Non-lethal Weapons as Legitimising Forces?: Technology, Politics and the Management of ConflictAs mankind finds ever more impious ways to kill and maim, some look to non-lethal weapons as a fix. Brian Rappert discusses the technologies involved and the ethics of, for example blinding someone with a laser, leaving them blind forever, versus killing them outright. |
Contents
Tools of the Trade | |
Threats and Promises | |
Assessing Effects | |
Examining Major Deployments of NonLethals | |
The Prospects for Prohibitions | |
CS Sprays in Britain | |
Gauging Electroshock Weapons | |
Other editions - View all
Non-lethal Weapons as Legitimizing Forces?: Technology, Politics, and the ... Brian Rappert No preview available - 2003 |
Common terms and phrases
accounts actions agents alternative Amnesty International analysis appropriate areas argued argument armed assessments associated basis baton Biological blinding lasers bombing Britain cause Chapter chemical civilian claims concerns conflict considered context conventional credibility critical deaths debates Defense deployed deployment determinations devices discussed disputes drug effects electroshock electroshock weapons equipment evaluations exposure given guidelines Home Office Human human-rights humanitarian implications importance incapacitant individuals injury instance interpretations issues jails kinetic legitimacy less-lethal Less-than-Lethal lethal weapons limited London Maricopa County means merits MIBK military NATO non-lethal force non-lethal weapons Northern Ireland OC sprays offered Omega Foundation operational options organizations particular weapons peacekeeping pepper sprays plastic bullets police positional asphyxia possible potential practice problems procedures projectiles PSDB questions regarding relation responsibility risks safety Seattle situations specific statements studies stun guns suggested tactics target TASER TASER International tear gas testing United use-of-force various warfare weaponry