Non-Lethal Weapon Alternative Policy
Whether it is in a military arena or that of law enforcement, non-lethal alternatives of weaponry are essential. Policies that govern their use may be based on safety, success or simple effectiveness. In all cases, the policies are based on desired outcomes.
Other People Are Reading
-
Categories of Non-Lethal Technologies
-
There are strengths and weaknesses in the use of non-lethal weaponry. In 1997, the United States Department of Defense created a Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate designed to direct its non-lethal weapons program. In so doing they published a document called the "Joint Vision for Non-lethals." In this document they categorize non-lethal technologies into six general areas: acoustics, biotechnology, chemical, mechanical, optical and electromagnetic.
Flaw With Non-Lethal Weaponry
-
Using the term "non-lethal" can be misleading since many non-lethal weapons can be lethal if employed incorrectly, and sometimes even when employed correctly. When a bean bag or rubber bullet is fired at too close a range, fatal injuries can occur. Sticky foam is capable of causing suffocation if used on the face instead of the feet. Microwave weapons can be fatal to the aged when set to be effective on the young and able-bodied. It is critical that policies governing non-lethal weaponry focus on precision and the method of employment.
-
Policy Considerations
-
Non-lethal weapons range from mechanical devices to specialized microbes. In order to be useful to the U.S. military, non-lethal weapons must advance the security interests of the United States. In 2001, Secretary Rumsfeld said that our defense strategy must, "Assure allies and friends by demonstrating the U.S.'s steadiness of purpose, national resolve, and military capability to defend and advance common interests. Dissuade, to the extent possible, potential adversaries from developing threatening forces or ambitions. Deter threats and counter coercion against the U.S., its forces, friends, and allies. Decisively defeat an adversary at the time, place, and in the manner of our choosing."
Crowd Control
-
Non-lethal weapons help dissuade groups opposed to the U.S. when they operate in ways that don't require military intervention. U.S. forces respond using a spectrum of force that ranges between doing nothing and employing lethal force. For example, in 1993 while attempting to provide food to the residents of Somalia, soldiers and marines encountered unruly crowds of people in the streets of Mogadishu. In this instance non-lethal force was preferable to employing lethal weapons on people who needed their assistance.
Peacekeeping
-
Non-lethal force provides peacekeepers the opportunity to respond early and prevent aggressive groups from provoking outright attacks--as would be the case if lethal-force were applied early on. Using non-lethal weapons allows commanders to separate combatants and to utilize exclusion zones. They also aid in fostering positive feelings from the locals who are less likely to destroy property or kill belligerent individuals from either side when peacekeepers demonstrate restraint from using full force.
-
References
Resources
- Photo Credit less lethal shotgun and shells. image by Kevin Chesson from Fotolia.com
