(MintPress)—US military researchers recently unveiled a non-lethal “heat ray” gun, or the Active Denial System (ADS), to control crowds in the United States, including demonstrations, or force enemy soldiers to surrender. While the US military and human rights groups agree the device is a positive step in non-lethal weaponry, activist groups are voicing concerns over health effects and overuse of the gun to quell Occupy protesters.
The military has repeatedly stated that the rays are not lethal, but critics of the device wonder what the effect of overexposure would be as well as the overall safety of the gun in the short- and long-term.
At ranges of over 550 yards, the ADS works by sending 94-GHz millimeter-waves that are able to penetrate through the outer layer of skin, creating a sudden, intolerable burning sensation as long as the individual stays in the line of fire. The weapon is designed to quickly disperse crowds by giving individuals an uncomfortable sensation provoking the instinct to immediately flee.
“You’re not going to see it, you’re not going to hear it, you’re not going to smell it: you’re going to feel it,” said US Marine Colonel Tracy Taffola, director the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate, Marine Corps Base Quantico.
Previous uses
For the last 15 years, the US military has been working on the “heat ray” gun to advance non-lethal weapons. While there is a safety mechanism that is currently installed on the weapon which automatically turns off the beam after 3 seconds so that targets are not overexposed to the beams, uncertainties about how operators of the machine would abuse the weapon persist.
“The concern is override,” said Marc Garlasco, the senior military analyst and non-lethal weapons expert at Human Rights Watch. “What about the possibility of a lengthening of this period so that the people are actually exposed to it for a longer period — can an adversary fight through it?”
In 2010, the ADS was sent to the US military in Afghanistan to be used in war situations. According to the military, however, the “pain ray” was never used in operations within Afghanistan and was withdrawn after questions from workers at the International Security Assistance Force headquarters in Afghanistan arose concerning whether using the potentially torturous device was an appropriate way to create trust between the US and Afghanistan.
After the military pulled the heat ray weapon out of Afghanistan, the Pitchess Detention Center in Los Angeles adopted the system to use on inmates. While the version used in the jail is smaller than that of the military’s, it produces the same results. The L.A. Sheriff’s Department implemented the gun in 2010 to decrease the number of inmate-on-inmate assaults as well as the number of assaults on deputies.
Even though the device is said to be safer than other non-lethal weapons, in a 63-inmate fight in the jail in October 2011, the system was not used, and instead, rubber bullets were shot at inmates.
According to reports, the gun has only been used in test situations and has still not been used in real-life scenarios. This has critics doubtful about how police and the military will handle the weapon when it is finally used outside of testing conditions.
This has left human and civil rights groups asking more questions regarding its safety.
One civil rights blogger states, “Law enforcement and the military will over use this weapon as they did with the taser. It will be touted as a safe weapon, so, instead of proper policing, they will rely on electrical gadgets that they don’t fully understand.”
While future uses of the ADS on US soil are unclear, human rights activists foresee the use of the gun on Occupy protesters. This begs the question: if the device has not been deemed safe to use in combat situations in other countries, is it safe enough to quell demonstrators domestically?
The future of protests
According to the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate, the ADS could be used in situations including defense of a perimeter, crowd control, protection of military forces, enhancing maneuver (particularly in an urban environment), protection of harbors and channels and protection of a pier.
The use of the weapon on protesters in the United States remains unclear. Even so, many people throughout the world agree that protesters of the Occupy movement may be among the first to have the weapon used on them in non-test scenarios.
A reporter for The Voice of Russia wrote that forces in America may give the weapon its first trial run on activist crowds in America. “The US authorities may find the ‘harmless’ electromagnetic gun extremely useful at home, for example, to cool down the Occupy Wall Street protesters, while simultaneously testing it in real-life conditions.”
Occupy movement supporters are also posting hints of how protesters can protect themselves against the rays to stay out of harm’s way.
While human rights activists believe the technology is a positive step in non-lethal weaponry, they warn that uses of the device should be limited. Garlasco stated the ADS has the potential to allow the rays to bounce and reflect if the beam hits off an acute angle, with the possibility of burning innocent bystanders.
“The weapon can hit one spot, and it can ricochet off and go much farther than it’s intended. And so, we’re just concerned about the development of policies, procedures, and the way the weapon is employed.”
Even after spending 15 years and $120 million on the development of the ADS, the military has not seen the weapon fit for use outside testing scenarios, which begs the question of how safe the gun is to use on protesters in real-life situations in the US.
Health concerns
Research conducted by the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) concluded that exposure to the beams produces a very low risk of skin damage. The heat waves penetrate through clothing, and 1/64 of an inch into the skin, causing skin temperature to rise to 50 degrees C, or 122 degrees F. Soon after targets move from the path of the ray, skin temperature returns to normal, and studies show no risks are associated with being hit by the ray.
However, human rights activists disagree with these findings, stating that there is not enough research and data to adequately prove that there are not risks, including short-term and long-term. Additionally, a report announced that the ADS has the possibility to inflict second- and third-degree burns to those exposed.
Garlasco states, “We don’t really understand the ocular damage that it can do to someone. And…pregnant women, children, the infirm, these are all people that are going to be far more susceptible to lasting damage, and there needs to be more understanding on the part of the public as to what the effects of this weapon are.”