The more tools you have on hand, the greater your chance is at finding the perfect one.
And the more money you'll need to buy all of this equipment. Then what if you never need it?:shrug:
The more tools you have on hand, the greater your chance is at finding the perfect one.
I think it's a great idea.
As long as it's not abused .
Of course it will be abused. Just look at Taser guns,... supposedly a non-lethal alternative to using a firearm, but end up getting used in situations to control people, where they otherwise would not have been fired upon with a live round.
It's known as 'function creep', and it is seen everywhere, so this device will get introduced with all the usual re-assurances, and then get deployed to break up crowds of peaceful demonstrators when the Police get bored and want to go home.
Apples to oranges. A taser isn't a crowd control device. ADS is. You could make the exact same arguments for any method of crowd control.DAMIT, i wrote a whole responce to this but the window crashed.
I said the abuse that could come out of this system is MUCH worse than out of a tasa because it can be used to stop people protesting if the goverment so wishes. Of course first you need the goverment to do something that will pry the average american out of there couch but there is always the chance it will happen. Protests are an important feature of a democrasy (to the point where the victorian goverment purpose built federation square for various funtions but one was to be the end point of marches through the city). Yet a system like this one can undermine that and it could concivably do this from a hidden position so no one even knows its been used
I'm pretty sure people would notice an angry mob turning tail and running away screaming in pain at the touch of a button.i know a taser isnt a crowd control device (i was making the point that the most specilised the equiptment the more specilised the abuse) but there is one difference between using something like this and using a fire truck or a line of cops in riot gear. This is that when it apears on the news its really EASY to see the abuse by the cops in riot gear or the hose on a fire truck. This wont be as ovious which makes it MUCH more dangorous to the political prossess
one thing i do have to wonder is why (especially in the US, not so much here) the police seem to be taught that the best way to deal with a protest is to atack it at all. You have LARGE numbers of people marching in one direction with there emotions hightend simply because they are mad enough about SOMETHING to march on the streets so the police either stand across the road and try to block them or they employ something like this. Surly the best way for the police to deal with it would be just to block the roads, divert trafic and let it happen
The whole reason fed square is designed so well is that Swanson street is a walk ANYWAY (so there are only taxis and emergency services alowed to drive along it) and so the ONLY intersection that has to be blocked is the corner of flinders and swanson street which doesnt overly inconveniance drivers. I would have to look up the exact figures of the anti war protest but say 50 000 as a guess marched against the war in iraq and there were no arests i can recall. The whole thing turned into a party at the fed square end because Peter Garrot (head of midnight oil and now enviroment minister) put on a concert at the end. Compare this to the batton charge when Kenert closed the school (sorry cant rember which school it was) which was a reltivly small protest but ended up with HEEPS of arests and injuries because the police got aggressive
I just dont get it