A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State

by Whitehead, John W.

  While Malaika Brooks' ordeal with the police did not seem to negatively impact her unborn child–she gave birth to a healthy baby girl two months after the altercation–Malaika bears permanent burn scars on her body where she was tasered by police.450

  As I noted earlier, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand an appeals court ruling that granted the police officers in Malaika Brooks' case immunity from prosecution. In other words, there appears to be very little protection from excessive police force.

  Torture

  Amnesty International has expressed concern that despite the far-reaching use of tasers, there has been no independent and impartial study of their use and effects. The growing employment of these weapons, as well as the number of associated deaths, presents serious questions.

  Furthermore, the use of tasers in law enforcement raises a number of concerns for the protection of human rights. Portable, easy to use, and with the capacity to inflict severe pain at the push of a button without leaving substantial marks, tasers are open to even more abuse. Their use often violates standards set out under the United Nations Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, which requires that force be utilized as a last resort and that only the minimum amount necessary be used. In fact, in late 2007, the United Nations Committee Against Torture declared that the use of tasers constituted a form of torture.451

  Yet despite all of the evidence that tasers are dangerous, taser technology continues to rapidly advance. One of the most recent advances in taser technology is the X12 Taser shotgun, which fires taser rounds at a distance of up to 100 feet, nearly 80 feet farther than a regular handheld taser.452 It would not bea stretch to envision police using the X12 against protesters simply exercising their right to free speech and assembly under the First Amendment.

  CHAPTER 20

  The Goodbye Effect

  With but slight expenditures of force, an all-pervasive sense of fright may be produced in the 'invisible spheres' of life. An ounce of actual violence can yield a pound of terror."453

  – Former presidential advisor BERTRAM GROSS

  The corporate powers who work closely with the police and other government agents to develop the host of weapons used against the populace are steadily introducing new products–all, of course, purchased at taxpayer expense. The catalogue of "nonlethal" and lethal weapons that follow are now available to your local police to use in quieting the disquieted with the "Goodbye Effect." In other words, when you see the police, it's time to tremble and run for cover. But should that be our response to the police in a so-called "free country"?

  The Barf Beamers

  A non-lethal weapon with the potential to do untold damage is the previously mentioned "LED Incapacitator" (LEDI). Designed like a flashlight, this light saber (also dubbed a barf beamer and a puke saber) is intended to totally incapacitate the people at whom it is aimed by emitting multiple light frequencies and colors that confuse the brain, resulting in symptoms ranging from discomfort and disorientation to temporary blindness and nausea.

  It has been suggested that LEDIs be installed in prisons so that riots can be stopped with the flip of a switch. Police vehicles with large versions mounted on top for riot control have also been proposed. But if LEDIs can be so easily employed on a mass scale and mounted on buildings, there is little that would stop police from dispersing even a mildly rowdy, but legal, political citizen protest and shutting down entire city blocks with virtually no resistance.

  "Sergeant Pepper," UC Davis Pepper Spray Incident

  (AP Photo/The Enterprise, Wayne Tilcock, File)

  Devices such as LEDIs facilitate a non-dramatic, palatable use of force. Indeed, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has praised the LEDI device for its potential to peacefully apprehend border jumpers and resistant suspects and control riotous crowds. (DHS has also expressed interest in yet another non-lethal weapon in the form of security bracelets, a.k.a. "taser bracelets," which could be used to control crowds, quell protesters and inflict pain compliance on suspects from a distance.)454

  Pepper Spray

  In 1982 pepper spray (oleoresin capsicum or OC spray) was developed for use by the postal service to prevent attacks by dogs and other animals. Pepper spray is a mixture synthesized from capsaicin, a bitter compound found in hot peppers, that produces a burning sensation upon contact with the skin.455 However, OC spray is highly concentrated, which makes it about three hundred times as strong as jalapeño peppers and five times as strong as commercially available pepper-spray blends.456 The mixture is so extraordinarily painful as to force victims into compliance and submission. It has been reported that if left untreated, the burning can last between forty-five and sixty minutes and cause temporary blindness for about a half an hour.457 Incredibly, Pepper Ball Technologies has now devised a paint ball-like weapon that shoots pepper spray in a "ball" form at a rate of 300 feet per second or 12 shots per second, attacking the victim's throat, nose and eyes with even greater force than the spray.458 Clearly, pepper spray is a potent tool in the arsenal of compliance weapons. Who could forget the stark photograph of the black-garbed policeman pepper spraying the University of California students in Berkeley as they sat on the ground in the lotus position in 2011? As part of the Occupy protests, these students were quietly, passively exercising their right to protest. However, "Sergeant Pepper," as this policeman became known, had other ideas.459

  Sound Cannons

  A more technologically advanced weapon in the toolkit of the American police force is the Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD) or "sound cannon." Developed by the American Technology Corporation, these sound cannons have a range of three city blocks, or roughly 980 feet.460 The sound waves emitted from the LRAD device are of a high frequency which can trigger pain responses.461 To compare the LRAD to everyday sounds, a normal conversation measures sixty decibels and a lawn mower registers at ninety.462 Sound cannons are usually operated at a volume of 120 decibels, while the threshold of pain is about 130, depending on the person's tolerance level.463 However, the LRAD's maximum volume override is 146 decibels, a level that can seriously impair the hearing of its victims.

  Before being unveiled on the public in 2009, the LRAD was tested on pirates who attacked the cruise ship Seabourn Spirit off the coast of Somalia in 2005. It crippled the attackers, who were armed with machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, and deterred their plan to overcome the Seabourn Spirit. Sound cannons were later used as a domestic weapon to disperse American citizens at the 2009 G-20 Summit.

  Skin on Fire

  Rumsfeld's Ray Gun, designed for use by the military and heavily promoted for use domestically in crowd-control situations, uses the Active Denial System (ADS), which dispenses brief, high-energy waves at an individual, resulting in a sensation of severe burning pain. As one reporter explained, the $51 million crowd-control device "rides atop a Humvee, looks like a TV dish, and shoots energy waves 1/64 of an inch deep into the human skin."464

  The ADS weapon directs electromagnetic radiation toward its targets at a frequency of 95 GHz. Upon contact with the skin, the energy in the waves turns to heat, causing the water molecules in the skin to heat to around 130 degrees Fahrenheit. Experiments were conducted on volunteer test subjects in 2003 and 2004 at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The results indicated that ADS causes pain within two to three seconds and becomes intolerable within five seconds, the intent being that the pain would be severe enough to cause a person to flee. As a test volunteer explained, "For the first millisecond, it just felt like the skin was warming up. Then it got warmer and warmer and felt like it was on fire... As soon as you're away from that beam your skin returns to normal and there is no pain."465

  The Air Force also explored the weapon's ability to control riots and unruly crowds by firing the ADS beam at volunteers acting as protesters or intruders. When the volunteers were zapped by the beam, they held their hands up and were given fifteen seconds to cool down before being targeted again. Volunteers were require
d to remove eye glasses, buttons, zippers and watches for fear that exposure to the beam could cause "hot spots" or severe burns. However, actual targets–such as average, ordinary American citizens–would certainly not be given the opportunity to remove such objects before being fired upon.

  Although the military has been guarded about the radiation weapon's effect on humans, several medical professionals insist that ADS beams can cause severe long-term health problems, including corneal damage, cancer, and cataracts. In fact, Dominique Loye of the International Committee of the Red Cross notes that ADS can result in "new types of injuries we're not aware of and may not be capable of taking care of."466 And as journalist Kelly Hearn points out, there are more questions than answers right now about how the weapon works, "what it does to the body and how it will be used in the streets of Basra and Baghdad or, one day, Boston."467

  Reportedly on orders from the United States Justice Department, a version of ADS has been developed by the Raytheon Corporation for use by local police departments. Someday, according to a Raytheon spokesperson, ADS may be "miniaturized down to a hand-held device that could be carried in a purse or pocket and used for personal protection instead of something like Mace."468

  Tear Gas

  Tear gas, like the LRAD, can be very hazardous and harmful to innocent civilians, and wind can carry tear gas away from the intended center of action, putting innocent bystanders in harm's way. In March 2010 police used tear gas on University of Maryland students after their basketball team defeated Duke. The crowd took to the streets, ripped down traffic signs, and allegedly shook a bus on U.S. Route 1. Mounted police fired tear gas and sand bags to disperse the crowd, eventually resulting in bloodshed.469

  During the April 2010 "Springfest," an annual party held off-campus at James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Virginia, police utilized various riot control practices when those enjoying the festivities became rowdy. Officers from six police agencies responded to the apparent disruption, and altercations took place between them and several of the 8,000 partiers.470 After pepper spray and tear gas were deployed, the partiers dispersed. Once the gas and haze settled, over thirty arrests had been made.471

  Some More 'Nice' Weapons

  Police even have weapons that can shoot around corners. One such firearm, the "Israeli Corner Shot Weapon," uses a video monitor to track targets from around corners. This allows police officers to shoot safely at targets from a 90-degree angle while tracking them on the projector screen.472 SWAT teams all across the country are hopeful about the advancements and new possibilities that this weapon brings. Captain Mike Shearer of Akron, Ohio, stated that this new weapon allows the police to "[e]xpose a weapon, expose a lethal threat, without exposing any part of your body... So it looks like a very nice weapon."473

  Other weapons that have appeared in the arsenal of police units across the country are metal and wooden batons, riot guns, flashbang and smoke grenades, and sedative darts. The water cannon is another potent weapon that the police force has used, including on protesters during the Civil Rights Movement. The average water cannon has the ability to knock a person down from approximately one hundred yards away474 Furthermore, some countries have gone as far as to dye the water and lace it with tear gas in order to wreak havoc on its victims. Police units in India have been known to dye the water, thus making it easier for law enforcement to recognize and target protesters as they flee the scene.475 In the past, water cannons have drawn their water from large natural bodies of water, fire hydrants, or even fire engines. Currently, however, water cannons are powered by kinetic pumps, which use a rotor propeller to shoot the water outward while simultaneously pressurizing it. A device called the deluge gun, which can be controlled remotely by a single person, allows greater control and precision for the cannon's target.476

  The Trouble with Non-Lethal Weapons

  There is a serious problem with "non-lethal, non-deadly" weapons: how they are used–or abused–largely depends on the individuals and agencies operating them. For example, as we have seen, many police forces around the world unabashedly use tasers as compliance weapons rather than as alternatives to deadly force. In these countries, tasers are more often used against passive resisters and stubborn individuals (i.e., people who talk back), while more deadly force is reserved for armed offenders. Consequently, abuses are on the rise and opposition to tasers is mounting worldwide, especially given the sharp increase in sudden deaths accompanying use of tasers.477

  Also, we know very little about these non-lethal weapons. For instance, despite assurances from Homeland Security that LEDIs cannot do any real damage, the research is still out on the long-term effects of many of these non-lethal weapons. As with tasers, which have resulted in nearly 500 deaths over the past few years, LEDIs might cause greater than expected damage to individuals who are especially susceptible to their effects.

  Moreover, non-lethal weapons such as LEDIs may not reduce the number of shootings by police. In Houston, Texas, for example, the introduction and routine use of tasers did not reduce the number of people shot, killed, or wounded by the police.478 Nevertheless, while the use of non-lethal weapons such as tasers and LEDIs may not necessarily reduce the number of civilian casualties, they have been largely accepted as the humane alternative to deadly force because they make the use of force appear far less dramatic and violent than it has in the past.

  Contrast, for instance, the image of police officers beating Rodney King with billy clubs as opposed to police officers continually shocking a person with a taser. Both are severe forms of abuse. However, because the act of pushing a button is far less dramatic and visually arresting than swinging a billy club, it can come across as much more humane to the general public. This, of course, draws much less media coverage and, thus, less bad public relations for the police.

  Moreover, the use of tasers and other weapons of compliance empowers law enforcement officials to resort to non-lethal weapons in situations where previously no force would have been used at all, such as routine traffic stops or peaceful protests. And as force becomes easier and more common, with police neutralizing masses of people for the slightest disturbance and only facing relatively minor repercussions, constitutionally protected protests will be rendered useless.

  No Revolt

  There are also totalitarian ramifications to be considered. Governmental coercion is largely restrained by the fact that people will resist governmental violence that crosses a certain threshold. But when the threshold is subtle and justified under the rubric of being more humane or combating terrorism (as in requiring airline passengers to wear taser bracelets), it becomes more difficult to find the outrage necessary to oppose it.

  Lest we forget, government domination is not usually accomplished by methods so dramatic that they spark a backlash from citizens. Thus, the real threat to freedom posed by such non-lethal weapons is a governmental system of coercion so well designed that it does not breed revolt.

  CHAPTER 21

  Attack of the Drones

  Although it is hard to predict where the drone infrastructure will grow, if other defense contracting projects are a reliable guide, the drone-ification of America will probably continue until there is a drone aerodrome in every state and a drone degree program to go With it."479–Richard Wheeler, Wired

  Imagine a robot hovering overhead as you go about your day, driving to and from work, heading to the grocery store, or stopping by a friend's house. The robot records your every movement with a surveillance camera and streams the information to a government command center. If you make a wrong move, or even appear to be doing something suspicious, the police will respond quickly and you'll soon be under arrest. Worse, you might find yourself tasered into compliance by the robot floating on high. Even if you don't do anything suspicious, the information of your whereabouts, including what stores and offices you visit, what political rallies you attend, and what people you meet will be recorded, saved and easily accessed at a later date by the po
lice and/or other government agents.

  Coming Home to Roost

  This is a frightening thought, but you don't have to imagine this scenario. Thanks to the introduction of drones into American airspace, we are only a few years away from the realization of this total surveillance and compliance society.

  Drones–pilotless, remote controlled aircraft that have been used extensively in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan to assassinate suspected terrorists,480 as well as innocent civilians481–have increasingly found favor with both military and law enforcement officials. "The more we have used them," stated Defense Secretary Robert Gates, "the more we have identified their potential in a broader and broader set of circumstances."482 In fact, President Obama's 2012 military budget provided strong funding for drones with intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities, with $4.8 billion set aside just "to develop and procure additional Global Hawk Class (RQ-4), Predator Class (MQ1/9), and other less expensive, low-altitude systems."483

  Parrot Drone (Parrot SA)

  Little surprise, then, that in early 2012 Congress passed and President Obama signed into law the FAA Reauthorization Act, which mandates that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) create a comprehensive program for the integration of drone technology into the national air space by 2015. By 2020 it is anticipated that there will be 30,000 drones crisscrossing the skies of America, all part of an industry that could be worth hundreds of millions of dollars per year.484