4 ms·
Calling tear gas a “chemical weapon” is a rhetorical exaggeration that conjures up comparisons to actually lethal chemical weapons like nerve gas. The two are n
by throwawaysea 6y ago
Calling tear gas a “chemical weapon” is a rhetorical exaggeration that conjures up comparisons to actually lethal chemical weapons like nerve gas. The two are not the same. The 1925 Geneva protocol has exceptions for riot control agents to be used in various circumstances specifically because its wording is otherwise overly broad. Tear gas is a non lethal tool to bring crowds under control. The alternative is to let crime happen or to put both the police and criminals at greater risk.
In case of Seattle’s attempt at banning use of tear gas, the federal judge also didn’t say “the police might get significantly more violent”. Do you have a source on that, because it feels like editorializing. From https://crosscut.com/2020/07/judge-blocks-seattles-ban-tear-gas-other-crowd-control-weapons https://crosscut.com/2020/07/judge-blocks-seattles-ban-tear-...
> The DOJ argued that implementing a ban on tear gas and other crowd control weapons, which the Seattle City Council passed in June, would result in “irreparable harm resulting from officer confusion and the inability to modulate force or de-escalate situations in which force may be needed.”
> "The issuance of this immediate change, without time for additional direction or training, is likely to result in officer confusion," he wrote.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- klyrs 6y ago> Calling tear gas a “chemical weapon” is a rhetorical exaggeration that conjures up comparisons to actually lethal chemical weapons like nerve gas. Tear gas is, categorically, a chemical weapon. Just as rubber bullets are projectile weapons. You can call it a "less lethal chemical weapon" if you like, but it's no less a chemical weapon.
- Pfhreak 6y agoTear gas is absolutely a chemical weapon. It's use is not allowed in war. It can be lethal, and can cause significant harm to people sensitive to it. Sure, it's a milder chemical weapon than, say, nerve gas but it is absolutely a chemical weapon.
- onecommentman 6y agoCan we shut down the semantics discussion? It leads nowhere. Folks can call tear gas a “chemical weapon” because it is chemical and is a weapon. Other folks can think and say that calling “tear gas” a chemical weapon is an abuse of terminology. Both points are valid. Both points lead nowhere. It shuts down productive discussion.
- Pfhreak 6y agoSure. I will add that the city council did describe them as "chemical weapons and crowd control devices" in a press release on the legislation.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]