CROWD CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES - Omega Research Foundation

4.1.4 Hazards Of Pyrotechnic & Blast Chemical Irritant Delivery Systems. Blast injuries from
fragmentation devices are far from uncommon. The fact that pyrotechnic devices are incendiary
creates both a risk of burn injuries and the initiation of a fire. For example 96 cases of acute burn
injuries were reported when teargas was used against refugees in a Hong Kong Detention centre. 143
The Material safety sheet on CS assigns a flammability rating of 4 (on a scale 0-4) and some
commentators now ascribe incendiary CS grenades as a large contributor to the conflagration which
burned the Branch Davidian Compound and its inhabitants at Waco, Texas, in 1993 144 .
4.1.5 Training & Professional Codes Of Conduct. The notion that such chemical irritants are nonlethal
is based on an assumption that they are used in accordance with manufacturers instructions and
not in enclosed spaces. When disputes over appropriate usage occur, there needs to be a clear line of
accountability. In Canada, when an innocent man was sprayed with pepper-gas and suffered injuries
to his eyes and lungs he sued the local police because of the longer term effects (bronchial asthma and
reactive airways dysfunction syndrome). The police officers in Ottawa defended the claim by filing a
third party claim against the manufacturer Defense Technology (Def-Tec). However, the company
claimed the fault was that of the police for failing to train its officers properly. The company alleged that
)police negligently caused the product to be activated for an excessive period of time 145 .(
In the UK , complaints about tear gas by members of the public have ballooned. In the year up to
March 1998, the Police Complaints Authority received 425 complaints about the sprays compared to
254 in the previous year. The UK guidelines insist that CS spray was introduced only for self defence,
yet the UK Police Complaints Authority Report already referred to, revealed that in nearly 40 % of the
cases in their study, it was not used primarily in self defence. Similarly, the original guidelines said the
sprays would not be used in crowd control, however, the new Association of Chief Police Officers
(ACPO) guidelines enable it to have a public order role. Such drift in the ground rules which originally
legitimated the introduction of this weapon illustrates the threat to civil liberties well. If Chemical irritant
weapons are not to become indiscriminate weapons then codes of conduct should have legal weight.
4.2 Kinetic Impact Weapons - Health and Safety Issues. In compiling this report it has become clear
that there is a lack of independently conducted research into kinetic impact weapons. The country that
has seen, by far, the greatest use of kinetic impact weapons in Europe is Northern Ireland. More data
and medical reports exist from the usage there than in any other country and will be used as a baseline
for the discussions that follow.
In January 1977, the UK Secretary of State for Defence was asked about the research on the
likely death and injury rates from rubber and plastic bullets carried out prior to their introduction. His
reply referred to a report by four surgeons working at the Victoria Hospital in Belfast in 1972 - two years
after rubber bullets had been used in Northern Ireland - and said that comparable data for plastic
bullets was not available 146 . The UKs inability to carry out basic safety testing was revealed by US
military scientists who developed a comprehensive set of procedures to evaluate blunt trauma impact
devices to establish their injury potential and the relevant characteristics that would enable them to
operate safely. 147 The US researchers also found that the injury potential of a projectile was dependant
on its kinetic impact energy. The researchers described Impact energies below 15 foot lbs (20.3
Joules) are safe or low hazard (provided the projectile is large enough not to damage the eyes);
between 30 and 90 foot pounds (40.7 - 122 Joules) as a dangerous area for impact energy and
impacts above 90 foot pounds (122 Joules) as being in the severe damage region. 148 The present
study has assessed a number of currently deployed riot weapons against this baseline for safety (see
Table 2). Figures for different types of kinetic energy weapons, including eight from Europe, are
presented. At the range that the weapon is intended to strike its target, seven of the European
weapons were in the )severe damage( region and one was in the )dangerous( region. Thus nearly all
of the kinetic energy weapons currently authorised for use in Europe operate in the severe damage
region and are therefore potentially lethal. One European government has announced that it will fund
research into a less damaging alternative. Given the findings of this report this research be reported in
public forums and not, as in the past, kept secret. 149
xxvi