article about sonic weapons

Status
Not open for further replies.

Grey_Mana

Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
726
Location
EST
I want one, although I imagine it would violate ordinances to actually play with one in suburbia. Is there any reason to think these would not be fully legal for civilian ownership? The only practical non-LEO use I can imagine would be as part of an alarm system - banks, reactors, dams where you would want to stop intruders/sabatours/terrorists more quickly than you could get guards on the scene.

The article has a picture of a van-mounted one, and also a youtube video.

DHS helps local police buy military-style sonic devices

Originally published 04:45 a.m., October 1, 2009, updated 09:56 a.m., October 1, 2009
DHS helps local police buy military-style sonic devices

Jerry Seper and Chuck Neubauer THE WASHINGTON TIMES

With the help of Homeland Security grants, police departments nationwide looking to subdue unruly crowds and political protesters are purchasing a high-tech device originally used by the military to repel battlefield insurgents and Somali pirates with piercing noise capable of damaging hearing.

Police acknowledge that they deployed the so-called Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs) as a safeguard at recent political conventions, protest-plagued international summit meetings and this summer's volatile town hall meetings on health care.

Officers were captured last week on video using the devices against protesters at the Group of 20 summit in Pittsburgh, causing many to cover their ears or disperse to escape the shrieking sound.

San Diego-based American Technology Corp. insists the devices it manufactures and sells are not intended to be used as sonic weapons but rather to "influence the behavior and gain compliance" from people.

But the company stated in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing in September 2008 that the device is "capable of sufficient acoustic output to cause damage to human hearing or human health," expressing concern that its misuse could lead to lawsuits.

• To hear the device being used in Pittsburgh in a YouTube video, click here.

It is that fact that has health and civil rights advocates concerned that the devices could fall into untrained hands and cause physical harm.

"Police should not be using military weapons that are likely to cause permanent hearing loss on demonstrators or anyone else," said Vic Walczak, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania who objected to the Pittsburgh police's use of the device.

The dish-shaped device generate tones that are higher than the normal human threshold for pain, according to the device's own data sheet. They can be aimed in a narrow beam at specific targets with what the company has described as "extreme accuracy."

The American Tinnitus Association said Wednesday that protesters at the G-20 summit were "acoustically assaulted" with sound of over 140 decibels, which it described as "like the kind of sound pressure members of the armed services might face from an Improvised Explosive Device (IED)."

The association said that at 130 to 140 decibels, damage to the ear can be instantaneous, adding that the 145 to 151 range of the LRADS is "the kind of sound that can cause tinnitus and hearing damage immediately." Tinnitus is a condition that causes ringing in the ears, sometimes permanently.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has said permanent hearing loss can result from sounds at about 110 to 120 decibels in short bursts or at 75 decibels with long periods of exposure. The National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders said regular exposure of more than one minute of 110 decibels can result in permanent hearing loss.

The U.S. military has used the devices successfully since 2003 and they have been available domestically since 2004.

The purchase of LRADs by police agencies in the U.S. is approved by the Homeland Security Department, making the departments eligible for millions of dollars in federal grants. Federal and state officials said the grant money is turned over to the states, which decide how to spend it.
(article continues)
 
Gee, I suppose they could have been "assaulted" with 7.62 or .50 BMG rounds, too......

What all these "whiners" can't /won't recognize is "less than lethal" doesn't mean 'harmless'.....>MW
 
Judging by the videos, it doesn't seem to particularly effective.
 
over 140 decibels

The device can be turned up and down, to be louder.

140 decibels is massive. Louder than firing a .22LR without hearing protection.

The device also delivers constant noise. So it would be closer to firing a .22 machinegun nonstop.



However one of the worst things about this device is it looks very similar to the one that burns you with radiation. Which can also be increased or decreased in intensity.
The Active Denial System.

220px-Active_Denial_System.jpg


I wonder when we will start seeing that deployed to silence dissenting opinions and protests.

Perhaps both in combination?
You can go deaf and feel like you are on fire at the same time for daring to peacefully protest!



They also have one that works on radio waves that makes people nauseous and produces some loss of balance.

Perhaps people will be assaulted with sound, feel like they are on fire, and be forced to puke all at the same time in the near future.

Such great advancements. No longer do they need to look like thugs with fire hoses, or be seen beating protesters with clubs. Now it looks much cleaner when they deliver pain to crowds, and prevent them from voicing thier undesired opinions.
 
Does anyone else find it somewhat sinister that the federal government is supplying local police forces with tools whose application is to "subdue unruly crowds and political protesters" in order to "influence the behavior and gain compliance" of people?
 
These should be banned completely within the borders of the United States.
Free speech and freedom of assembly are Constitutional rights...that includes things that are unpopular or "politically incorrect".
They have absolutely no place in a free society.
 
You must have missed all the hubbub a few months ago regarding the Somali pirates...

Sonic devices have been installed and used in everything from cruise liners, freighters, oil tankers to Japanese whalers.

Know what pirates have used to defeat them? -a pair of foam ear plugs.
 
They deployed these sonic weapons in Pittsburg like last week to crush peaceful protestors. There is all sorts of disturbing footage on Youtube of what took place there. People being beaten for nothing at all. Abductions. Entire squads of "police" on peaceful protestors for no reason. We have been entering a new phase of Police State since September of 2001, all of these "anti terrorist" things are really meant for "we the people" I agree this kind of stuff is a serious threat to liberty. It's also off-topic for THR unfortunately :p
 
ive played with the LRADs before, they are effective, and at close ranges earplugs arent effective, they are loud. but if you turn them way down, you can hook a cd player up to it for parties on the FOB, bass sucks on them though
 
well, i cant actually site specs on those, itll go loud enough, and it is loud enough to damage hearing if its turned up, and we had ours hooked up to the 5k generator, ive seen some platoons wire theirs to vehicles, so im guessing they could work indefinitely with the right source. (Ill be honest though, that was in 2006 and i cant remember everything about it. a 105 round close to the head kinda screws up your memories there)
 
WHY? Protesting is an American right. If the protesters are peacefull, leave them alone. How long until a protester brings rifle and shoots the stupid machine? Why do they want to subdue ANYONE???
 
protesting is an american right, rioting is not. the protests they mention in pittsburgh were not peaceful, windows broken, things smashed. and honestly, the LRAD can be safer for everyone involved,
 
Equipment like this begs to be misused. I agree with Glockman that these things should be banned in the US.
 
I believe they they should be banned to in the United States of America. Mark my words they will be used in peaceful protests in the very near future.

1911swacp
 
How long until a protester brings rifle and shoots the stupid machine?

That is not a concern of thiers. Then they are able to use lethal force against those rifle wielders.
So they still prevail in using force to control the people.
These devices are to control people who do not justify the use of deadly force. If they did then the police would be using deadly force instead.


The biggest problem is these types of devices do generate the backlash that fire hoses and clubs do when used excessively. They look clean and do not appear violent.
Imagine if the police during the civil rights movement had such devices. All those black crowds would have never been seen on TV being beaten and hosed down, generating empathy and support through non violent resistance.
Instead they would have just become deaf, and felt like they were on fire anytime they gathered. While the police smiled for the camera and politely asked them to disperse.
 
Sorry, but to use the term "peacable" on the anarchists is incorrect.

They aren't there to peacably assemble and protest, they are there to disrupt the meetings. This is being done through violent and nonviolent groups working togehter and in concert with each other.

Both groups assemble, the violent ones tear things up and/or the nonviolent ones block streets and interrupt normal going's on until the cops arrive. Then when the cops show up to deal with the rioting anarchists or the ones disrupting blocks of vehicle traffic then the Youtube cameras come on and they cry foul.

A quick check of the anti-G20 protest and anarchist sites will reveal their plans. It's all a game to make their side look oppressed. Don't buy into it.
 
Does anyone else find it somewhat sinister that the federal government is supplying local police forces with tools whose application is to "subdue unruly crowds and political protesters" in order to "influence the behavior and gain compliance" of people?

It is a conundrum. If you think about it that's all a gun is a tool to, "influence the behavior and gain compliance of people." It is indeed the use to which the tool is put that is good or evil.

Gun
Good = Against a would be rapist attacking your wife
Evil = Against your wife by a would be rapist

Sonic weapon
Good = Against Somali pirates
Evil = Against some folks at a town hall asking their congresscritter questions he doesn't want to answer

Banning it is at this point not possible, the wheel has been invented you could no more ban it than you could ban underwear or guns. Sorry, but once the bag is open the contents come out. I'm to lazy to do the searches, but I'd bet real money that if you looked long enough in the right places on line you could find plans for one of these devices right now on the internet.

Just remain vigilant, and bring earplugs when stating your unpopular opinion in public. If tyranny rears its' head then use your God given right and the tools you have now to fight it. That's all we can ever do.
 
It's just a little odd to me that they phrased it the way they did. "Riot control" would be something else entirely. But "against political protestors" definitely has a sour tone to it, to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top