IDM gun used on G20 protesters

the g20 protest was most likely non-violent and offended the super elite 'leaders' of the world so they told the pigs to send in the hounds....

I think this is what usually happens....

the sheep can get a bit noisy as times so why not drown them out with harmful sound and deafen them....

  On 9/28/2009 at 1:05 AM, kaini said:

rain bullets could be absolutely deadly if fired at a high-enough velocity

if you didn't sit in the shade on jupiter during a storm, you'd be swiss cheese

and even that is dependent on being lighter than a mixture of mostly H2, He, and some other shit

and there being shade on jupiter. and rainstorms.

 

i'll come in again.

Jupiter

lol you should do my degree

  On 9/28/2009 at 12:38 AM, kaini said:

 

 

what's paradoxical is that people (mostly skinheads and chavs) will willingly pay money to experience similar hearing loss listening to something which isn't too dissimilar (if a tad bass-heavier) of their own volition

 

i have met several people with significant and mostly high-frequency hearing loss from going to raves innit

yeah but, to be fair, any music lover is guilty of that. gigs and music through proper earbuds will almost inevitably fuck your ears. it certainly has with me.

i take back what i said, video #2 is most infuriating. The guy who cut it together is kind of trying to balance both sides but even when he tries to it's still pretty of obvious the level of abuse the police inflicted on innocent people. Anybody here see the movie 'Berkeley in the Sixties'? it's a great document of how the police can pretty much squash any large protest if they are ruthless enough. in one particular protest on the Berkeley campus Swat Teams didn't even bother going on the ground to confront protestors, they just sent in a helicopter crop dusting the entire crowd with tear gas.

no but I have seen the murals around Berkeley and know that Reagan is pure evil....

my dad was studying there at the time and go tear gassed, twice, once from the helicopter you mention

  On 9/28/2009 at 4:29 AM, lumpenprol said:

my dad was studying there at the time and go tear gassed, twice, once from the helicopter you mention

Fuck that...

  On 9/28/2009 at 4:29 AM, lumpenprol said:

my dad was studying there at the time and go tear gassed, twice, once from the helicopter you mention

what's your dad's take on the whole thing?

  On 9/27/2009 at 10:53 PM, ericsosh said:

  On 9/27/2009 at 6:37 PM, chenGOD said:

  On 9/27/2009 at 3:13 PM, ericsosh said:

  On 9/27/2009 at 2:12 PM, Mesh Gear Fox said:

what the fuck

people are allowed to protest

 

People are not to allowed to protest illegally.

 

this is sarcasm right?

 

  On 9/27/2009 at 8:59 PM, Kcinsu said:

And yeah, there are such things as legal and illegal protests. There are right ways to go about things, and destroying stuff isn't one of them.

 

This.

 

Atleast here in the Netherlands you need to acquire some sort of permission in order to protest legally.

Sometimes destroying shit and fighting back is the only way to get the change you want. South Korea wouldn't be a democracy if it weren't for the very violent protests that happened in the 80s.

The idea of getting a permit for a protest is simply mind-boggling. You are supposed to have the right to public gathering.

  On 9/28/2009 at 7:53 AM, Awepittance said:

  On 9/28/2009 at 4:29 AM, lumpenprol said:

my dad was studying there at the time and go tear gassed, twice, once from the helicopter you mention

 

what's your dad's take on the whole thing?

I think he was sympathetic with the protesters but also stayed a bit distant from the whole thing - he grew up in Mexico and Columbia so I think he was a bit cynical/realistic about the efficacy of political activism (funny thing was he was dating my mother who happened to be the daughter of the Mayor of Berkeley at the time, and I know my dad and he had long and involved political debates with each other). In regards to the tear gassing, I think he was mostly in the wrong place at the wrong time. I don't think he harbors any resentment towards anyone about anything that happened; on the few occasions I've heard him talk about it, it was pretty cut and dried "this happened, and then this happened." Sorry I can't provide anything juicier or more insightful.

  On 9/28/2009 at 8:17 AM, chenGOD said:

 

Sometimes destroying shit and fighting back is the only way to get the change you want. South Korea wouldn't be a democracy if it weren't for the very violent protests that happened in the 80s.

But the point is you shouldnt need to riot in a democratic society where you're given the right of free speech.

I'm waiting for the day that they develop some sort of weapon that draws the Sun closer to the Earth to exhaust the protestors quicker and cause minor burns.

But seriously, I find it's so hard to come to a conclusion about this protesting thing. Because there's so many angles I look at it from - I mean, I was working around the area of the G20 protests in London (five minutes from Bank) and the streets were a fucking mess, which I suppose you expect.

The thing is, although I get what the idea of the protesting is about and I support it, I can't help but think loads of people haven't a fucking clue what the protesting is all about and are there for the day off and a laugh. I think these are the people most likely to be causing destruction.

On the other hand, like Chen said, the violence sometimes is necessary to make a point and drive the issue home, though innocent people get hurt.

Then you have the media's portrayal of the events, which is impossible to avoid and unlikely you're going to get a straight point of view on the whole thing. Because people get up in the cops faces being aggressive but I KNOW that the majority of cops there are just doing their fucking jobs and I'm sure they don't want fights to kick off (for the most part anyway). So it troubles me when I hear people ranting "fuck the police!" as if they've been listening to too much NWA recently and they think the police is the government's elite guard designed to stamp down on the common man.

I remember after G20 I saw on the morning news this girl who got walloped in the protests bitching on like she was making a Youtube reply video - she clearly didn't have a clue what the protests were about and in videos she was clearly causing trouble. At the end of the report they were saying she's signed a book deal, getting interviews all over the place and seemingly is now raking in the dough because she was a mouthy little aggressive cunt who got thwacked. But she doesn't mind eh? Now that she's getting all the attention she wanted.

The problem is the seriousness of a protest has gone out the window and honestly a lot of people treat going to a protest like a badge of coolness. From what I can tell anyway.

I've gone off topic and lost my train of thought, but my opinion is this: Crowd control weapons are disgraceful and everyone has the right to congregate to protest. It's ridiculous implying that people getting together in one place is somehow unlawful.

Well there has to be regulations on gatherings... I mean there are a lot more people now than in the days of the founding fathers... And transportation is important to he functioning of cities. I mean what if 50 people gather in the middle of a street to protest something inconsequential? It would shut down traffic on a main road, and fuck shit up... So

the cops can't do any thing to move them, because of their right to protest? There has to be a balance.... Which is why you get permits for this stuff... Where you won't be disrupting everything around you. Of course it's a tricky subject and I don't lime siding against the people... But you have to be sensical about it, or else it really would be chaos.

From what I've seen it seems like the majority of the protesters, at least the 'rowdy' ones who are getting the media attention, are the same kind of folks who showed up to the Scientology protests trying to look all trendy with their Guy Fawkes masks. They all look like a bunch of disgruntled high school students to me so I haven't paid much attention.

this is true, i mean the cops have every right to try and root out the rowdy people and arrest them. i just dont think it makes sense for cops to chase students ( who arent protesting but just observing) in their own dorm building up the stairs and then force them to walk out onto a public street filled with tear gas (as shown in video #2). Too many innocent people get abused by the police and i don't think that can be ignored just because 'they are doing there job they have to enforce' they can do that civilly and legally, and frankly i don't even think a lot of what they are doing in these videos is legal.

WTF are they actually protesting? Can someone break it down in short for me? Is it just a protest of elite wealthy nations?

  On 9/28/2009 at 9:30 PM, blicero said:

WTF are they actually protesting? Can someone break it down in short for me? Is it just a protest of elite wealthy nations?

i think for the most part globalization . specifically when elite wealthy (and the most powerful) nations get together and make imperialist plans.

Act the most recent g20 conference Browne, Obama and Sarkozy got up and stage and announced that they are going to give an ultimatum to Iran or else face consequences.

I could understand why people would protest the g20, for the same reasons they would protest the WTO.

I agree... I'm more on your side than not robbie... I just don't know where that fine line falls you know?

So the police commisioner says the protests were illegal, so people should leave. They don't leave, so the police begins using methods to get them to leave. At that point, if they stay, they Re asking for trouble. The real issue, in my mind , is how the police. Commisioner gets to decide. Did these people not get the right paper work?

And "you shouldn't need paper work be because it's our right to protest" doesnt hold up.

obviously it's not that simple for the reasons I stated earlier.

  On 9/28/2009 at 9:34 PM, Awepittance said:

  On 9/28/2009 at 9:30 PM, blicero said:

WTF are they actually protesting? Can someone break it down in short for me? Is it just a protest of elite wealthy nations?

 

i think for the most part globalization . specifically when elite wealthy (and the most powerful) nations get together and make imperialist plans.

Act the most recent g20 conference Browne, Obama and Sarkozy got up and stage and announced that they are going to give an ultimatum to Iran or else face consequences.

I could understand why people would protest the g20, for the same reasons they would protest the WTO.

right, but they're also talking a lot about climate change... and re:Iran, about how they have the sovereign right to have clean nuclear energy, but NOT pursue nuclear weapons, which we all know they are doing.

I guess i can see how such a gathering could seem sinister, but i don't really see anything negative coming out of it.

no matter wether you support the protesters or not, it sucks that one thrown brick, or one broken shop window can undermine thousands of peaceful protesters... because it validates the claims or the authorities, or critics, that it's just a bunch of troublemakers.

also, most cops are just trying to pay the rent. there are plenty of bad apples, but the police are not the enemy.

When I first heard about this I was envisioning this really sinister device that transmitted a sound so high pitched that you couldn't quite hear it, but it caused extreme pain or something really advanced. I then watched the video and realized it is just a really loud siren on wheels. Earplugs anyone?

What can they do against deaf protesters? The next step must be flash grenades that blind people forever.

atomic bombs might work too

  On 9/29/2009 at 1:23 AM, countchocula said:

When I first heard about this I was envisioning this really sinister device that transmitted a sound so high pitched that you couldn't quite hear it, but it caused extreme pain or something really advanced. I then watched the video and realized it is just a really loud siren on wheels. Earplugs anyone?

I don't think ear plugs would work, otherwise modern pirates would all wear earplugs when trying to hijack cruise ships. The most effective weapon these large commercial ships have against hijackings is a mounted LRAD and its very effective in certain situations

  On 9/29/2009 at 1:23 AM, countchocula said:

When I first heard about this I was envisioning this really sinister device that transmitted a sound so high pitched that you couldn't quite hear it, but it caused extreme pain or something really advanced. I then watched the video and realized it is just a really loud siren on wheels. Earplugs anyone?

http://www.boingboing.net/2009/09/28/make-your-own-1-mill.html

  On 9/28/2009 at 10:47 PM, blicero said:

I guess i can see how such a gathering could seem sinister, but i don't really see anything negative coming out of it.

except that the protestors smash up random people's shit

  On 9/29/2009 at 6:01 PM, Awepittance said:

I don't think ear plugs would work, otherwise modern pirates would all wear earplugs when trying to hijack cruise ships. The most effective weapon these large commercial ships have against hijackings is a mounted LRAD and its very effective in certain situations

lol they probably don't have earplugs in somalia mind