6 ms·
“Halt and Catch Fire”, but IRL. That’s a really awful way to go. I continue to be uncomfortable with so-called “less lethal” weapons since they habituate use of
by Arubis 5y ago
“Halt and Catch Fire”, but IRL. That’s a really awful way to go. I continue to be uncomfortable with so-called “less lethal” weapons since they habituate use of force in more situations, and overall use of force by police forces is demonstrably excessive—but ignoring priors, this does seem like it could be a genuine mistake.
- thr0wawayf00 5y agoThere's remarkably little research done on how powerful "less than lethal" implements are. I'm reminded of the anti-police riots down in Austin right after George Floyd died and a kid got hit in the head with either a rubber bullet or sandbag round (can't remember which), suffered a major cranial fracture and brain damage from the shot. One wonders the morbid question: would you prefer a "less than lethal" round that could severely and permanently alter the course of your life or a real bullet that would end it? There's not an easy answer to that question for me. [0]: https://www.texastribune.org/2020/06/01/austin-police-george-floyd-mike-ramos/ https://www.texastribune.org/2020/06/01/austin-police-george...
- leeoniya 5y agoi imagine 99.9999% of people would take their chances with a sandbag round than a bullet. the fact that 1 in <some very large number> may hit your head in a way to injur you permanently doesnt change this.
- Arubis 5y ago> There's remarkably little research done… Well, sure. You don’t research what you don’t want to know, let alone have a public debate about. Better to just make loud blanket statements, and when challenged to just make them louder.