Controversy Active Denial System

the effects of radio frequency on humans have been studied military years, , much, not of research has been published openly in peer-reviewed journals.

symptoms attributed active denial weapons have reportedly been felt daily since november 2015 retired government officer resident in canberra, australia. on 3 march 2016, however, australian department of defence stated had not purchased capabilities such raytheon s silent guardian or infrared, sonic weapons, or long range acoustic devices. on same date australian capital territory s minister police stated a.c.t. government including act directorates, agencies , act policing not use ... devices [such electronic crowd control devices , electronic active denial systems], nor these entities considering use.

a news article criticized sheer amount of time taking field system, citing potential had avert great deal of pain , suffering in volatile areas around world.

although effects described unpleasant , device has potential death .

while claimed not cause burns under ordinary use , described being similar of incandescent light bulb being pressed against skin, can cause severe burns in few seconds. beam can focused 700 meters away, , said penetrate thick clothing although not walls. @ 95 ghz, frequency higher 2.45 ghz of microwave oven. frequency chosen because penetrates less 1/64 of inch (0.4 mm), – in humans, except eyelids , babies – avoids second skin layer (the dermis) critical structures found such nerve endings , blood vessels.

the methodology of testing, in volunteers asked remove glasses, contact lenses , metallic objects cause hot spots, raised concerns whether device remain true purpose of non-lethal temporary incapacitation if used in field safety precautions not taken. however, these tests in program , part of thorough , methodical process demonstrate safety , effectiveness of technology, has involved more 600 volunteer subjects , 10,200 exposures. safety demonstrated in each step of process, restrictions removed, , now, according ads proponents, there no restrictions or precautions necessary volunteers experiencing effect. long-term exposure beam may cause more serious damage, sensitive tissues, such of eyes. 2 people have received second degree burns after exposure device. (the actual number of injuries, according ms. stephanie miller of afrl/rdhr, total of 8 – 2 mentioned, , 6 others, healed without medical intervention.)

in addition, claim subjects have body piercings, jewelry, or tattoos suffer serious skin damage. tattooed people can become ill due high amounts of toxic substances released heated/melted tattoo pigment. human effects testing on large-scale version of ads included more 11,000 exposures on over 700 volunteers. both laboratory research , full-scale test results demonstrated there 0.1% chance of injury system 1 or system 2 exposure.

critics cite that, although stated intent of ads non-lethal device designed temporarily incapacitate, modifications or incorrect use operator turn ads more damaging weapon violate international conventions on warfare (although @ time, ads has gone through numerous treaty compliance reviews , legal reviews af/jao, , in cases complies every treaty , law).

some have focused on lower threshold of use may lead use them (especially civilian police) become trigger-happy , in dealing peaceful protesters. others have focused on concerns weapons operative principle of inflicting pain (though non-lethal ) might useful such purposes torture, leave no evidence of use, undoubtedly have capacity inflict horrific pain on restrained subject. according wired magazine, active denial system has been rejected fielding in iraq due pentagon fears regarded instrument of torture.