Handy advice for dodging and disarming the sonic weapons used by militarized police

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2020/06/23/handy-advice-for-dodging-and-d.html

4 Likes

Get your own:

https://l-13.org/product/jimmy-cauty-advanced-acoustic-armaments-tank/

5 Likes

Which was pretty lame as the discussion here demonstrated.

Hey, Captain Obvious called.

4 Likes

I wonder if noise canceling headphones would lessen the effects–at least in the damage it can do to your ears. I assume the use frequencies that resonate with other parts of your body as well.

4 Likes

Better than bullets?

It depends.

If easy, acceptable, palatable, forced control and repression of citizens’s rights needs to be expanded, then yes, sonic weapons are better than bullets.

Making repression less violent and bloody is a conscious strategy to perpetuate it.

19 Likes

My handy advice would be to outlaw it.

15 Likes

Possible countermeasure: throw any viscous+sticky enough substance to that hexagon shaped transducer. If its surface is a screen covering the emitter, the substance will partially obstruct the sound path, while if it’s the actual emitter, the added weight will also alter its resonance frequency so that its efficiency should drop to innocuous levels.

6 Likes
8 Likes

Another weapon to be filed under “why the fuck was this a) made and b) deployed on US soil and c) who the fuck exactly is in charge in this country?”

25 Likes

OMG, what a boring conversation.

Fuck the police, and fuck their stupid boombox guns.

1 Like

Doubt it. Noise canceling does jack on voices, these devices are likely to fall under the more random noise category, and even if it is possible, not sure if the cancelling device is able to handle +120dBs.

While not developed by the military for use on enemies during combat, it was intended to be used by the military instead of bullets. The military is pretty serious about rules of engagement, and despite a long list of counter examples, prefers not to shoot civilians.

Putting aside the policy of why they were there, patrols during the last couple wars were stuck with the rules of avoiding civilian casualties but only having lethal weapons as a response to any situation they felt threatened in. All too easy to make a mistake and someone dies. Frequently and often. So there was a lot of research into what might be called “get the fuck out of here” technology that didn’t involve death. Compared to a lot of other military stuff through history, it was comparatively enlightened.

Regardless of the noble or not goals, sound weapons were a result. And if used as intended, that would be the end of it.

But the contractors who developed it also saw a way to make even more money from the police. The rest of the story is pretty obvious.

10 Likes

I wonder if silly string would work

2 Likes

I figure the best way to fool the police would be to (first step for POC) go full whiteface, dress in sleeveless t-shirts, US flag bandanas as durags, and camo pants, and top it off with an automatic rifle. Nobody will touch you.

7 Likes

Apt avatar for this comment.

1 Like

Good thought, and reminded me of this. :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like

Both the Popular Mechanics and the BB headlines are misleading. The article says nothing about how to disarm these weapons.

BTW my friend and neighbor won $72k in a settlement from the city of Pittsburgh for hearing damage she sustained from the police use of one of these LRADs. (She’s the “bystander” mentioned in the PM article.)

ETA: Looks like Popular Mechanics fixed their headline. How about it, @thomdunn?

7 Likes

Well, the first part of my comment looks pretty hostile since the conversation that inspired it was removed, but I can’t repeat the second part often enough.

1 Like

If you could get your own, would it be legal to use one of these back at the police. Better yet, outfit it as an acoustic noise cancelation device - the emitting what would be “silence”.

3 Likes

There is no end to what the government will do to protect itself from angry brown people.

1 Like