3 ms·
GP isn't wrong though. Tear gas of the type used by civilian police forces against the general population is illegal to use in war. It is a war crime to use i
by sillystuff 4y ago
GP isn't wrong though. Tear gas of the type used by civilian police forces against the general population is illegal to use in war. It is a war crime to use it.
Tear gas was developed by France and used on the battle field in WWI before being used for "crowd control".
https://www.kumc.edu/school-of-medicine/academics/departments/history-and-philosophy-of-medicine/archives/wwi/essays/medicine/gas-in-the-great-war.html#:~:text=Several%20chemicals%20were%20weaponized%20in,tear%20gas%20in%20August%201914 https://www.kumc.edu/school-of-medicine/academics/department....
"Riot control agents, including tear gas and other gases which have debilitating but non-permanent effects as a means of warfare, is prohibited in armed conflict under the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention."
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule75 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul...
And, if a government's leaders feel they need to gas, assault with sound cannons / water cannons / pepper spray, use flash bang grenades, beat with clubs, and/or fire rubber coated steel bullets at their population, it might be taken as a hint that the government involved has lost the consent of the governed.
- iudqnolq 4y agoThis is one of those sayings that's technically true but misses the point by a mile. A wounded soldier is a greater burden than a dead soldier, so a possible tactic would be to deliberately wound. Some people thought that was especially amoral, so they added a rule against it to what they called international law. So most police weaponry is illegal under international law, but it's illegal because it's less deadly than the permitted alternative.