4 ms·
Calling tear gas a "chemical weapon" is technically accurate, but still a BS clickbait tactic. Teargas shouldn't have been anywhere near kids, but that won't ge
by sqeaky 2y ago
Calling tear gas a "chemical weapon" is technically accurate, but still a BS clickbait tactic. Teargas shouldn't have been anywhere near kids, but that won't get most of the press with headlines like this around.
When people say "chemical weapon" they think "weapon of mass destruction" even if they don't know names like mustard gas, vx or seran. These are clearly very different categories of things.
It sucks that this will get a pass from many people when they realize schoolkids weren't at risk of mass death, because teargas simply isn't going to kill a lot of kids. Should the cops have behaved better? Yes. Should they be in trouble for tear gassing kids? Yes. Will this be downplayed while people argue uselessly if this was or wasn't a chemical weapon attack while trying to get a better understanding of the story? Yes. Will this water down future talks of weapons of mass destruction as "Chemincal Weapons"? I think it will.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- seadan83 2y agoCS gas and tear gas are chemical weapons. Period. By definition. It is not a technical distinction. See WWI. The fact there are more deadly chemical weapons does not change that use of CS and tear gas are chemical weopons and their use in war would be war crimes
- TheBill 2y agoThe CWC does not treat tear gas as a banned chemical weapon, instead classifying it as a riot control agent (RCA). Article II(7) defines RCA as “[a]ny chemical … which can produce rapidly in humans sensory irritation or disabling physical effects which disappear within a short time … .” CWC Article I(5) prohibits using RCA “as a method of warfare,” but does not define the term method of warfare, leading to a potential exception or “loophole.” https://www.justsecurity.org/76595/clearing-the-fog-of-war-surrounding-battlefield-use-of-tear-gas/ https://www.justsecurity.org/76595/clearing-the-fog-of-war-s... Pedanticisim aside, the .mil requires risk assessments up the wazoo for every training event, let alone using CS/OC, and they should have expected this. Hope it deploys and dissipates for 60 year old anything is a bad gamble in the desert, let alone a built up occupied urban area.
- johnnyjeans 2y agoHe didn't say otherwise. Under the legal definition, my 'death vindaloo' made with 3 moruga scorpion peppers is a chemical weapon, and simply the act of cooking it as a combatant in a warzone would constitute a war crime. It's also immensely delicious and one of my favorite meals, I make it twice a month.
- seadan83 2y agoCS gas is 2-chlorobenzalmalononitrile [1], not capsacin. "Although [CS gas is] described as a non-lethal weapon for crowd control, studies have raised doubts about this classification. CS can cause severe pulmonary damage and can also significantly damage the heart and liver." [1] Tear gas is largly bromoacetone, not capsacin [2]. Though, CS gases and tear gases can contain mixtures with capsacin AFAIK. It's funny, except when the police flood urban areas with this stuff. EG: "Seattle Residents Got Tear Gassed in Their Own Apartments" [3] A SF school added to that list is sad. Sure though, we can make jokes whenever you cook that you prepared a weapon of war. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CS_gas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CS_gas [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tear_gas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tear_gas [3] https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2020/06/04/43840246/seattle-residents-got-tear-gassed-in-their-own-apartments https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2020/06/04/43840246/seattle...
- Terr_ 2y agoI remember a fun little fact back from the run-up to the Iraq War: Under some sections of US code, a single hand-grenade is (was?) literally a "weapon of mass destruction."