All in one stun gun
Published March 10, 2012 | 
Wired ran a story on a new patent application by Joel Braun that is for a multi-function non-lethal weapon. It is basically a gun with many barrels. I think this is a cool idea. Don’t like pepper spray, change to the tazer. If that doesn’t work, move on to rubber bullets. This may work, but I am a bit concerned that this might be a bit too big for the average police officer to use effectively.
The more options that police have the better, as long as training and accountability is also maintained. I’d add a small camera on the weapon too, so we can keep a record of what is going on. This type of tool is very powerful, but could easily be used to attack innocent people. Or the level of force could be increased inappropriately compared to the needs of the situation. However, with that in mind, it is a good idea to have the ability to escalate gradually as the situation requires, instead of jumping from pepper spray to batons immediately.
I wish Joel the best of luck on this. Hopefully he’ll be successful and we can put the right tools, training, and accountability in place for our police.
I never realized how large LMCO is
Published January 17, 2011 | I read an interesting article on TomDispatch.com, regarding how large Lockheed-Martin actually is. It is a lengthy, but a great read. It you don’t know much about Lockheed-Martin, here’s how the article starts:
Have you noticed that Lockheed Martin, the giant weapons corporation, is shadowing you? No? Then you haven’t been paying much attention. Let me put it this way: If you have a life, Lockheed Martin is likely a part of it.
If you look closely at all of the different contracts LMCO has with the US Government, it is concerning that one single company can have such a broad role in almost every aspect of our lives. I guess you could argue the same with GE, and their many different business entities. They do everything from jet engines to refrigerators. While GE is spread across military and civilian technologies, LMCO appears to be mostly focused in the military space. However, that isn’t completely true. I have met one LMCO employee that is working on commercial solar energy. I was surprised when he told me that, and I was delighted to see that type of work being done by LMCO.
The article isn’t really positive about the role LMCO has within the DoD. I won’t comment on that, but I do have similar concerns when any company gets so large and has such a broad role in society, one must question if this is a good thing. I do think that President Eisenhower’s warning on the defense military complex has merit. I wonder what he would think of Lockheed-Martin and their role in our government.
I know that we need defense. We need to have military contractors, and in order to get the best price, we need competition. It is a matter of supply and demand. Again, go ahead and read the article. I think you’ll like it.
Lasers vs. Police Helicopters
Published November 28, 2010 | According to Rawjustice.com, Mark Hazlitt decided to persuade a police helicopter flying near his house to leave by pointing a green laser at them. He’s now arrested and charged with a felony.
For those that don’t know, green lasers are significantly more powerful than the traditional red lasers used for pointing at your powerpoint slides. These can be powerful enough to pop balloons, and more importantly, can cause permanent damage to the eye. The military has been concerned about lasers being pointed at cockpits for some time, and they have probably developed some countermeasures by now. However, police helicopters fly a lot closer to the ground, and are constantly looking at the ground, seriously increasing their vulnerability. I have not heard of any countermeasures taking place for police pilots.
These lasers are getting easier and easier to obtain, and it is probably only a matter of time before a helicopter pilot is blinded while flying and crashes, killing innocent bystanders. It is sad that such a cool technology can be easily obtained by an idiot like Mark Hazlitt, but so can guns. I don’t think he appreciated the danger he put the pilots in, and his neighbors. I hope that this event and others like it get the press they deserve, and that police pilots will have the protection they need. It is just too easy for some idiot to point one of these at a helicopter just for laughs.
FBI’s New List: Cybercriminals
Published June 19, 2010 | Ars had an article on the FBI’s new Most Wanted List: Cybercriminals. I don’t know why it has taken so long for cybercriminals to get this kind of attention, but it is overdue. It looks like the current crew is either charged with fraud or with hacking. Not a big surprise there. I am not optimistic that these guys will be found, that is unless they are stupid and announce their presence to the authorities. I can see an iPhone app on the way.
EMP’s on the border
Published June 13, 2010 | Popular Science had an article on a Texas congressman whom is calling for Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) weapons be deployed on the US border. While in theory this may sound like a good idea, in reality, it is very stupid. EMP weapons are very short range and are not reliable. There are many factors that go into an EMP working correctly. Yes, they may work in certain circumstances and can be very useful. If you are chasing a car on a road and you can get behind them an EMP weapon may be the right choice. I can’t imagine that this would be the case on the border. Here you are chasing a vehicle over the desert, how are you going to get close enough to use an EMP weapon. There are simply too many factors to take into consideration for this to work, and the cost is simply too high.
EMP weapons depend on coupling energy into the target electronics. The range is directly proportional to the energy of the weapon, and the energy dissipates at 1/r^2, so unless you have a massive power source, you have a very short range weapon. If you have too much power, you end up with plasma on the antenna that also drains its efficiency. The efficiency of the coupling is dependent on the type of vehicle electronics being targeted and the structures between the electronics and the EMP weapon. Simply put, you can never be sure that it is going to work. If you have unlimited resources and this is one of the many tools you have available, sure… give it a try. Worse case, it does nothing. Best case, it works. But we don’t have unlimited resources and to throw more money at the border to buy these things is an absolute waste of money.
I find it telling that the EMP weapons in question happen to be made in Texas… this is clearly an effort of a Texan congressman to bring more money into Texas. It isn’t about securing the border, it is about a pork barrel project under the disguise of national security. It is a waste of money that would be better used to pay down our national debt, or hiring more border patrol agents. I hope that someone will find some sanity before the tax payers once again line the pockets of a lobbyist.
AZ Speed Camera Revolt
Published February 20, 2010 | 
As a recovering victim of Arizona’s speed camera system, I was delighted to see this report from the LA Times on how the citizens of Arizona are revolting against the cameras.
Speed limit enforcement using photo radar is a misuse of technology. I don’t argue that many speeders will get ticketed through the system. The problem is that often the cities or in this case, state that uses them forgets that they are ticketing people. They are wrapped around the idea of the technology and the possible income source to forget that it is their own citizens that will be targeted by this technology. There is contradictory evidence on the effectiveness of photo enforcement. Some say that they reduce the number of speeders and improve the safety of the roads, and other evidences suggest that drivers efforts to avoid the cameras actually cause more accidents by disrupting the flow of traffic.
So, what is AZ forgetting:
- It’s people receiving these tickets. Most speeders are willing to accept responsibility if they perceive that it was fair and square. Every speeder knows that they are taking a chance on getting caught. If a cop pulls you over, okay… it is your turn. But at least you have a human to talk to, to explain your “special circumstances” to, and at least there’s a human bond there. Speeders don’t like getting tickets, and they may not be the nicest of people to the police, but most folks will accept it. Cameras are impersonal and do not offer the speeder the same experience, or anything like it. It is like trying to have a discussion with an automated phone service at your bank, when all you want to do is talk to a human. In once since it is fair since the camera has no biases as to who to issue a ticket to, but it is not the same, nor is it even close to the same experience.
- Arizona has clearly set this up to generate income. Some may state that it is for safety, but that argument gets lost when you take into account the efforts of Arizona to make it easy to “just pay the fine”… no point on your license, no insurance issues, etc. It may actually serve a dual purpose, to raise income and promote safety, but safety is quickly drowned out in the argument. And unlike a human police officer, the cameras only catch speeders and red light runners, but doesn’t offer any judgment on if your actions are safe or not. A police officer can tell if someone is driving safe or not, and can pull over the drunk driver that is driving within the speed limit. Getting rid of the officers reduce the cost to generate this income, but also reduces the safety on the road. So, all of the evidence suggest that Arizona’s motivation for these cameras was primarily for making money. But wait, it does so by fining the citizens of Arizona who elect those that put this system into place. You can only piss in your own pool so long until someone notices the water changing color.
- People want to be heard. Whether you call it an “excuse” or a “reason” for speeding, people want to be heard. If not by the police officer that pulled you over, then by the judge. If you cut out the police officer, you end up with a lot of people that want to be heard by the judge. According to the article, there are courts in Arizona booked through 2011 with these cases. You can make it enticing for people to “just pay your fine”, but if someone feels strong enough, they are willing to pay more… but only after they have been heard. So, now the traffic courts in Arizona are overloaded. According to the report, only 38% of the fines have been paid, and 50% of the cases are pending while waiting for court. That’s a lot of people that want to be heard, and a lot of voters with a burning issue with their elected officials.
Technology is all fine and good, but when technology intersects with humans there are always issues. You can never forget that it is a human with emotions and feelings that are at the receiving end of this technology. The technology itself may be straightforward but when mixed with emotions, nothing is ever straightforward. Even if without a doubt that photo that arrived in the mail is me, and yes, I was speeeding… I have a strong emotional response to it. It isn’t a cold calculation that yep, I’m guilty and I should pay my fine. When this happened to me I felt violated in that I didn’t have even a small chance to confront my accuser, or explain my behavior. I don’t live in Arizona and was simply driving through the state when I got caught, so I suppressed my anger and frustration and signed up for “traffic school” (a whole other income generating scheme by the state of Arizona). The technology got me into trouble and I used technology (from the same evil bastards) to get out of the ticket.
I hope the citizens of Arizona will vote to end the use of photo radar. I know I have one more trip I must take to Arizona next month, but after that… I’m not inclined to visit ever again. I love the area, but after getting that ticket, I simply don’t feel welcomed in that state. Maybe if the citizens of Arizona ban the use of these systems, at least they will feel welcomed in their own state.