Huh. I think it'd be easy to tell if it was lethal. If a lethal weapon is successful then people would die. A nonlethal weapon wouldn't kill anyone. That's pretty much definition. Did I misunderstand your sentence?
No, it was just a completely nonsensical sentence. If you successfully tested a lethal weapon, the test subject would be dead. In no way then is it more difficult to call that a lethal weapon.
You guys are ridiculous. Why hate the military for trying to reduce casualties? Are kids these days filled with so much hatred and angst? I thought that's why you guys had your live journals and blogs, to vent all that hatred. (And feel important.)
In order of posting:
I wonder how many people here would be willing to participate in the test. It's easy to say it's non-lethal until your asked to actually do it.
That's really not here nor there. Someone has to test it, and it's probably tested on animals or whatever convention they use in this day and age before testing on humans. Saying "THE MILITARY IS TESTING ITS WEAPONS ON CITIZENS!" is really just an obvious statement. It's not like they're going into random towns and spraying gas in people's faces, no, they're obviously informed people who have, of their own will, signed up for this. It's really irrelevant where they are from.
No, it's always easy to say a weapon is nonlethal. If you had a lethal weapon (successfully) tested on you, it would be much harder to say that it was lethal.
I addressed this early on, but we're back to it again. It really doesn't make any sense. If a weapon kills someone, it's lethal. If you're going to be technical, sure, I can say anything is non-lethal, but that doesn't make it true. It just makes me a liar, or an ignorant person.
Also, we don't know if these 'nonlethal' weapons have any side effects.
Do you understand what tests are for? I highly doubt these tests are to make sure no one dies.
'If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation,'' said Wynne.''
This is an interesting statement. I wonder how many Americans would agree with it.
I think in regard to this situation, and non-lethal weapons, sure I'd agree with it. But it becomes a different story when considering lethal weapons, for obvious reasons.
