed (1)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239747)

"The Israeli military used a suppressed .22 LR rifle in the 1990s for riot control and to "eliminate disturbing dogs prior to operations", though it is now used less often as it has been shown to be more lethal than previously suspected."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22#Usage [wikipedia.org]

It's just a matter of perspective.

Re:Great, what we really needed (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239815)

In the U.S, peaceful protester who abide by the law will have no problem with this. The violent ones who throw bricks at cops(Occupiers) and ones who won't leave defecate on the street(Occupiers) who will get to see this thing in action. Get em!!!!

Re:Great, what we really needed (2, Insightful)

GmExtremacy (2579091) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239905)

Exactly. Cops are perfect beings, unlike normal humans. They've never done anything wrong. Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.

Re:Great, what we really needed (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240317)

Have you ever tried to stand up for democracy and protect peoples rights?

Cops doesn't hesitate to fire lethal weapons at a violent protester. This weapon, like other "nonlethal", will only be used against the peaceful protesters.

free speech (5, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239483)

They're coming up with ever-more creative ways to hurt peaceful protesters -- and let's be honest: Most of the time, they provoke, prod, cajoule, and taunt these people until one of them out of the dozen, hundred, or thousand there snaps, then they point and say "See! See! We're justified" and open up unholy horror on everyone nearby, including journalists, children, and anyone else, then seize or destroy the evidence of what went down, counting on their purchases media contacts to portray their victims as all manner of bad. But whether it's rubber bullets or real ones, the fact is this is a business of causing pain and misery... and it is because the people its being inflicted upon had the audacity to say "I think we can do better than this."

I am the last person to suggest violence as a response to improper government action: I live in a democracy, and one of our main pressure valves to prevent violence is peaceful protest. They're busy stuffing that up now, and just like every other country that has tried it in the past, eventually public sentiment is going to shift. It'll be fine one day, and the next shit will be on fire and they'll be declaring martial law, and the bought-off press will be busy with headlines like "How did this happen?" ... Well, it happened because you stupid bastards didn't do your job and report the truth. It happened because people don't like being silenced.

It happened... because human nature isn't all that different from an animal: Keep poking it with a stick and eventually it will stop hiding in the corner and come sink its claws and teeth into you. And why? Because it didn't have a choice.

Re:free speech (3, Interesting)

Entropius (188861) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239565)

Nonviolence comes from all sides acknowledging a non-aggression principle: you don't use violence against me or my property, I won't against you. The traditional role of police is to respond to violence with overwhelming violence (or the threat of such): you punch me or smash my shit, they'll arrest you, and if you punch them too they'll come with guns.

But using weapons like this against peaceful protesters isn't what the police are for -- it's using violence against the nonviolent, and the victims (like any other victim of unprovoked aggression) have the right to respond in kind. Bullets, microwave-oven HERF guns, take your pick.

Re:free speech (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239643)

Recent videos show that no excuse is needed, any longer, for completely unprovoked pepper spray attacks (as well as bludgeoning) by senior police officers on completely peaceful protestors.

I too believe in peaceful protest. THAT SHIP IS SINKING OR SUNK. Our political power, at this point, is limited to refusing paychecks (not following unethical orders.) The police, themselves, must stop using violence in their daily jobs. The use of pepper spray to hurt people who are not hurting you, is wrong. The use of a vortex cannon to squirt that pepper spray is no more, nor less, wrong.

The US government system is so corrupt that the corruption is "trickle down" and I, for one, am having more trouble with corrupt corporations at the personal level. And hearing stories about corruption.

A stolen credit card number? "No problem, provide us a list of suspicious charges. Oh, this suspicious charge on your list...you actually made."

"I did? Sorry, they're hard to understand, these cryptic entries."

"Too bad. Our policy is to force you to pay for all the fraudulent charges, if even one of those charges is mis-identified."

"Fuck!" (My honest friend's story.)

Re:free speech (5, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239739)

The police are outnumbered by the citizens they protect a thousand to 1 at least and they can only be effective if the majority of those citizens trust them and cooperate with them. The social contract that all officers of the law have with its citizens is this: "We trust you, you protect us." It's a simple, straight-forward principle that depends on the officer's ethical conduct being at all times impeccable. Any unethical behavior observed and the officer should be quickly stripped of rank and authority to maintain public trust.

That isn't happening anymore. Our country now has mock trials where they declare the officers innocent, or that the protesters were engaged in vague-sounding crimes like "resisting without violence"... which in most of those cases can be rightly called, "speaking one's mind." Officers seize and destroy evidence of their own misconduct. They preferentially attack people on the basis of race, sexual orientation, ethnicity (perceived or actual), or on social class. These are not isolated cases: They are widespread issues that regularly receive attention in the press, though heavily edited, redacted, and spun to appear less severe than it is. It does not take anyone long on google to find a current, relevant case of significant police misconduct involving many officers, often an entire department or city of them.

The social contract of "We trust you, you protect us" is broken. And that's a problem. That's a big problem. That is in fact a super huge democracy-threatening problem... because if people don't assemble to protect out of fear, then that anger with the status quo isn't visible. We (as a society) don't know there's a problem, can't address it, and so the anger builds and builds until we start getting gunman in the bell towers, people marching into classrooms and blowing away everyone they see... We get sporatic acts of seemingly random violence because these individuals feel they cannot be heard. And then we have a society living in fear, more fear, terrible amounts of fear.

And protracted anxiety and fear destroys economies, governments, and institutions. Democracy depends on freedom, and freedom depends on the confidence to use those freedoms. I cannot find anyone above the age of 21 who thinks they have the freedom of speech they were told they had in school. I have trouble finding anyone who's willing to attend a protest for something they believe in and support out of fear of "getting a record" or "getting on a list". They well and truly believe their livelihoods would be threatened by engaging in activities protected by the highest law in the land, activities that our founding fathers and every reputable scholar on the subject of civil liberty and democracy says are essential for the functioning of this society.

F*ck terrorists: We've got a much bigger problem. We're rotting from the inside out.

Re:free speech (2)

houghi (78078) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240361)

we start getting gunman in the bell towers, people marching into classrooms and blowing away everyone they see... We get sporatic acts of seemingly random violence

This is what the police andf politics will read. Yes, it is edited like a boss (or a /. editor, you decide) and their answer is to give MORE power to the police and tell all that want to listen: Doi you want to have terrorists in the towers? Do you want your kids killed in school?

I do not agree with that. Unfortunately that is how things are at this moment. The only way is to have a revolution and that will come. Not sure when, but history has shown that it will happen.

Re:free speech (2)

CodeBuster (516420) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240607)

I have trouble finding anyone who's willing to attend a protest for something they believe in and support out of fear of "getting a record" or "getting on a list".

People fear this because it can and does happen. The economy is tough enough for young people who've worked hard and kept their noses clean. They don't call the occupy crowd "unemployable" for nothing you know.

Re:free speech (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240017)

It is only going to get worse. Europe had life very cheap for over a millennium from the fall of Rome and the tiny dukedoms and duchies. A starving person stealing a loaf of bread? It was likely they would get beheaded, hanged, or just hacked to death. Just being homeless was grounds for being thrown in the clink, shipped off to a penal colony, or perhaps just killed outright. Peasant results were always unsuccessful, and resulted in a ton of people being burned at the stake if they were leaders, or just run through and left where they were.

The only reason that this brutal way of life isn't with us now is because of the plague. With the Black Plague taking out the backs for nobles to flail, they actually had to make concessions (Magna Carta) in order to keep order (this after they realized that they were running out of peasants to kill.)

Same thing is happening now. Higher populations end up with brutal police states. I'm not going to be surprised if our kids are living in one room places like the main character out of Fifth Element, with the spots on the wall to put your hands during the random shakedowns, with permits required to ever leave a city, and with long prison terms being the norm (because there is a whole industry around locking people up.)

People talk about revolution? In reality, revolution as we know it is impossible. What ends up happening is that there is a crackdown, a lot of people tortured and killed, the regime in power tightening its grip making life harder for everyone else, and things going on. A crowd protesting in the streets? A helicopter gunship full of napalm or high rpm chain guns is inexpensive, will take care of the job, and there will be no successive protests afterwards. Libya was overthrown not because of internal politics, but because the US invaded and bumped off its leader. Without external influence, what will happen in most countries is what is happening in Syria -- towns and villages turned into craters, and actually more stability for the people in charge since all the revolutionaries showed themselves and were killed.

With the advent of social media, it is trivial for governments to take out would-be firebrands. Someone becoming popular with their speeches? A quick overnight disappearance takes care of that.

One can credit the black plague for the Western Renaissance, but future generations won't be that lucky.

Re:free speech (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240099)

Syria: Victory for Obama! Good job, Mr. President! We all now know that a Libyan is worth more than a Syrian!

Re:free speech (2, Insightful)

PeeAitchPee (712652) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239579)

Most of the time, they provoke, prod, cajoule, and taunt these people until one of them out of the dozen, hundred, or thousand there snaps

Not that I agree with deploying this type of technology against peaceful protesters, but what you're describing sounds * exactly* like the Occupy movement's tactics to provoke the police to assault them, thereby ensuring the incident ends up all over the news. Just sayin'.

Re:free speech (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239665)

He was referring to the police....

Re:free speech (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240061)

He was referring to the police....

Whooosh, right over your head.

But GP is right, it goes both ways. Bait police into a response with the cameras rolling and you get what looks like an unprovoked attack (after a bit of editing of course).

Dangerous Denial Of Brutality (5, Insightful)

Web Goddess (133348) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239707)

Police are supposed to be trained officers. They are being provoked by taunts? Throw those goddamn police out of their jobs, with a black mark on their records. What you say is (trolling?) bullshit. I have seen numerous videos of peaceful people blindsided by police with pepper spray and bludgeons. Overwhelming force, yet the police are provoked by taunts? You live in a world of hypocrisy and denial, previous poster.

Re:Dangerous Denial Of Brutality (1, Insightful)

PeeAitchPee (712652) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239769)

Wow, such vitriol directed towards someone that might have a different perspective than you. Yeah, I've seen the UC YouTube video, and I've also read stories about Occupy camps rigging booby-traps when threatened with eviction, throwing human shit at police, cursing at them, daring them to attack, threatening lawsuits, etc. As with most things, the truth is most likely somewhere in the middle, unless we choose to wear blinders that let us think one side can do nothing but good and the other is always wrong.

Re:Dangerous Denial Of Brutality (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239867)

Care to point out the links to those stories you read, or are you indeed just spouting uninformed bullshit like the troll that you are?

Re:Dangerous Denial Of Brutality (2)

GmExtremacy (2579091) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239927)

I'm sure it's true that at least some of the Occupyers weren't completely innocent, but the same applies to the police. And frankly, I expect far more restraint out of them than I do out of the (mostly) peaceful protesters.

Re:Dangerous Denial Of Brutality (5, Insightful)

tqk (413719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240013)

Wow, such vitriol directed towards someone that might have a different perspective than you. Yeah, I've seen the UC YouTube video, and I've also read stories about Occupy camps rigging booby-traps when threatened with eviction, throwing human shit at police, cursing at them, daring them to attack, threatening lawsuits, etc.

The protesters are civilians. Police are supposed to be trained professionals. If you're a cop at a protest, you're wearing a face shield and helmet, you're armed and dangerous, and you can change out of your uniform at the end of your shift. Why care about what's thrown at you by civilians? It's your job to take it and react reasonably. It's what you were hired for. If you can't handle that, you're in the wrong job.

Why any policeman would think it's reasonable conduct to pepper spray a line of kneeling civilians is beyond me. I'd be looking around for a rifle if I saw that happening.

Re:Dangerous Denial Of Brutality (1)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240419)

Why any policeman would think it's reasonable conduct to pepper spray a line of kneeling civilians is beyond me.

Probably feelings of disgust, frustruation and anger

I'd be looking around for a rifle if I saw that happening.

They would respect that. They would kill you, but they would have more respect for you.
 
Just saying... this is their brain.

Re:Dangerous Denial Of Brutality (4, Insightful)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240801)

Have you *seen* the stuff they're packing? Kevlar body armor, riot shields, fall face masks... anything short of a rifle or a molotov cocktail isn't going to significantly hurt them.

If your job is cashier at McDonalds, you're expected to be able to handle some irate customer yelling at you without flipping out. If your job is programmer at Ubersoft, you're expected to be able to handle a moronic boss yelling at you without losing your shit. And if your job is police officer armed up and suited for a riot, you're expected to be able to handle people yelling at you and tossing rocks without bringing out the shotguns and chemical weapons.

The police don't need better weapons. They need better brains. Problem is, between shitty funding, politics, and a fundamentally broken sense of justice in America, most of the police don't actually know how to handle this sort of thing. They're just as scared as the protesters are, but hey, they've got a badge, and someone handed them a billy club and a can of OC, so they're going to use it the same way any undertrained, terrified person would.

Re:Dangerous Denial Of Brutality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240471)

Probably because they were blocking the right-of-way of others. I mean, sure, it doesn't seem such a big deal to block a sidewalk or park path... Until someone with a wheelchair or other need to use the actual paved walkway needs to get through.

Just because you are upset and protesting doesn't mean you get to be a complete asshole.

Re:Dangerous Denial Of Brutality (1)

tqk (413719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240777)

Just because you are upset and protesting doesn't mean you get to be a complete asshole.

Just because you're wearing a uniform and carrying a gun doesn't mean you get to be a complete asshole. You were hired to protect civilians, not assault them, and especially when they're not resisting. Tell me how impossible it is for three cops to drag a kneeling civilian out of the way.

Defending that cop's action is despicable. You should be ashamed.

Re:Dangerous Denial Of Brutality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239859)

Wait, you're calling THAT hypocrisy when you're the one saying that behavior is okay for one group but not another?

Re:Dangerous Denial Of Brutality (2)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240797)

Here's the problem. Can you name one police college off the top of your head that trains using debasement? That's physical and verbal attacks. I doubt it, all of the ones that I know are in Canada. The ones in the US that used to removed that part of the program because of leftie hand-wringing that it was too "mean" and might "provoke a response". So to be honest, I'm not surprise that newer cops are being provoked by taunts. They're not being trained to ignore them.

And yes debasement works. I've gone though it, the casual disregard of the idiots makes your day much easier.

Re:free speech (0)

Nidi62 (1525137) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239737)

Most of the time, they provoke, prod, cajoule, and taunt these people until one of them out of the dozen, hundred, or thousand there snaps

Not that I agree with deploying this type of technology against peaceful protesters, but what you're describing sounds * exactly* like the Occupy movement's tactics to provoke the police to assault them, thereby ensuring the incident ends up all over the news. Just sayin'.

They do, because they know they will always find that one cop that's had a bad day, or is tired and cranky because his kid was up all night, or something else that causes stress, and if they apply enough pressure, he'll snap. And during the Occupy protests the police and authorities showed an incredible amount of restraint, considering how many locations there were and how long the protests lasted. When police broke up the camps, they did so with court orders. Pretty much any other place besides the US and Europe would have called in military at the very least, if not use more violent and forceful measures to remove the protests.

Re:free speech (3, Insightful)

Entropius (188861) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239745)

If you're going to trust your police with guns then you need to be able to trust them not to use them in response to provocation. If you can't find someone that you can trust not to start shooting at people taunting them, then you should just take the guns away from them -- or arrest them for assault.

The Arizona Criminal Code says, plain as day: "the use of force or deadly force is not justified in response to verbal provocation alone".

I'm no fan of some of the shit Occupy has pulled -- in particular, squatting on public land in such a way that it reduces the value the public can get out of it. (I think a lot of their demands are naive and silly, too, but that's neither here nor there, since if being wrong negated the right to free speech we'd have to close all the churches -- and the Capitol, for that matter.) But the police get trigger-happy when provoked then you need some better police.

(NB: Provoking them in a manner that makes them unable to do legitimate police work is a different story.)

Re:free speech (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239923)

in particular, squatting on public land in such a way that it reduces the value the public can get out of it

I take issue with this line of reasoning. These people are also members of the public and are getting tremendous value out of that land.
If you follow that line of reasoning to its logical conclusion then any peaceful protest on any public land is "reducing the value the public can get out of it" and thus...wrong?

Re:free speech (2)

GmExtremacy (2579091) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239949)

in particular, squatting on public land in such a way that it reduces the value the public can get out of it

What does that even mean? We can kick anyone out of the public lands as long as most people don't want them there (because of some arbitrary, imaginary value people get out of the land)?

There might be laws regarding doing certain things on supposedly "public" lands, but I take issue with this particular sentence.

Re:free speech (4, Interesting)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239849)

There's so much I could say to this, but I'll try to be brief: There has never been a case of a political movement who's platform ended with "... and to achieve this, let's piss off a bunch of people with shotguns while we remain unarmed." The Occupy protests were creative and (when started) legal. They later had what they were doing declared illegal at the behest of the Department of Homeland Security, who whispered "terrorist" into the ears of dozens of municipal leaders, who then closed and locked the doors to city hall and passed all manner of legislation in any way they could to give the DHS the ability to coordinate directly with local law enforcement, who then turned hostile. When the protests started, the police didn't interfere. They didn't really have much to say beyond making sure the protesters and the general public near them were safe and living in sanitary conditions... a few arrests here and there, but nobody was making a big deal about it. It was just "the cost of doing business" in a democratic society. Then the goddamned gustapo showed up, ordered them to roll in the tanks and start with the mass arrests and surveillance.

No, there was no provocation from the protesters... in fact, I've never once seen a historically accurate account of any protest who's stated goals were to get tangled with the police, who have a 1,500 win, 0 loss record against protest movements.

Re:free speech (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239679)

Obviously, shooting rings of pepper spray at protesters is the only application of this technology.

Re:free speech (1)

tqk (413719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240351)

Obviously, shooting rings of pepper spray at protesters is the only application of this technology.

You didn't even make it to the end of the summary? "What the gas rings can be used for is transporting other gasses (like pepper spray or tear gas or pesticide) ..."

Sigh.

Re:free speech (4, Informative)

clyde_cadiddlehopper (1052112) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239749)

Keep poking it with a stick and eventually it will stop hiding in the corner and come sink its claws and teeth into you. And why? Because it didn't have a choice.

"Terror" is the strategy for those with no other options. The best weapon against terror is blind and principled justice for all.

Re:free speech (1)

tqk (413719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240555)

Keep poking it with a stick and eventually it will stop hiding in the corner and come sink its claws and teeth into you. And why? Because it didn't have a choice.

"Terror" is the strategy for those with no other options. The best weapon against terror is blind and principled justice for all.

I agree with the latter, but not the former. Terror, or terrorism, is the strategy of assholes (OBL, I'm lookin' at you). Civilized people don't attack unarmed civilians[*]. Full. Stop.

Anyone wearing a Big Brother uniform, fair game, but beware they're just as armed as you and probably better trained, and their buddies'll get you if they don't. Have fun. :-)

[* Dresden [wikipedia.org] was an atrocity, as was Coventry [wikipedia.org] , and those who perpetrated those crimes knew it at the time. They'd been worried it was eventually going to happen ever since the Wright Bros.]

Re:free speech (1)

icongorilla (2452494) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239791)

There is a lot of truth to this "not having a choice" thing.

I ran away from home in NY about 6 months ago. I was working at Target for about $7.25 an hour with an artificial leg. Things weren't going too horribly for having to run around a store that huge being handicaped.

Then the loan sharks started coming. The kept calling the company until they started upping my hours. I was biking into work 7 miles each way because I didn't have that much money.

The extra load started causing mechanical problems with my fake leg and because of the extra hours, I lost my health medicaid health insurance because I was making too much money to keep the insurrance, but too little to pay for leg repairs, a car, and loans at the same time.

So I left for Washington to hang myself at Nela (the student loan organization.)

Over time and talking with people, I decided to give things another try because I do have a computer technical background. Casher again isn't an option since my leg is now cracking in half with no way to fix it.

It looks like I may be getting a NOC Engineer job this week. Unfortunately, walknig 4-6 miles a day on crutches is making my fingers go numb on my left hand.

I called the student loan organization not too long ago. If this doesn't work out because I can't type anymore, I will be hanging myself there. Because there isn't any other choice. That is what our current government is about.

Re:free speech (4, Interesting)

paiute (550198) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239979)

They're coming up with ever-more creative ways to hurt peaceful protesters -- and let's be honest: Most of the time, they provoke, prod, cajoule, and taunt these people until one of them out of the dozen, hundred, or thousand there snaps, then they point and say "See! See! We're justified" and open up unholy horror on everyone nearby

"one of them" = police plant in the crowd, you mean

Re:free speech (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240005)

2/3 to 3/4 of all the cops I have ever know/had dealings with were decent people doing their very difficult job in a fair fashion, and thus providing the society with a vital service at great risk to themselves.

The balance were, to one degree or another, violence loving authority freaks who hate everyone who doesn't play by their rules (not the law, their rules), and are more than happy to smash those folks' skulls in order to persuade them to do so, an act that they almost universally get away with.

Until humans advance to the point to where such individuals are receiving treatment for those inclinations instead of entering a profession where they can act them out legally, nothing will change.

Re:free speech (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240081)

Of course, we're in a positive feedback loop now. Civil disobedience begets more police response and erosion of liberties in the interests of "freedom", which leads to more civil disobedience, which leads to more of a police response, etc. Add this to all the economic problems today with the accelerating concentration of wealth in an extremely small subset of the population exacerbating the problems of income inequality, coupled with the coming energy crises due to Peak Oil, and we're going to be having serious problems within a generation (if even that long).

Things have gone too far for there to be any real compromise now. The United States government is on borrowed time. Anyone that isn't making arrangements to take care of themselves in the absence of government functions is being foolishly optimistic in my opinion. Many people laugh at the preppers [wikipedia.org] and call them extremists, accusing them of having their "tin foil hats on too tight" but even simple logic dictates that it's better to be prepared for an event that never comes (although it's getting harder and harder to credibly believe it's won't) than assume it won't.

My family will not be victimized due to a lack of preparedness on our part, regardless of who is doing the victimizing, whether they're wearing a badge, military uniform, or not. I am not a war-monger, and I don't want to hurt anyone...but I will defend myself, my family, and my neighbors if it comes to that. When the shit hits the fan all we're going to have to depend on is each other, so it's imperative you have serious conversations with your neighbors concerning these things as well. There's safety in numbers, obviously...

Re:free speech (1)

Beyond_GoodandEvil (769135) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240141)

unholy horror on everyone nearby, including journalists, children,
Who the fuck brings children to a protest where there may be arrests or use of force for anything other than using said children as a human shield? That is pretty fucked up

The World's Most Badass Fart Gun (2)

rossjudson (97786) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239519)

I've got a 14 month old boy. I need to warm up my fart joke capacity, so it'll be ready when I need it. I wonder if a positively-charged fart would be different from a negatively-charged fart.

Re:The World's Most Badass Fart Gun (2)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239615)

I've got a 14 month old boy. I need to warm up my fart joke capacity, so it'll be ready when I need it. I wonder if a positively-charged fart would be different from a negatively-charged fart.

Farts with a range of 150 feet, what could go wrong?

Re:The World's Most Badass Fart Gun (1)

clyde_cadiddlehopper (1052112) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239797)

Farts with a range of 150 feet, what could go wrong?

That would be a biological weapon delivery system. "Fetchez la vache" is so 12 seconds ago. We don't have to launch a whole putrid carcass over the castle walls, just a few puffs of bad air.

Re:The World's Most Badass Fart Gun (2)

Dr_Barnowl (709838) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240663)

"I fart in your general... oh ... with extreme precision right in your face from 150 feet away!"

Go Ahead. It won't make any difference. (5, Insightful)

rbrander (73222) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239525)

Typical of a certain mindset that sufficient force will stop a demonstration.

And it will, of course. ONE demonstration. But if you don't want another twice as big, you can't stop it with force.

Ghaddafi used anti-aircraft ammunition on human bodies. That tidied up the whole street in jig time. But where is he now?

Re:Go Ahead. It won't make any difference. (3, Insightful)

Sique (173459) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239547)

It worked for him for about 40 years. And it seems to work for Bashar al-Assad right now.

Re:Go Ahead. It won't make any difference. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239635)

Someone will get him eventually. Check back in a year or two. It's more likely to come from one of his own than a protestor, but it only takes one bullet.

Re:Go Ahead. It won't make any difference. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239781)

It's like the wildebeest and the lions. The lions normally can pick off the weak ones at will. But once in a while a lion pisses off too many wildebeest at a time and then it dies.

Re:Go Ahead. It won't make any difference. (3, Insightful)

tsotha (720379) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239735)

Don't kid yourself. Daffy would still be in power if the Europeans (with American support) hadn't pushed him out. His response to protests and then later outright civil war was working very well.

Re:Go Ahead. It won't make any difference. (1)

JockTroll (996521) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239825)

Good luck expecting France will bomb the US to let you carry on your protest.

So...if the crowds... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239567)

Use a big fan and blow it back at police will tbey get charged with assaulting a police officer?

GET EM!!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239721)

I'd love to see those Occupy scabs hosed down this thing!!!

Pissing people off (4, Insightful)

Omnifarious (11933) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239813)

Getting people to disperse in a matter that will piss them off will only work if they wake up in the morning and think "Gosh, I'm kind of embarrassed I was there at all.". Otherwise, it will just make them angrier. And it may not even get them to disperse and go home like you want them to in the first place.

The people who work at firms who make stuff like this should be ashamed of themselves for the world they help create.

But, of course, there are enough people on Slashdot who think that might makes right, and that authority is always correct (most of whome paradoxically are against 'big government') that I suspect these people feel not a glimmer of guilt.

Much earlier than WWII... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239833)

American scientist Robert W. Wood experimented with vortex machines to stun his students long before WWII.

Use this in war. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39239889)

High concentrations, great non-lethal suppression force for people to pop in and lay some phat beats on those turrurists.

But really, it would be highly useful for that. They wouldn't know what hit them.
Sitting there discussing the next plan to attack town X, suddenly they inhale a volcano of gasses and choke their lungs out their nostrils, then in pops the military.
Better than explosive rounds or the like since that would require you to actually go up next to things, or fire a launcher of sorts that would be more noticeable.
This would be a directed blast-wave that would be pretty much invisible against most landscapes until it hits a target.

We already have a good option (0)

Charcharodon (611187) | more than 2 years ago | (#39239895)

"What the gas rings can be used for is transporting other gasses (like pepper spray or tear gas or pesticide) long distances with a decent amount of accuracy, holding their cargo inside the calm center spinning vortex" We already have an old school "vortex" gun that spins a piece of lead to delivery it with extremely high amounts of accuracy over much greater distances. It works on criminals, looters, politicians (what happens when the first two marry and have kids), and protesters equally well.

Wrong subject (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240217)

"Vortex gun: coming soon to a free speech zone near you".

Nuff said.

One itty-bitty drawback: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240229)

Using weapons with a spread of 150 feet on protestors seems like a horrible idea. Why? Because protests take place in cities. Cities have homes. Homes sometimes have open windows(or windows smashed by bricks). Not only would you probably get sued by anyone who was gassed because his home was next to the protest, it could cause permanent damage to people with lung deficiencies, newborns or easily-damaged eyes.

Perfect for a variation on ARM (1)

boddhisatva (774894) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240345)

It sounds perfect for a small variation on an ARM device. A very simple sensor could continuously detect the vortexes and their centers, a simple circuit programmed into an FPGA could adjust fins to keep it on course. An easily constructed device would fly straight down the concentric rings and at target radiate spherical pattern of jagged shrapnel, eliminating the device and killing or otherwise neutralizing anyone within about 10 meters. One could acquire the components off the shelf in a city of any size. If you spend a great deal of money developing this you would need to tell the operator to be sure there was no one with an engineering degree at the other end.

Sounds Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240417)

I'm perfectly willing to take a 90 MPH torus of pepper spray to the face while sitting down for the cameras because I understand the greater effect that the pictures will have.

Snipper! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240517)

Police snipers pepper spraying protestors from the inside of a building hidden and unseen. Oh yeah, Thats EXACTLY what this country needs......................

Overly confrontational headline (2)

tomhath (637240) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240589)

The article is basically a press release from a company in Ohio that filed a patent application for delivering electrically charged bubbles of gas with a vortex gun. Somehow Slashdot turned it into a rallying cry for Occupy Someplace for Some Reason protesters.

You have a right to peaceful protest. You don't have a right to trespass and disrupt businesses or political gatherings. Respect others' rights and yours will be respected too.

Re:Overly confrontational headline (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39240679)

You have a right to peaceful protest. You don't have a right to trespass and disrupt businesses or political gatherings. Respect others' rights and yours will be respected too.

I wish you were even close to correct.

What about Debifrillators pacemakers? (1)

rhalstead (1864536) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240743)

It'll be interesting about the time they use one on some one wearing a pacemaker or defibrillator. You can't even go through the X-Ray machine or let them use a wand on you in airports. A lot of younger people do have these devices now days.

Democratization of This Technology (1)

Phoenix666 (184391) | more than 2 years ago | (#39240755)

There was a time, perhaps, when only the government had the shiny, new. Super secret facilities in Nevada or Los Alamos chock full of stolen nazi scientists with equipment only defense budgets could afford.

But now I'm seeing massive computing power at the fingertips of most Americans, and amazing technologies like additive manufacturing on the brink of hitting the mainstream, and I wonder how long it will be before the people, getting hit with LRADs and vortex cannons for voicing their opinions, will turn all of it on the police and the elites they serve, whom they outnumber 10,000 to one.

These "non-violent" weapons are not based on some crypto science Uncle Sam learned from aliens from the Kla'arg galaxy. They are not made out of solid platinum or unobtainium. The software needed to run them? Crap, there are probably open source packages out there to do so already (soon, also on BSD!).

Why do they think that people, highly incensed at the injuries to their freedom, won't put all that together and employ it?

I suspect someone among the elites is clear-eyed enough to see it, but clueless how to prevent it, and they're scared shitless and panicking.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...