The state needs to take arming people seriously

April 26th, 2012 § 0 comments § permalink

Why the buggery can’t the Independent Police Complaints Commission force officers who witness a fatal shooting by a colleague to be interviewed?

The in this country the state doesn’t officially kill people, not even after a trial. If the police, who are part of the state apparatus, kill someone there needs to be a proper investigation, to ensure that the death resulting from their actions was unavoidable to prevent even greater loss of life.

The police will, unfortunately inevitably, now and again kill people. It comes with the territory of dealing will the nasty, desperate and sometimes unhinged elements of our society.

Letting officers that witness a death caused by a colleague only having to submission a written statement is not good enough for a proper investigation.

An interview of a police witness is needed to clear up ambiguities, contradictions or even just to clarify a statement that is written particularly clearly.

This is needed to ensure the state, via the people it authorizes to use firearms on its behalf, uses its monopoly on force responsibility properly and at a minimum.

There is no excuse not to.

The Home Office has declined to comment on this issue because of the investigation into the death of Mark Duggan during the rioting last year.

This is a weak excuse as this issue isn’t just about the case of Mark Duggan. This investigation may have highlighted the problem and brought it some welcome publicity, but the problem is about officers not having to account for themselves in general, not in specific cases.

This needs to change to show the state takes its responsibility of arming people seriously and for accountability of the armed officers themselves.

Safety Sword

April 7th, 2009 § 0 comments § permalink

sword of honour

I’ve been with my company a few years now and seen a sword in the various display cabinets about, along with various awards for various corporate things, but only today looked to see what it’s actually for.

It is a Sword of Honour, awarded by the British Safety Council…

The Sword of Honour is the most prestigious international health and safety accolade that a company can receive, and it is designed to encourage and reward organisations that work to best practice. Inaugurated in 1979, every year only 40 swords are awarded world-wide, so winners can be assured that they are elite organisations that boast first class health and safety for their employees.

That’s all good and well, but didn’t anyone notice the irony of awarding a pointy implement, that has the sole purpose of killing people to companies for keeping people safe?

Double Standards again

September 26th, 2007 § 0 comments § permalink

There will not be peace in the world if the international community falters in the face of the proliferation of nuclear arms

The whole source piece is about Irans’ nuclear ambitions, but once again, how can “The West” go on about the proliferation, or non-proliferation, while there are countries re-arming themselves or denying ownership (to mention just two, 1, 2).

The NPT is effectively dead.
What serious efforts have the nuclear nations taken to get rid of nuclear weapons, and I do not mean by stopping non-nuclear countries acquiring them.

Barrett M107 Rifle

March 14th, 2007 § 0 comments § permalink

Watch this video…

…and think what Ronnie Barrett could do if he put his mind to something other than weapons…

Isreal Demolishes Entire Beduin Village

December 6th, 2006 § 0 comments § permalink

Filling the Gap Between Shoot & Shout

October 5th, 2006 § 0 comments § permalink

I have got to get me one of these toys!
It’s called a Silent Guardian and it:

  • Provides a zone of protection
    that saves lives and protects
  • Minimizes collateral damage
  • Provides real-time ability to
    establish intent and
    de-escalate aggression
  • Does not cause physical harm;
    prevents injury and death
  • Provides precise effects at a
    longer range than current
    less-than-lethal systems

Sounds good don’t it?

I’ll let Raytheon tell you how it works from their flyer:

The system’s antenna emits a focused beam of millimeter wave energy. The beam travels
at the speed of light and penetrates the skin to a depth of 1/64 of an inch, producing an intolerable heating sensation that causes the targeted individuals to instinctively flee or take cover. The sensation ceases immediately when an individual moves out of the beam or the operator steers the beam away. Silent Guardian does not cause injury because of the shallow penetration depth of the millimeter wave.

I heard about it here, and the way this guy describes it, just makes it more appealing:

Imagine you’re at a protest – at a nuclear plant, perhaps, or a military installation. You approach the perimeter fence, carrying your placard. The loudhailers warn you to keep away. But you ignore them; this is a protest, after all. And then it happens. Your skin feels as if it’s on fire – a burning, relentless, intense pain as if you were touching a frying pan. You scream and jump back, trying to escape the sudden agony. You scrabble a few metres away and it stops. Then you look closer at the buildings that are the object of your protest. Did it come from there? You approach the fence again and the pain starts again – until you jump back.

“This technology is capable of rapidly heating a person’s skin to achieve a pain threshold that has been demonstrated by AFRL human subject testing to be very effective at repelling people, without burning the skin or causing other secondary effects.” The device, it adds, “is an alternative to lethal force.”

The human testing showed that the beams will penetrate even tiny openings and cracks in any physical barrier, including clothes, walls and shields. It is as though it wraps around corners to affect any piece of exposed body – the fingers or face, say, of those trying to hide.

Tests carried out with the Active Denial System at Kirkland Air Force Base in New Mexico between 2003 and 2004 raised questions about the safety of this technology in practice, since volunteers were asked to remove glasses and contact lenses to avoid the possibility of eye damage. Volunteers were also asked to remove metallic objects next to the skin to prevent hot spots forming. Demonstrators might not be so cooperative.

This is a sweet line: Raytheon: Aspiring to be the most admired defense and aerospace systems supplier

Where Am I?

You are currently browsing entries tagged with weapons at Sim-O.