05-02-24 • Less Lethal Weapons
Erin: Oh no, a tragedy. Officers killed a student who came to school armed - "Police shot and killed a student outside a Wisconsin middle school Wednesday after receiving a report of someone with a weapon."
Belle: It’s heartbreaking that he was so young, but if he was armed and about to shoot up the school, I don’t know what other choice the police had if he didn’t drop the weapon when told.
I can't believe that in 2024 there is NO technology which can incapacitate a human at a distance without killing him. Rubber bullets? Tranq darts? Entanglers? Blinders, sonic blasts?
There is too much margin for error to allow cops to be executioners. I'm sure there is a tech fix for this. We should be all over it.
There is too much margin for error to allow cops to be executioners. I'm sure there is a tech fix for this. We should be all over it.
Belle: I’d be all for something that worked, I just don’t think we have much available right now that wouldn’t put the other students at further risk.
I have been reading about these "less-lethal" weapons and they are certainly effective in some situations. This could have been one of them. If a suspect is outside, and surrounded, and there are officers with lethal weapons trained on the individual, then officers absolutely *should* attempt to use less-lethal weapons first. Especially in cases like this, where the perp was a juvenile who had not actually harmed anyone yet.
Officers shooting live rounds at the school were putting those other students at further risk too. Bystanders have been killed by stray bullets from a cop's gun. A non-lethal weapon could have ended this without any loss of life, but was it even tried? It would be far less a tragedy if it had been.
I think developing effective non-lethal incapacitation for law enforcement should be a very high priority. I'd like to see an end to this kind of death.
Officers shooting live rounds at the school were putting those other students at further risk too. Bystanders have been killed by stray bullets from a cop's gun. A non-lethal weapon could have ended this without any loss of life, but was it even tried? It would be far less a tragedy if it had been.
I think developing effective non-lethal incapacitation for law enforcement should be a very high priority. I'd like to see an end to this kind of death.
Belle: That would never work! And police would never try it.
On the contrary, here's an explanation I read from an officer:
My department has a very formulaic response to dangerous subjects. Primary, backup, and supervisor go on scene, make a plan, and approach using a force array. This normally means one officer has a lethal response and another has less-than-lethal. This takes time to set up, but if we’re being perfectly honest the department will never be sued for responding too slowly as long as a response happens.
For this example, we’ll say that the backup officer is using a less-than-lethal option. There are options like the Taser, beanbag shotgun, or 40mm launcher that are more or less instantaneous and may incapacitate the person with a gun without the need for gunfire.
Normally, we announce a less-than-lethal option before firing it to avoid sympathetic fire. If it’s effective—and often they are—then that’s great. Collect the gun and put the detainee in handcuffs as trained. If it’s not effective and a lethal threat is presented, then you still have a gun up and ready to answer the threat.
But, those stories never make the news.
---------------------------------------
So, certainly police do try it and it does work, or they do more.
My department has a very formulaic response to dangerous subjects. Primary, backup, and supervisor go on scene, make a plan, and approach using a force array. This normally means one officer has a lethal response and another has less-than-lethal. This takes time to set up, but if we’re being perfectly honest the department will never be sued for responding too slowly as long as a response happens.
For this example, we’ll say that the backup officer is using a less-than-lethal option. There are options like the Taser, beanbag shotgun, or 40mm launcher that are more or less instantaneous and may incapacitate the person with a gun without the need for gunfire.
Normally, we announce a less-than-lethal option before firing it to avoid sympathetic fire. If it’s effective—and often they are—then that’s great. Collect the gun and put the detainee in handcuffs as trained. If it’s not effective and a lethal threat is presented, then you still have a gun up and ready to answer the threat.
But, those stories never make the news.
---------------------------------------
So, certainly police do try it and it does work, or they do more.
Belle: It would be nice to have non lethal methods, but they would have to be 100% effective and completely incapacitate the person, like making them completely unconscious. And that’s not a simple thing to do and could leave lasting sequels.
Lasting consequences are better than death IMO.
04-28-24 • Salt Batteries = Better World
The world just became a better place...
https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/batt ... 33135.html
The biggest hurdle we have faced to cheap, clean, sustainable energy is the difficulty of energy storage. Existing batteries are inefficient, take a long time to charge and are made of rare minerals that are hard to source and hard to recycle.
The new batteries are made from sodium. Cheap, plentiful, endlessly renewable sodium may soon make it possible to charge your phone, your car etc in seconds. Batteries of this kind would allow us to store the energy from solar and wind to use when it's dark and still. These batteries could be made from the waste sodium from desalinization, solving two problems at once, and they already have a process for mass-producing them.
Cheaper, safer, greater charge, and more efficient batteries will improve everything. The world just became a better place.
Scientists build battery that can charge in seconds
Breakthrough battery can be used in everything from electric cars to smartphoneshttps://www.independent.co.uk/tech/batt ... 33135.html
The biggest hurdle we have faced to cheap, clean, sustainable energy is the difficulty of energy storage. Existing batteries are inefficient, take a long time to charge and are made of rare minerals that are hard to source and hard to recycle.
The new batteries are made from sodium. Cheap, plentiful, endlessly renewable sodium may soon make it possible to charge your phone, your car etc in seconds. Batteries of this kind would allow us to store the energy from solar and wind to use when it's dark and still. These batteries could be made from the waste sodium from desalinization, solving two problems at once, and they already have a process for mass-producing them.
Cheaper, safer, greater charge, and more efficient batteries will improve everything. The world just became a better place.
Snook: Really need to know how these preform in extreme cold temperatures. Existing electric cars are almost worthless in northern Canada.
Good question, but if the rest of the world was running electric, northern Canada, Siberia etc could keep their combustion engines and it wouldn't be a problem.
Snook: Not Canada's take on it. They want all cars sold to be 0 emissions by 2035. With the current infrastructure that is completely impossible. The world is not ready for 100% electrical, we do not have the capabilities. Plus currently with the cost of these batteries there is no real second hand car market, leaving the cost of cars out of reach for many people. This is yet another issue that needs to be solved prior to switching over to 0 emissions.
Good news, here are some reasons why sodium batteries might perform a lot better a low temperatures than lithium-ion batteries:
• Weaker Ion-Solvent Interaction: Sodium-ion batteries use electrolytes with a weaker bond between the ions and the solvent compared to lithium-ion batteries. This weaker bond allows sodium ions to move more freely even at low temperatures, resulting in better performance.
• SEI Film Formation: The weaker interaction also helps form a more conductive layer called the Solid Electrolyte Interphase (SEI) on the electrode surface. This layer is crucial for ion transport, and a more conductive SEI at low temperatures translates to better battery function.
So, maybe. But we cannot even imagine the technology which will be available by 2035, so I have a lot of hope that we can figure it out. Now, if we can just avoid civilizational collapse.
• Weaker Ion-Solvent Interaction: Sodium-ion batteries use electrolytes with a weaker bond between the ions and the solvent compared to lithium-ion batteries. This weaker bond allows sodium ions to move more freely even at low temperatures, resulting in better performance.
• SEI Film Formation: The weaker interaction also helps form a more conductive layer called the Solid Electrolyte Interphase (SEI) on the electrode surface. This layer is crucial for ion transport, and a more conductive SEI at low temperatures translates to better battery function.
So, maybe. But we cannot even imagine the technology which will be available by 2035, so I have a lot of hope that we can figure it out. Now, if we can just avoid civilizational collapse.
04-28-24 • Running on Hate
Liza: Are the Democrats just trying to hand Trump the presidency? 29% of Americans think the Trump trials are being handled unfairly.
Pam: Well, only 13% think the trials are unfair to Trump, the other 16% think the courts are being way too lenient with Trump and giving him special treatment. So it might not make a difference.
It looks to me like Democrats are being forced to walk any number of extremely narrow tightropes to try to do the right thing in tough situations facing nothing but obstruction. Yeah, that's gonna be hard to sell. But I'm not sure that's their real problem.
Yesterday I heard a guy say, "It's simple. I love Trump because Trump loves America. I hate Biden because Biden hates America."
Well, I don't love Biden, but it's obvious he doesn't "hate America." It's just polemics, demagoguery. If that is the reason people hate Biden, it's just wrong. It's from listening to people who *hate* Biden, who *hate* Democrats, who tell them all day that their fellow Americans (and everyone else in the world except their group) are pure evil.
I would give the hate more credit for Biden losing than how "Democrats" (actually the criminal justice system) are handling the Trump trials.
Yesterday I heard a guy say, "It's simple. I love Trump because Trump loves America. I hate Biden because Biden hates America."
Well, I don't love Biden, but it's obvious he doesn't "hate America." It's just polemics, demagoguery. If that is the reason people hate Biden, it's just wrong. It's from listening to people who *hate* Biden, who *hate* Democrats, who tell them all day that their fellow Americans (and everyone else in the world except their group) are pure evil.
I would give the hate more credit for Biden losing than how "Democrats" (actually the criminal justice system) are handling the Trump trials.
Read more in the Archives.