An exploration of deploying non-lethal weapons in todays chaotic post cold-war world; thereby facilitating peacekeeping deployments without casualties. Dando argues a more sinister outcome could be the result.

This thesis constitutes one of the first attempts to investigate police use of the electric-shock weapon the Taser in England and Wales, between 2004 – 2014. The research combines an inter-disciplinary approach—drawing on the criminology and policing literature, as well as on Science and Technology Studies (STS), Actor Network Theory (ANT) and Social Psychology—with mixed methods and novel data sources. It benefits from virtually unprecedented access to sources including internal police datasets, the College of Policing’s Lead Instructor Taser Training, Taser training in two forces, interviews with police officers and individuals subject to Taser. The thesis first explores how, and in what circumstances, Taser is used in selected forces in England and Wales, before looking at consequences of use for officers and subjects. It then discusses the broader legal, policy, training and accountability framework around the weapon, via an examination of three inter-related and widespread stories told about the weapon and its regulation: that Taser is a neutral tool, that appropriate use is a responsibility for, and at the discretion of, individual officers, and that it is subject to robust accountability mechanisms. It is argued that these stories, whilst not incorrect, are incomplete. Descriptions of the weapon as a neutral tool are understandable but not always convincing, decisions on its use are not just the preserve of individual officers, and accountability mechanisms are not always as robust as is claimed. The conclusions have implications for practitioners and for the literature on Taser. They also contribute to wider criminology debates around use of force, discretion and accountability, and to sociological debates about the relevance of STS and ANT approaches. Finally, the thesis not only highlights areas for future research, but also highlights some tentative recommendations for policy and practice.

yes / Drawing from the Non-Lethal Weapons Database this report summarises and reviews: non-lethal technology research and development issues, themes and trends developments in non-lethal military organisation and co-ordination capacity recent developments in selected non-lethal technologies commercial opportunities and applications of non-lethal technology ethical and social implications of non-lethal technolgy non-lethal human bioeffect research

yes / This is the second in a series of Occasional Papers published by the Bradford Non-Lethal Weapons Research Project. It addresses the development of anti-personnel ¿non-lethal¿1 weapons from 1990 to 1999 and follows on from Occasional Paper No.1: The Early History of "Non-Lethal" Weapons. 2 Concentrating on events in the United States, 3 this paper explores the expansion of police and military interest in these weapons with a focus on the research and development activities conducted by the Department of Justice and the Department of Defense. Related developments in international law are also discussed. ¿Anti-materiel¿ weapons, proposed for use against vehicles, electronic equipment, or other objects, are beyond the scope of this research. This paper does not detail the debates over ¿non-lethal¿ weapons that intensified during this period and were marked by an increase in the corresponding literature. Nevertheless this is the background against which the research and development described here occurred. Fidler has observed that, broadly speaking, this debate was polarised with advocates on one side and sceptics on the other.4 The advocates5 emphasised what they viewed as the revolutionary or transformational promise of these weapon systems and their potential to promote the humane use of force. The sceptics,6 on the other hand, building on concerns first expressed in the 1970¿s,7 cautioned against affording any weapons special status and highlighted the need for critical legal, technological and ethical assessment. Fidler has summarised a central theme of this enduring debate: Nothing epitomized the distance separating advocates and sceptics better than disagreements about the moniker ¿non-lethal weapons¿. For proponents, this description encapsulated the technological and ethical distinctiveness of these weapons. For sceptics, the moniker was misleading because it gave moral status to weapons simply by virtue of their technology and not on the basis of legal and ethical analysis of why, how and where they are used.8

No description available.

L'objectif scientifique de la thèse est de contribuer à améliorer la compréhension des mécanismes lésionnels découlant de l’impact non pénétrant d’un projectile en région thoracique latérale. Concrètement, l’application concerne l’amélioration de l’évaluation du potentiel lésionnel et l’optimisation de projectiles dits « à létalité réduite ». Cette étude a été menée dans le cadre du projet PARCHOC, associant la Délégation Générale pour l’Armement-Techniques Terrestres, le laboratoire PRISME de l’université d’Orléans, les sociétés Nexter munitions, ITC élastomère et ATCOM télémétrie. Il s’agit notamment de mettre en évidence les paramètres des projectiles qui doivent être maîtrisés pour limiter le risque lésionnel. Nous avons d’abord réalisé une étude pour caractériser des projectiles d'essais constitués d'un culot rigide et d'une ogive en mousse d'élastomère. Les propriétés dynamiques des élastomères ont été caractérisées par le système des barres de Hopkinson. Ce travail a permis la mise au point d'un modèle numérique de comportement des élastomères. Des essais ainsi que des simulations d’impacts sur cibles rigides ont ensuite été réalisés afin d'étudier l'influence du couple masse-vitesse et des caractéristiques mécaniques des élastomères sur le chargement généré. Dans la seconde partie de l'étude, des essais sur cibles biologiques instrumentées ont été menés à l’aide des projectiles d'études précédemment caractérisés. Les résultats expérimentaux et numériques montrent que la dangerosité des projectiles est liée à l’action qu’ils exercent sur la structure osseuse thoracique après sa fragilisation et que le mécanisme lésionnel est fortement dépendant de l’impulsion transmise par le projectile lors de l’impact. / The scientific objective of the thesis was to make a contribution in the understanding of the injury mechanisms following the blunt impact of a projectile on the lateral thoracic region. Practically, the application concerns safety certification and optimization of less-lethal projectile. This research was supported by the project PARCHOC partners: the Délégation Générale pour l’Armement-techniques terrestres, the PRISME laboratory (Orléans university),the companies Nexter munitions, ITC élastomère and ATCOM télémétrie. In particular, we have sought the principal projectile parameters which must be controlled to limit injury risk. Firstly, we have performed a study based on specialized test projectiles, made with a rear rigid part and soft foam (elastomeric) nose. The foams’ chemical formulations were made so that the dynamical properties (measured with the Hopkinson bar apparatus) were those expected. Experiments and simulations of the impacts on rigid wall target have been made to investigate how the mass-velocity couple and the foam material properties influence the impact force. Secondly, an experimental campaign was made using pig anatomical parts and the projectiles previously studied. Experimental and numerical results obtained during the thesis demonstrate that the dangerous nature of the projectiles used is essentially linked to the action on the thoracic bone structure after it has been weakened by the impact. Furthermore, injuries are strongly dependent upon the impulse transmitted during the impact.

yes / This third report from the Bradford NLW Project aims to give the reader a brief update of developments and debates within the NLWs field over the last few months. We hope that it will be of interest not only to NLW `specialists', but also to those with a general interest in this area. Interest in non-lethal weapons, which have been defined as being `explicitly designed and primarily employed to incapacitate personnel or material while minimising fatalities, permanent injury to personnel, and undesired damage to property and the environment', has increased dramatically over the last five years as a result of non-lethal technology progress and increasing calls from military forces (especially those engaged in peacekeeping) and civil police for more sophisticated non-lethal responses to violent incidents¿whilst there are evident advantages linked with non-lethal weapons, there are also key areas of concern associated with the development and deployment of such weapons. These include threats to existing weapons control treaties and conventions, their use in human rights violations (such as torture), harmful biomedical effects, and what some predict as a dangerous potential for use in social manipulation and social punishment within the context of a technology of political control.

Yes / This paper explores the early history of ¿non-lethal¿1 weapons development covering the period from the 1960¿s, when several diverse weapons were first grouped together in one category and described as ¿non-lethal¿ by law enforcement end-users and policymakers, until 1989, just before the hugely increased interest in the field that developed during the 1990¿s amongst both police and military organisations. It describes the origins and emergence of new weapons, examining this process with reference to technological advances, wider socio-political context, legal developments, and evolution of associated institutional structures. Developments in both the policing and military spheres are considered as well as the interconnections between them. Necessarily this paper focuses on events in the US2, in part because it led the way in this field but also because sources of information on US activities are more readily available.3.

yes / This is the third in a series of Occasional Papers published by the Bradford Non-Lethal Weapons Research Project. It addresses the contemporary development of anti-personnel ¿non-lethal¿1 weapons, covering the period from 2000 to 2006 inclusive2 and focusing on the research and development programmes of the US Department of Defense and Department of Justice. Following Occasional Paper No. 1, The Early History of "Non-Lethal" Weapons,3 and Occasional Paper No. 2, The Development of ¿Non-Lethal¿ Weapons During the 1990¿s,4 this paper completes our analysis of the overall development of ¿non-lethal¿ weapons from their inception up to the present day.

yes / The length of this Bradford Non-Lethal Weapons Research Project Report No.7 again reflects the interest related to non-lethal weapons from academics, research institutes, policy makers, the police and the military. A number of reports, particularly concerning the Taser electro-shock weapon, have been published from these sectors since our last BNLWRP Report No.6 in October 2004. Some, such as the Amnesty International (U.S. and Canada) have again raised, and stressed, the concerns about the safety of the weapon and the number of deaths associated with its use. Others, such as the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Human Effects Center of Excellence (HECOE), Human Effectiveness and Risk Characterization of the Electromuscular Incapacitation Device ¿ A Limited Analysis of the TASER. (March 2005) concluded that the Taser was relatively safe, but that further research was needed into potential bio-effects, and for continual development into a safer weapon. Reaction to these reports was mixed. Some US legislators called for limitations on the use of Tasers, more accountability, and the detailed recording of incidents in which they were used.1 Others called for a ban on their use until more testing was carried out regarding their potentially harmful effects. A number of US police forces stopped the use of Taser, slowed down the deployment and ordering of the weapons, reviewed their rules of engagement and reporting, and revisited their operational guidelines. The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) published the Electro- Muscular Disruption Technology (EMDT). A Nine-Step Strategy For Effective Deployment. (April 2005) as a response to these growing concerns. Certain elements of the media, especially The Arizona Republic2 and others, took a hostile view of what they considered the scandal of the number of deaths and associated serious injuries caused by the Taser. Taser International challenged allegations that their weapon was directly responsible for these deaths and quoted reports, such as the Madison Police Department report (February 2005), the study by McDaniel, W & Stratbucker, R & Nerheim, M & Brewer, J. Cardiac Safety of Neuromuscular Incapacitating Defensive Devices (January 2005), and the U.K. DOMILL Statement (March 2005) to support their view. The controversy continues. Other than Tasers, there are still few reports of the newer non-lethal technologies actually being deployed in operations. The exception to this is the Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD), which is now in widespread use in Iraq. Little additional information has appeared regarding the `active denial¿ weapon we have described in previous reports.