Just like the waste hierarchy there is a hierarchy for conflict situation engagement. Negotiate, negotiate, negotiate. It is only when those negotiations fail that a situation may arise where conflict threatens to become violent. If and when violence does arise serious questions need to be asked of the negotiators about why their negotiations failed.I would like to believe that when some form of force is called for that it will be non-lethal and human. Unfortunately it also leads to potential abuse. Just because it's supposed to be non-lethal it may give people the impression that it's okay to use it whenever they feel like it.
Was force really necessary in these incidents? There was a highly public incident of a man who was killed at Vancouver airport by police using tasers. Then there was that incident with the student in the US. Then I discovered the granny incident, what a shocker. 'Emotional insecurity' comes to mind.
It's not going to stop those from developing a technology from doing so. Here's a man taking on the role of a taser guinea pig and having a shocking experience with the new X3. Then there's the Taser XREP, which is a wireless stun weapon fired from a shotgun. More ideas blossom from this previous reference - shock nets (Spiderman's favourite), liquid tasers and air ionisation.
The robots descended upon the humans with their tasers set to maximum power and declared "resistance is useless".
No comments:
Post a Comment