NONLETHAL WEAPONS:

TERMS AND REFERENCES





Robert J. Bunker, Editor





INSS Occasional Paper 15


USAF Institute for National Security Studies


USAF Academy, Colorado




The views expressed in this paper are those of theauthors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position ofthe Department of the Air Force, the Department of Defense, or the USGovernment. This paper is approved for public release by OASD/PA andSAF/PAS (with the following disclaimer). Distribution isunlimited.

"Many of the weapon concepts described in this paperare merely proposals. Except where specifically identified in officialDepartment of Defense documents, none of the concepts in this paper shouldbe interpreted to be funded R&D programs or operational weapon systemspossessed by the Department of Defense."

* * * * * * *

Comments pertaining to this paper are invited and shouldbe forwarded to:

Director, USAF Institute for National SecurityStudies

HQ USAFA/DFES

2354 Fairchild Drive, Suite 5L27

USAF Academy, CO 80840

phone: 719-333-2717

fax: 719-333-2716

email: hayspl.dfe@usafa.af.mil

Visit the Institute for National SecurityStudies home page at http://www.usafa.af.mil/inss

* * * * * * *

ABOUT THE EDITOR:

Dr Robert J. Bunker is anadjunct professor, National Security Studies program, California StateUniversity, San Bernardino, and professor, Unconventional Warfare, AmericanMilitary University, Manassas Park, Virginia. His research focus is on theinfluence of technology on warfare and political organization and on thenational security implications of emerging modes of warfare. He served as aconcept assessor to the US Air Force Project 2025 study.

The editor would like to thank the following individualsin addition to those listed on the next page for their contributions tothis work: Dr Glenn W. Goodman, Jr., Dr Mark T. Clark, Amy Wittman, andScott Boris, as well as the institutional support of Armed ForcesJournal International and Defense News.

ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS:

Dr John B. Alexander is aretired Army Colonel with assignments ranging from command of SpecialForces A-Teams in Thailand and Vietnam to Directorship of the AdvancedSystems Concepts Office, U.S. Army Laboratory Command. From 1992-1995 hewas the Program Manager for Nonlethal Defense, Special Technologies Group,Nonproliferation and International Security Division, Los Alamos NationalLaboratory. He currently holds many positions including that of USDelegate to a NATO Advisory Group.

Col Rex Applegate is aretired Army officer whose career in unconventional warfare includedassignments with the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), Military Policeand Counterintelligence. He is a recognized international authority onnonlethal weapons having been involved in projects relating to theirdevelopment during the period 1960-75. His book on riot control isconsidered the principle work in this subject area by many policeforces.

Mr Jon B. Becker is the CEO& President of Aardvark Tactical, Inc., a California based provider ofless-lethal munitions and training. His business was the primary contractorfor less-lethal munitions and training for Operation United Shield inSomalia.

Lt Col Matt Begert, USMC, isthe Military Assistant to the Director, Precision Guided WeaponsCountermeasures Test and Evaluation Directorate, an OSD field activity. Hisoperational experience includes instructor duty for the A-6 Intruder,extensive deployment to the Pacific and operations as a small team leaderattached to US Army and allied special operations units for interoperablefire support. Expeditionary experience includes aircraft carrier deploymentin the Indian Ocean and air operations in the Persian Gulf War.

Mr Jaime H. Cuadros is thefounder of Arts and Engineering, a firm dedicated to the study anddevelopment of less-lethal kinetic energy projectiles and weapons; togetherwith the art of watercolor painting. Arts and Engineering has designedimproved shotbags (for the 12 gauge shotgun) and a 19 mm close-range rubberbullet system for police use.

Mr Abraham Flatau, formerlyChief of Weapons Systems Concepts Team, US Army Armament Research andDevelopment Command. Conceived and directed research and developmentprojects in unconventional weaponry, including Ring Airfoil Grenade (RAG)and tubular projectiles. From 1984 to 1988 served as technical advisor toDirector, Advanced Systems and Technology Division, Aerojet OrdnanceCompany.

CWO-5 Charles "Sid" Heal, USMCR,saw service in the Vietnam and Persian Gulf Warsand was the Mobile Training Team leader for nonlethal options in OperationUnited Shield in Somalia. He has over 22 years of law enforcementexperience and is a national authority on diversionary devices and a courtrecognized expert in law enforcement special operations and emergencymanagement.

FOREWORD

We believe you will find this reference book to be a usefuladdition to the current literature on nonlethal weapons. Its targetaudience is individuals who deal with special operations, weaponsprocurement and sales, and military operations other than war. It alsocomplements other handbook literature of this type, such as Weapons ofMass Destruction Terms Handbook (Alexandria, VA: Defense SpecialWeapons Agency, May 1997), and Nuclear Terms Handbook 1996(Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, 1996). The need for sucha handbook on nonlethal weapons and associated technology has grown alongwith the perception that U.S. forces will increasingly use such systems inthe post-Cold War global security environment. We hope that thiscomprehensive handbook will help to contribute a sense of the technologicallimitations of nonlethal weapons, as well as provide clarity andconsistency in discussions on the future of U.S. national securitypolicy.

About the Institute

INSS is primarily sponsored by the National SecurityPolicy Division, Nuclear and Counterproliferation Directorate, HeadquartersUS Air Force (USAF/XONP) and the Dean of the Faculty, US Air Force Academy.Our other current sponsors include: the Air Staff's Directorate forIntelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (USAF/XOI); OSD NetAssessment; the Defense Special Weapons Agency; the Army EnvironmentalPolicy Institute; Army Space Command; and the On-Site Inspection Agency.The mission of the Institute is to promote national security research forthe Department of Defense within the military academic community, and tosupport the Air Force national security education program. Its primarypurpose is to promote research in fields of interest to INSS' sponsors:international security policy (especially arms control andcounterproliferation), Air Force planning issues, regional security policy,conflict in the information age (including the revolution in militaryaffairs and information warfare), environmental security, and space policy.

INSS coordinates and focuses outside thinking in variousdisciplines and across services to develop new ideas for USAF policymaking. The Institute develops topics, selects researchers from within themilitary academic community, and administers sponsored research. It alsoedits books and hosts conferences and workshops that facilitate thedissemination of information to a wide range of private and governmentorganizations. INSS is in its fifth year of providing valuable, cost-effective research to meet the needs of the Air Staff and our othersponsors. We appreciate your continued interest in INSS and its researchproducts.

PETER L. HAYS, Lt Colonel,USAF

Director, Institute for NationalSecurity Studies

TABLE OF CONTENTS

About the Editor iii

About the Contributors iv

Foreword v

Executive Summary ix


Term Listing 1

I. Nonlethal Weapons 2

Acoustics 2

Acoustics & Opticals 3

Antilethals 4

Antiplant Agents 6

Barriers 7

Batons 9

Biotechnicals 10

Electricals 11

Electromagnetics 13

Entanglers 13

Holograms 15

Markers 15

Obscurants 15

Opticals 16

Projectiles 19

Reactants 22

Riot Control Agents 23

II. Nonlethal Weapons Concepts 27


Ethical 27

Functional 28

Operational 29

Physiological 31

Theoretical 32


Reference Listing 34

I. Books 34

II. Chapters 35

III. Documents 36

IV. Addendum 79

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this paper is to promote an understandingof and research into a new category of weapons, designated"nonlethal" by the military services. These weapons are alsoclassified as "less-than-lethal" or "less-lethal" bylaw enforcement agencies. National security experts consider these weaponsincreasingly important in the post-Cold War era. This type of weapon hasbeen used throughout history, but was given new emphasis during the VietnamWar era. Law enforcement agencies and Army national guard units relyingupon traditional forms of politico-military force were ineffective incountering US domestic civil unrest. As similar types of conflict, nowmany magnitudes greater, seem to dominate international politics since theend of the Cold War, this type of weapon takes on increasingimportance.

The Department of Defense defines these weapons asfollows:

Weapons that are explicitly designed and primarilyemployed so as to incapacitate personnel or materiel, while minimizingfatalities, permanent injury to personnel, and undesired damage to propertyand the environment. Unlike conventional lethal weapons that destroy theirtargets principally through blast, penetration and fragmentation, non-lethal weapons employ means other than gross physical destruction toprevent the target from functioning. Non-lethal weapons are intended tohave one, or both, of the following characteristics: a. they haverelatively reversible effects on personnel or materiel, b. they affectobjects differently within their area of influence [229:1-2].

We have followed this Western definition of nonlethalweapons in this paper, but have also included what would be considered non-Western forms of weaponry. The reason for the inclusion of these weapons,which specifically are designed to result in permanent injury to personnel,is because of the great likelihood that they will be used against US forcesin future conflicts.

Our intent is to create an initial term and referencelisting that will help support joint-force and dual-use initiatives focusedon identifying the potential drawbacks of integrating nonlethal weaponsinto our military services and law enforcement agencies. Because of thelimited objective of this paper, it consists solely of two sections: a listof terms that describes nonlethal weapons along with the concepts bothsurrounding and inhibiting their use and a comprehensive listing ofreferences to facilitate further research. The category of nonlethalweapons that offers the capability for information warfare has not beenincluded in this paper because of its association with that distinct formof conflict.

The terms and descriptions provided within this papershould not be considered authoritative, static, or comprehensive. Rather,they represent a point of departure from which further research can beconducted and eventual definitions created as these weapons begin the slowand tedious process of being adapted for operational use. This paperoffers a candid assessment of our current understanding of nonlethalweapons that undoubtedly contains inaccuracies, either directly or byomission.

Bearing these caveats in mind, we have attempted tocreate a fairly comprehensive overview of the terms and concepts relatingto nonlethals and the works available for reference on this topic. Thecontributors to this paper represent some of our country's "best andbrightest" in the field of nonlethal weapons research, development,training and operational employment. Their combined expertise spans theearly years of the development of nonlethal weapons from the Vietnam Warera, including their employment in the Somali operation and in recentdomestic law enforcement disturbances, to newer systems still in theprocess of being developed and field tested.

Nonlethal weapons cannot be thought of in a"business as usual" sense or, for that matter, solely as a newtype of force multiplier. It is the opinion of the editor (and most of thecontributors to this paper) that when nonlethal weapons are ready for wide-scale application, this will signal a development as significant inmagnitude as the emergence of gunpowder based firearms during the EuropeanRenaissance. Just as the firearm gave the ability for distance-killingthat destroyed a Western ban existing since the time of the Iliad,the introduction of nonlethals may allow for tailored employment ofpolitico-military force and challenge the accepted definition ofwarfare.

The US military will need to undertake significantorganizational and doctrinal restructuring in order to exploit thepotential of these new weapons. The most important near-term applicationof nonlethal technology appears to be in areas such as: operations in"failed states," as a counter to the non-Western form of warfarethat is emerging globally, as a defense against the specter of furtherterrorist assaults upon our homeland, and as a means of responding to civilunrest in many of our inner cities. Over the longer term, it is their fitwith other nascent warfighting trends embodied in the revolution inpolitical and military affairs (RPMA) that is of paramount significance.For example, nonlethal weapons could present new and potentially highlyeffective mechanisms for dealing with an advanced form of battlespace (i.e.cyberspace) and the criminally-based non-state soldier (i.e. terrorist,mercenary or "new-warrior class") as a challenger to the Westernnation-state's domination of political violence.

In order to respond to these and other challenges, wemust insure that our armed services retain the capability to dominate thebattlefields of the 21st century. Our ability to use nonlethal weaponseffectively will be a critical component of our future capabilities. It istoward improving our knowledge in that endeavor that this paper has beenwritten.

Robert J. Bunker

December 1996

Nonlethal Weapons:

Terms and References



TERM LISTING

As listed in the table of contents, the entries in thispaper are organized into seventeen categories for nonlethal weaponstechnology and five areas for concepts associated with the use of nonlethaltechnology. The citation protocol for entries list the reference materialnumber and the page number as follows: [Reference Number: Page Number].If an entire document is cited, no page numbers are given. For the purposeof accuracy, many terms have been directly quoted from a single referencedsource, while others combined reference sources.

I. Nonlethal Weapons

A. Acoustics

Acoustic Beam .High power, very low frequency beam emitted from weaponry underdevelopment. Envisioned to be a piston-driven or detonation-drivenpulser which forces compressed air into tubes to generate a lowfrequency wave [543,546].

Acoustic, Blast Wave, Projector. Energy generation from a pulsed laser that will project a hot, highpressure plasma in the air in front of a target. It creates a blast wavewith variable but controlled effects on hardware and troops[543].

Acoustic Bullets . High power,very low frequency waves emitted from one to two meter antenna dishes.Results in blunt object trauma from waves generated in front of the target.Effects range from discomfort to death. A Russian device that can propel a10-hertz sonic bullet the size of a baseball hundreds of yards is thoughtto exist. Proposed fixed site defense [16,113,212,543]. Also known as sonicbullets.

Acoustic, Curdler Unit . A devicewhich is plugged into an HPS-1 sound system to produce a shrill shrieking,blatting noise. It is used to irritate and disperse rioters and had adecibel range just below that of the danger level to the human ear. It isused in night operations to produce a "voodoo" effect andeffectively breaks up chanting, singing and clapping [2:279-280,82:184,84,529].

Acoustic, Deference Tones .Devices which can project a voice or other sound to a particular location.The resulting sound can only be heard at that location [176:86].

Acoustic, Doppler Effect Alarm .Any movement in the area between a transmitter and a receiver causes aslight variation in the sound pattern received. By measuring this variationan alarm system can be made to be activated [23:204].

Acoustic, High Intensity Sound .Loud music was used by American forces to drive Manual Norriega fromthe Vatican Embassy in Panama in 1990. Also known as polysound[354:45].

Acoustic, HPS-1 Sound System . A350 watt sound system with an audible voice range of 2 1/2 miles. Used bythe military in Indo-China and then supplied to law enforcement. First usedby police forces at San Francisco State College and at Berkeley in the1960s [2:277-279,82,84]. See also Acoustic, Curdler Unit.

Acoustic, Infrasound . Very low-frequency sound which can travel long distances and easily penetrate mostbuildings and vehicles. Transmission of long wavelength sound createsbiophysical effects; nausea, loss of bowels, disorientation, vomiting,potential internal organ damage or death may occur. Superior to ultrasoundbecause it is "in band" meaning that its does not lose itsproperties when it changes mediums such as from air to tissue.By 1972 an infrasound generator had been built in France whichgenerated waves at 7 hertz. When activated it made the people in range sickfor hours [23,302,546].

Acoustic, Squawk Box . Crowddispersal weapon field tested by the British Army in Ireland in 1973. Thisdirectional device emits two ultrasonic frequencies which when mixed in thehuman ear become intolerable. It produces giddiness, nausea or fainting.The beam is so small that is can be directed at specific individuals in ariot situation [451,452,504].

Acoustic, Teleshot . Cartridgeprojecting a powerful sonic device delivered by a 12-gauge shotgun.Experimental use in 1972 [529].

Acoustic, Ultrasound. A very highfrequency sound whose wavelength is "out of band" making it lesseffective than infrasound because it losses its properties when it changesmediums. Example, from air to human tissue. Like infrasound a lot of poweris required to generate these waves which create biophysical effects. Seealso Acoustic, Infrasound.

B. Acoustics & Opticals

Acoustic & Optical, Air Burst Simulator . A diversionary device normally used to simulate the air burst ofartillery rounds during infantry training. The device is fired via a 37-40mm launching device and has an 8 second fuze prior to ignition.

Acoustic & Optical, Cod-Weight . A heavy, (2 pounds or greater) weight to which a diversionarydevice is attached to allow it to be thrown through window screens, windowglass, bushes and similar materials. The name is derived from the originalweights used for deep-sea fishing for Cod.

Acoustic & Optical, Diversionary Device . A hand thrown pyrotechnic device which emits a loud bang anddazzling light when ignited. The device is designed to create a sensoryoverload which temporarily causes confusion and an inability to effectivelyrespond to a tactical team's actions. Sometimes called a flash-banggrenade.

Acoustic & Optical, Diversionary Device, Launched. A diversionary device which can be launched from a 12gauge shot gun [373].

Acoustic & Optical, Flash Stick . A stick or pole to which a diversionary device is affixed,allowing it to be precisely placed and held during ignition. Often used forexact insertion through chain link fences, windows, heavy brush and soforth.

Acoustic & Optical, Painter's Pole . An extendible pole to which a diversionary device is affixedallowing it to be precisely placed and held during ignition. Often used forsupporting second story entries from beneath. The name is derived from thepole used by painters to hold paint rollers when painting overhead.

Acoustic & Optical, Photic Driver . A crowd control device developed by a British company prior to1973 which uses ultrasound and flashing infrared lights which penetrateclosed human eyelids. Potential for epileptic fits because of thestroboscopic flashing effect. May have been employed by South AfricanPolice during interrogations [23,450].

Acoustic & Optical, Psycho-Correction . A technology invented by a Russian scientist that involvesinfluencing subjects visually or aurally with imbedded subliminal messages[318].

Acoustic & Optical, Stun Grenade. A non-lethal grenade, XM84, in development to be used by Armymilitary police [338].

C. Antilethals

Antilethal . Technologies whichprovide counter-sniper, counter-mortar, antimissile and high-precisionweapons capabilities. Advanced forms of camouflage and sensors which defeatlethal weapons are additional forms of this technology [418:24].

Antilethal, Camouflage-Active .Created by dynamically matching the object to be camouflaged to itsbackground colors and light levels rendering it virtually invisible to theeye. This is conceptually the same camouflage process as that used by achameleon. This is accomplished through a sophisticated color and lightsensor array which detects an object's background color and brightness.This data is then computer matched and reproduced on a pixel array coveringthe viewing service of the object to be camouflaged. Also known aschameleon camouflage [245,302].

Antilethal, Camouflage-Metamorphic . Uniforms or paint which change color due to either light or heatsensitivity. Extremely useful for night and day operations and those takingplace in urban environments [245,302].

Antilethal , Counter-Sniper. Electronic sniper-locating systems based on acoustic, shockwave or infrared measuring technologies. Provides the location of a hostilesniper to a sniper team or to an automated counter-sniper system which canfire either a kinetic round or a low-energy laser at the hostile sniper[2:300-301,505].

Antilethal, Electronic-False TargetGeneration . An electronic device that creates andpresents an image of a target to a precision laser-guided weapon thatcauses that weapon to aim at the false target. Used as a countermeasure tothose precision guided weapons [468:14].

Antilethal, Electronic-Shell Detonator . A system fielded by U.S. troops in Bosnia which creates anelectronic field that causes mortar and artillery shells to explodeprematurely by signaling to them that they have reached their target [183].

Antilethal, Electromagnetic Shielding . A form of defense against microwave attack. A metal box, knownas a "Faraday Cage," can sometimes function as one by excludingelectromagnetic fields [356:39].

Antilethal, Food Bomb. Humanitarian use of nonlethal weapons. Place concentrated food pelletsrather than anti-personnel bomblets in a cluster bomb unit. For use incities under siege on the verge of starvation [609].

Antilethal, Laser Protection .Protection is achieved in three ways: absorption using dyes, reflectedusing optical coatings and the blocking of specific wavelengths [287].

Antilethal, Laser Protection-BLPS.

Ballistic and Laser Protective Spectacles. Since 1988, these devices have been issued to high priority Armyand Marine Corps units. The BLPS are dye-filled polycarbonate plasticfilters which will protect eyesight against the low-energy lasers mostlikely encountered on today's battlefield, specifically the two or threewave lengths used by common range finders and target designators based onNd:YAG and ruby lasers. They will not give protection against frequency-agile low energy laser weapons [1:185].

Antilethal, Laser Protection-Smoke . Smoke's attenuative properties allow it to serve as a passivedefense against blinding laser weaponry. Large-area smoke generation mayprovide a means to offer continuous protection for forward elements of U.S.combat forces [115:38].

Antilethal, Low Energy Laser. AnAir Force project, known as Have Glance, in which a pod-mounted, low energylaser would be mounted on an aircraft to confuse the heat-seeking functionof infrared missiles [1:161].

Antilethal, RPG Barrier . SeeBarrier, Fence-RPG.

Antilethal, Sensor-Acoustic. Remote acoustic sensors placed in an area overwatch position in urban zonesto detect and locate gunfire within that area [429].

Antilethal, Sensor-Facial RecognitionTechnology . Experimental information systems whichrecognize human facial features and compare them to databases of wantedsuspects. Great potential for apprehending terrorists in airport terminalsand criminals in large crowds. More advanced subdermal systems will berequired as a follow-on to these systems as a counter to criminals/non-state soldiers who surgically alter their facial features [642].

Antilethal, Sensor-Ground Penetrating Radar . Sensor that can detect nongeologic objects and human engineeredstructures beneath the ground by analyzing the return of electromagneticwaves traveling through geologic structures. Detection of buried mines anddiscovery/mapping of underground bunkers represent practical, nonlethalapplications [215:10].

Antilethal, Sensor-Nonimaging PortableRadar . A radar unit which weighs less than 10 pounds,uses rechargeable batteries, is small enough to fit into a briefcase andwill detect motion through nonmetallic walls and floors. Using soundsinstead of images, it detects motion and can transmit to a receiver up to adistance of 200 feet [302].

Antilethal, Sensor-Retroreflectivity . A theory based on the reflection of light. Common example isseeing an animal's eyes at night in your headlights. Allows for an electro-optical sensing mode that can be used to find opposing electroptics lookinginto the night for location and targeting purposes.

Antilethal, Smart Gun . A gunwhich can only be used by the proper user or users. Identification isautomatic and would be carried out by radio frequency signals or othertechnologies [620].

Antilethal, Smart Metals. SeeMarkers, Smart Metals.

Antilethal, White Light Goggles .Experimental goggles which "gate out" bright white light so thatthe user will not be affected by them along with the targets [330:6].

D. Antiplant Agents

Antiplant Agent . Compounds usedto destroy plants or crops function in one of two general ways. Growthregulators and desiccants kill or defoliate by stimulating the leaf fallprocess (growth regulator) or by drying the leaf blade (desiccant). Theother category, soil sterilizers, contaminate the soil, preventing orretarding growth. Uses of antiplant agents include destruction of crops andfoliant removal to deny/degrade camouflage [13:77-78].

Antiplant Agent Blue . Fast actingantiplant desiccant containing sodium dimethyl. The desiccant, unlike anti-plant growth regulators, works by drying the leaf blade of the plant ratherthan simulating the plant's leaf fall process [13:77-78].

Antiplant Agent, Defoliants . Anyof a variety of chemical compounds that either stimulate the leaf fallprocess, dry the leaf blade or sterilize the soil [13:77-78].

Antiplant Agent, Operation Ranch Hand . A defoliation program conducted during the Vietnam War from 1962to 1970. The primary purpose of the operation was to deny cover to enemyforces, thereby making ambushes more difficult. Crop destruction missionswere also conducted in northern and eastern central areas of South Vietnam[22:66-67].

Antiplant Agent Orange . Antiplantgrowth regulator containing n-butyl esters of dichlorophenoxyacetic acidand trichlorophenoyacetic acid. Publicized for its use in Operation RanchHand in the Vietnam War from 1962-1970 [13:77-78].

Antiplant Agent Purple . Growthregulator similar to Agent Orange but contains, in addition, the isobutylester of trichlorophenoxyacetic acid [13:77-78].

Antiplant Agent White . Antiplantgrowth regulator composed of a mixture of tri-iso-propanolanime salt ofdichlorophenoxyacetic acid and picloram in water [13:77-78].

E. Barriers

Barrier , Air Bag,Backseat. An automobile airbag designed to hold in place a suspectplaced in a police car. Designed because of the frequency of violentbehavior once suspects have been handcuffed and placed in a police car fortransport.

Barrier, Air Bag Mine . Anonlethal vehicular mine based on a type of air bag [339].

Barrier, Caltrops . A personneland vehicular barrier device with four projecting spikes so arranged thatwhen three of the spikes are on the ground, the fourth points upward. Theterm caltrop is derived from an English water chestnut which was used toimpede the mobility of heavy cavalry during the Middle Ages. Caltrops wereused in Somalia by the Marines during United Shield to supplement keybarrier systems at night during the final hours of the withdrawal[378].

Barrier, Coating-Slick . Teflon-type lubricants which create a slippery surface because of their chemicalproperties. These

chemical agents reduce friction with the intent to inhibitthe free movement of the target. In the 1960s the term"Instant Banana Peel" was coined to describe thecapability provided by Riotril. When applied to a hard surface and wetteddown, this dry, relatively-inexpensive, non-toxic, non-corrosive whitepowder becomes ice slick. It becomes virtually impossible for an individualto move or stand up on a hard surface so treated. Tire-type vehicles arealso unable to get traction. Riotril, if allowed to dry, can easily bepeeled away or, because of its water-soluble nature, can also be hosed awaywith high-pressure streams [2:302-303,16,91, 356,565]. Also known as low-friction polymers, slick'ems,' and superlubricants.

Barrier, Coating-Sticky . Polymeradhesives used to bond down equipment and human targets. Also known asstick'ems' and superadhesives [16].

Barrier ,Electronic. See Antilethal, Electronic-Shell Detonator.

Barrier, Emulsifier . Agents,contained in a mixture of mutually insoluble liquids, which were dispersedover the Ho Chi Minh trail to degrade the logistical lifeline of Viet Congforces during the Vietnam War. Used in tandem with clouding seeding. Alsoknown as soil destabilizers [434].

Barrier, Fence-Electrical . SeeElectrical, Fence.

Barrier, Fence-RPG. Conventionalfencing, usually 6 ft high, with barbed wire on top. While the anti-mobility utility of such fencing is apparent it also had an anti-lethalcapability. In Vietnam this fencing was erected as a rocket propelledgrenade (RPG) screen in front of armored fighting positions and aroundcommand vehicles. RPGs which hit this screen either had their fusingsystems disabled (RPG7's) or prematurely detonated (RPG2's). Also known ascyclone fencing [635,637:109].

Barrier, Foam-Aqueous . Originallyderived from a fire fighting compound used to put out airplane fires.Barrier foam is a derivative which is thicker in consistency. Thistechnology employs a safe, biodegradable form of suds which can be piled upto as high as four feet. Barrier foam can be applied over fences,concertina wire, ditches to be seeded with caltrops (a four pointed devicedesigned to puncture tires) to prevent vehicular passage. By applying thefoam over obstacles, it impedes the ability to defeat them. Barrier foam,as its name implies, is used to deny entry or passage. The conceptualorigins of this foam date back to 1965 [2:300,82,302,378].

Barrier, Foam-Aqueous, Generator .Concept involves blowing air through nylon net kept wet with mixture whichcreates aqueous foam [529].

Barrier, Foam-Aqueous Riot Control Agent . The ordinary suds of barrier foam can be enhanced with theaddition of substances such as oleoresin capsicum, the primary ingredientin "pepper spray," or CS [165].

Barrier, Foam-Sticky . A namegiven to a polymer-based superadhesive agent. The technology first beganappearing in commercial applications such as "super glue" andquick setting foam insulation. It is extremely persistent and is virtuallyimpossible to remove without a liquid solvent which has a pleasant citrusodor. The solvent can be applied as a spray or poured on. The foam thenappears to dissipate, releasing its hold and allowing suspects to bearrested and safely transported. Sticky foam came to public attention onFebruary 28, 1995 when U.S. Marines used it in Mogadishu, Somalia, toprevent armed intruders from impeding efforts to extricate United Nationforces from that county [302,378].

Barrier, Foam-Sticky ,Dispenser. An interior barrier system, operated by eitherintruder penetration or command, which administers a sticky-foam barrier ina passageway from floor to ceiling [506].

Barrier, Rope, Launcher . Nylonrope dispersed by a compressed air launcher using mounted on a truck.Thirty cubic feet per minute [529].

Barrier, Smoke-Antilaser . SeeAntilethal, Laser Protection-Smoke.

Barrier, Smoke-Cold. A thick,disorienting "cold smoke" which

can be generated in areas from 2,000 to 50,000 cubic feet.It restricts an intruders eye-hand coordination and interactions amongmembers of an intruding group [506].

Barrier, Spike. An angle-cutmetal rod driven into an unsurfaced road's wheel pit. A 1/2 inch diameterrod, protruding only about 3 inches, is blunt enough so as to not penetratea shoe sole under a person's weight, yet a heavy vehicle will drive itthrough a tire [15:92].

Barrier, Spiked Strip . Flat stripresembling a fire hose with retractable hollow spikes designed to flattenthe tires of a target automobile. When the strip is activated, hollowspikes extend vertically and puncture the tires as the vehicle rolls overthe strip.Also known as road spikes [566:2].

Barrier, Stakes . A sharp stake,often of wood or bamboo, that is concealed in high grass, deep mud or pits.It is often coated with excrement, and intended to wound and infect thefeet of enemy soldiers. Can be utilized both as a booby trap and as abarrier. Commonly known as punji stick or punji stakes.

Barrier, Wire/Tape-Barbed, Launcher . Dispensing systems for flat barbed tape and barbed wire whichcould be quickly deployed into concertina form [82,529].

F. Batons

Baton, Biotechnical-Injector. Abaton with an automatic self-injecting syringe for administering theantidote to nerve gas built into it's tip and filled with calmatives orother biotechnical agents [165].

Baton, Breakaway . A baton made ofa substance that will break if used incorrectly [529].

Baton, Electrical . Standarddimension baton which delivers an electric charge of low voltage, poweredby standard flash-light cells [2:240,23,529]. Also known as stun baton orshok baton.

Baton, Expandable . Measures6" to 7" in closed position. The three telescopic sectionsrapidly flick open to an extended 16" to 18". Also known asextensible billyclub [529].

Baton, Riot Control Agent . 12-26" plastic baton which is able to project riot control agents [2:211-212].

Baton, Side-Handle . A baton witha side-handle attachment which allows it to be twirled for greater impactand used more effectively to block an opponent's blows.

Baton, Straight . Wooden, plastic,metallic rod from 12" to 36" used as a swung impact weapon. Caneither hang from a leather throng or be held in a holster. Smaller version,6" to 8." Also known as nightstick or billyclub.

Baton, Straight, Flashlight .Heavy shock resistant flash light which can be swung like a baton.

Baton, Straight, Flashlight-Riot Control Agent. Shock resistance polyethylene flash light. Besidesproviding a light source, this flashlight can be used as a baton and toproject a riot control agent [2:216].

Baton, Two-Handed Riot . The 36in. long riot baton is employed like a rifle and bayonet--overhead blowscould be fatal. Short, one-handed batons are not appropriate for close-quarter riot actions [74,95].

G. Biotechnicals

Biotechnical, Behavior-Altering Drugs . See Biotechnical, Calmatives. Suggested delivery in agaseous form for terrorist and hostage situations in 1987 [556].

Biotechnical, BiodegradingMicrobes. Microbes which turn storage tanks full of aviation fuelinto useless jelly. Such microbes may produce acids or enzymes which canbe tailored to degrade almost anything, even concrete and metal, so theirpotential use as nonlethal weapons could be extensive [171:2,356:38].

Biotechnical, Calmatives .Biotechnical agents which are sedatives or sleep-inducing drugs; includesalfentinil, fentanyls, ketamine and BZ. Several of them make ideal choicesfor this application when mixed with dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), whichpromotes absorption through skin to quickly sedate persons contacted. DMSOintroduces the calmative agent into the bloodstream by increasing theepidermal absorption rate by about 1,000 percent. The explosion of a flashbang (sometimes called a diversionary device) represents one method ofdispersing DMSO and a calmative agent. Calmatives were reportedly used bythe Soviets against the Mujahideen in Afghanistan[16,176:83,302,431,556].Also known as sleep agents.

Biotechnical, Disease Organisms .Nonfatal diseases targeted toward troops and civilians. Such viral agentswere developed by Iraq to be used against Western forces during the GulfWar so as to create long term disabling injuries. Agents being consideredfor use were those that cause hemorrhagic conjunctivitis, chronic diarrhea,yellow fever and Crimean Congo hemorrhagic fever [627].

Biotechnical, DM. Diphenylaminechloroarsine. A sickening agent no longer in use bythe military because of health risks. Probably ruled out of use in Vietnamby October, 1965. Effects include sneezing, shortness of breath, retchingand vomiting, hemorrhaging, and possible death. Mixed with CN for immediateeffect [13:19,529].

Biotechnical, Genetic Alteration .The act of changing genetic code to create a desired less-than-lethal butlongterm disablement effect, perhaps for generations, thereby creating asocietal burden.

Biotechnical, Hypodermic Syringe-Dart . Modified shotgun or handgun in which the projectile is a drug-filled syringe activated by a small charge on impact. Wide variety of drugsavailable including emetic (vomiting) agents [2:293,165,529].

Biotechnical, Injector-Baton . SeeBaton, Biotechnology- Injector.

Biotechnical, MalodorousAgents. Foul-smelling gases and sprays such as hydrogen sulphide(H2S) or a compound known as NaS8 which is used inmaking plastics. Could be delivered by a grenade. Past work on"cultural specific" agents has also been undertaken [356,529].See also Biotechnical, Project Agile.

Biotechnical, Neuro-Implant .Computer implants into the brain which allow for behavioral modificationand control. Current research is experimental in nature and focuses on labanimals such as mice [636].

Biotechnical, Pheromones. The chemical substances released by animals toinfluence physiology or behavior of other members of the same species. Oneuse of pheromones, at the most elemental level, could be to mark targetindividuals and then release bees to attack them. This would result inforcing them to exit an area or abandon resistance [195].

Biotechnical, ProjectAgile. Series of military science studies in Asia conducted byBattele Memorial Institute in May 1966 for Advanced Research ProjectsAgency (ARPA). One such study centered on developing 'stink' bombs whichwere race specific [320].

Biotechnical, Wetware. Advanced technology devices which are surgicallyimplanted into the body rather than worn. These devices can be used toenhance memory and the human senses, modify behavior or to locate alliedtroops. Pacemakers represent an early form of wetware. New conceptdeveloped in this document.

H. Electricals

Electrical , ArmoredPersonnel Carrier. Standard armored personnel carrier fitted with agate-like apparatus in the front and charged to a high voltage. Used byWest German police to clear streets or round up small groups of people[165].

Electrical, Baton . See Baton,Electrical.

Electrical, Fence .A fencewhich delivers a nonlethal electrical shock. It can be employed as aneffective barrier against intruders [74:66].

Electrical, Flashlight . A type offlashlight designed with electrodes on the base. Effective range is minimal[556].

Electrical, Glove . A glove withan electric impulse generator in the palm and the bottom sides of the glovefingers. A close-in device similar to the electric stun gun and theelectric flashlight [556].

Electrical, High-Voltage Telsa Coil. Passed from public scene because of their indiscriminate useagainst blacks in several Southern states in the mid-1960s. Example,electric baton or electric cattle prod [165].

Electrical, Homemade Body Armor .Newspapers and magazines stuffed down inmates' clothing and/or the use ofmattresses as shields to counter the effects of stun guns [385].

Electrical, Police Jacket . Policejacket which jolts anyone who touches it [165].

Electrical, Projector . Anadvanced version of the standoff stun gun, where no wires are required. Thecharges are delivered through the air through pre-ionized air channels orby charging a low energy projectile which releases the charge at impact.Another approach is to launch a low energy projectile that releases theelectrical charge at impact by compressing a piezo-electric element[195:8].

Electrical, Stun Belt . A commandactivated belt worn by prisoners which delivers a mild electric shock whenthey become combative [385].

Electrical, Stun Gun -CloseIn. A small, two-pronged, hand held electrical discharge weapon.Effective range is less than an arm length. It works by affecting themuscle signal paths, disturbing the nerve system [556].

Electrical, Stun Gun-Standoff . Aform of stun gun with a range of 20 feet. It fires small, barbed electricalcontactors, via a fine trailing wire, which snare a victim's clothing. A 3-4 second lapse takes place before the target is subdued. The development ofthis device was inspired by the Watts Riots in 1965 [408,529].

Electrical, Water Stream . Amobile unit projects a water stream charged with high voltage, lowamperage. Another method cites 2 water jets, 1 negatively charged and 1positively charged, which meet to close the circuit [529].

I. Electromagnetics

Electromagnetic, Engine Kill . Theuse of high-powered microwaves to kill the electrical system of an engine.

Electromagnetic, High Power Microwave [HPM] , Weapons. Energy generated by a conventionalelectromagnetic apparatus, such as a radar transmitter, or released from aconventional explosion converted into a radio-frequency weapon which causesthe disruption of electronic systems. Usually an ultra-wide ban sourcefocus due to target vulnerability considerations. HPMs can also cause humanunconsciousness without permanent maiming by upsetting the neural pathwaysin the brain and/or death [256,278].

Electromagnetic, Interference (EMI) . Flight control systems of military aircraft are sensitive toelectromagnetic interference (EMI). It is suspected that several crashes ofArmy UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters may have resulted when they flew too nearlarge microwave transmitters [278].

Electromagnetic, Maser . MicrowaveAmplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation. A microwave generationdevice.

Electromagnetic Pulse, Non-Nuclear [NNEMP],Weapons . Non-nuclear EMP generating weapons mountedon cruise missiles or unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) which would disableenemy tanks and early warning radars would be invaluable. Such weapons whenthey explode would produce a momentary burst of microwaves powerful enoughto disable all but special, radiation-hardened electronic devices[205,261,262].

Electromagnetic, Radio Frequency [RF],Weapons . A class of weapons which transmit short,high-powered pulses of electromagnetic radiation over significant ranges[278].

Electromagnetic, Rocket-Powered Unit. Unmanned miniature-wheeled vehicle launched by a police cruiserwhich delivers an electromagnetic energy pulse to the underside of afleeing car's engine controls and associated sensors to disable it [644:4].

Electromagnetic, Static Unit. SeeElectromagnetic, Rocket-Powered Unit. Static version resembling apancake shaped bump in the road. Remote control or unmanned automaticcontrol [644:4].

Electromagnetic, Thermal Gun . Adevice that directs energy to produce heat, in concept similar to amicrowave oven [565].

J. Entanglers

Entangler, Animal "Come-Along." A pole with a looped wire attached to one end. When the wire isplaced around the neck of a subject and then tightened it produces achoking effect much in the same manner as that of a choking collar used fordogs.

Entangler, Bola . Deviceconsisting of two or three heavy balls attached by one or two ropes/cordsand used for entanglement purposes. It is twirled overhead in one hand andhurled or cast at the intended target. Designed to entangle legs toretard/stop movement. Probably an ancient weapon, but made famous by thegauchos of South America, who used them to catch cattle and ostrich.

Entangler, Cloggers . Polymeragents, sticky-soft plastics, used in burst munitions to clog up jet andtank engine intakes [144].

Entangler, Cloggers-Colored .Clogging agents when mixed with dyes result in "tinted clouds"whose presence let friendly forces know not to enter them [353].

Entangler, Cloggers-Colored, Mine-Air . Cloggers mixed with colored gas which designate an air mine toallied pilots or drones. These air mines can be intermixed with "decoymines" consisting solely of colored gas and laid in air mine fields torestrict aerial mobility [54].

Entangler, Monofilament Fishing Line . When spread out on snow, monofilament fishing line may be suckedinto a snowmobile's track mechanism and cause it to jam. Effectivenessunconfirmed [15:108].

Entangler, Net-Electrified. A netshot from a gun at a targeted individual. Will release an electric shock ifthe target tries to struggle [361:69].

Entangler, Net, Gun . Fires a netwhich entangles a human or vehicular target. One such net is 18 feet wideand employs glue-coated strands. Another is 28-foot-wide, fired from acannon and can envelope a car or armored vehicle [121:24,165].

Entangler, Net, Mine-Human . Minedetonation fires a net into the air which lands upon a soldier target.

Entangler, Net, Mine-Vehicular . Adevice laid across a road which shoots a fabric barrier up about to 2meters to ensnare an oncoming vehicle [216].

Entangler, Net -Poles. A capture device based on a pair of 6 foot nylon polesthat have a strong chain interlaced between them. It is employed by twopeople who capture the target in the chain mesh between the poles[2:295,569:21].

Entangler, Riot Gloves . Heavyprotective gloves used by prison guards and riot police which protect thehands and forearms from cuts and blunt trauma. These gloves allow for thegrappling of prisoners and rioters.

K. Holograms

Hologram, Death . Hologram used toscare a target individual to death. Example, a drug lord with a weak heartsees the ghost of his dead rival appearing at his bedside and dies offright [149:4].

Hologram, Prophet . The projectionof the image of an ancient god over an enemy capitol whose publiccommunications have been seized and used against it in a massivepsychological operation [609].

Hologram, Soldiers-Forces . Theprojection of soldier-force images which make an opponent think more alliedforces exist than actually do, make an opponent believe that allied forcesare located in a region where none actually exist, and/or provide falsetargets for his weapons to fire upon. New concept developed in thisdocument.

L. Markers

Marker, Foam Dye . Hand helddevice which is used to spray green foaming dye into the face of anopponent. Obscures vision and marks the target for one week for futureidentification.

Marker, Invisible. One conceptenvisions a fluorescent powder sprayed into crowds from pressurizedcontainer. Particles adhere to clothing and are only visible underultraviolet light. Another concept envisions sponge grenades impregnatedwith infrared dye so that rioters can be later identified [529].

Marker, Laser Paint . A laser dyeand scatterer suspended in a host medium. When irradiated with a laserbeam, this "laser paint" exhibits laser-like properties, becominga brilliant light source, without being a collimated beam [355].

Marker, Paint Gun . Gelatincapsule containing a marking agent which splatters on impact leaving a3" circle and streamers from 12" to 18" [2:294,529].

Marker, Smart Metals . Metalsformed with chemical additives or blended in a particular form so that theywould function only when used for legitimate purposes or give off telltalessigns to inspectors when used improperly [176:84].

Marker, Smoke Dyes . Marking dyeadded to smoke during crowd control situations [529].

M. Obscurants

Obscurant, Agents . Rapid-hardening agents used to obscure the vision ports/optics of an armoredfighting vehicle [144].

Obscurant, Crazing . Higherpowered low energy laser weapons have the capability of heating anddistorting or cracking the glass lenses of optical systems. This effect iscalled crazing and is caused when the heat buildup and subsequent coolingin the glass surface creates uneven stresses in the glass surface to crackit. The result is a frosted effect, making it impossible to see through theglass lenses or vision blocks (glass windows) in tanks. Such targets may beeffected at long ranges, and the optics can be crazed in less time than isneeded to blink an eye [1:148].

Obscurant, Laser-Argon Beam . AnArgon laser aimed at windows, automobile windshields or airplane canopiesfor vision denial purposes. Microabrasions in the glass scatter thisparticular wavelength of light turning the entire sheet a glaring, opaquegreen. As a result, a sniper could not see through a window or a suicidedriver would not be able to look out through the windshield of the truckladen with explosives that he was driving [253].

Obscurant, Myopia . The inabilityof the human eye to focus light from infinity accurately, which, inpractical terms, means beyond approximately 20 feet. If induced throughnerve/chemical agents, performance degradation could be dramatic,especially in aviation operations, because studies indicate that as much as85% of pilot sensory perception/performance is through sight. Nerve gas caninduce myopia [14:42].

Obscurant, Smoke-Colored . Coloredsmoke concentrations produce greater initial psychological and panic effectthan white smoke. Caucasians are said to have a greater repugnance tobrilliant green smoke, which is associated with disagreeable personalexperiences such as seasickness, bile and vomit. Negroids and Latins aredeclared to be most adversely affected by brilliant red. Rioters confrontedwith a strong concentration of colored smoke feel, instinctively, that theyare being marked, or stained, and thus they lose anonymity [2:198-199].

Obscurant, Smoke-White. Whiteobscuring smoke delivered by grenades or smoke pots. Relativelyinexpensive, non-toxic, noncontaminating and tactically ideal for policeuse. Obscuring smokes are temporarily irritating to the nose and throat,and cause those affected to lose visibility, sense of purpose and direction[2:198,529].

N. Opticals

Optical, Add-On Combat Assault Weapon . The use of a low energy laser weapon as a compliment to the mainarmament of a tank or infantry fighting vehicle or as a compliment to aantitank missile system [1:172].

Optical, Bucha Effect . Highintensity strobe lights which flash at near human brain wave frequencycausing vertigo, disorientation, and vomiting [245]. See also Optical,Stroboscopic Device.

Optical, Cameo Bluejay. A 75pound version of the AN/VLO-7 Stingray designed for use by the Apacheattack helicopter [1:161].

Optical, C-CLAW . The Close-CombatLaser Assault Weapon, code named "Roadrunner," was an early 1980sArmy tactical laser proto-type which was designed to attack the optics ofopposing armored fighting vehicles. The program was canceled in 1984 as aresult of adverse publicity over human blinding issues and cost/weightrequirements [435].

Optical, Cobra . Prototype of theAN/PLQ-5 Laser Countermeasures System. A 30-pound hand-held laser weaponused to damage enemy sensors and human eyes. Because this device mayoperate on three-different wave lengths it may be impossible to becurrently defended against [1:161-164].

Optical, Cornet Prince . Air Forceversion of the AN/VLO-7 Stingray. It is a pod mounted system which isintended to protect an aircraft from enemy air defense weapons which aredependent on optics and electro-optics for their effect. Cornet Prince hasa detection system which notifies an air crew if it is under attack or ifattack is imminent so that it can take the proper counter-measures[1:160].

Optical, Crazing . SeeObscurant, Crazing.

Optical, Dazer . Battery-operated20,000 candlepower "flashlight." It uses an alexandrite laser andis meant to provide infantry with a nonlethal capability against armoredtargets by attacking sensors, night vision devices and personnel. Theshoulder-fired Dazer weighs about 20 pounds and is submachine gun size[1:161-163,16].

Optical, Dazzle . A class ofoptical weapons that emit extremely bright light causing temporaryblindness.

Optical, Dazzle Rifle . A riflewhich emits an eye-safe argon-ion laser beam designed to disorient thetarget [352].

Optical, Demons . Term fordirected-energy munitions [16].

Optical, Electro-Optical CountermeasuresSystem . AN/VLO-7, Stingray. A laser designedto blind the optics and electro-optics of enemy tanks and armored fightingvehicles. Two test versions were deployed in the Gulf War by the Army butnot used. This device weighs about 160 kilograms. It can be mounted on boththe M1 Abrams tank and the Bradley infantry fighting vehicle [16,546]. Seealso Antilethal, Sensor- Retroreflectivity.

Optical, Flares . Both directionaland omnidirectional flares can be used against personnel and materiel toobscure vision.

Optical Flash . A 40-mm artilleryshell filled with plastic dye laser rods. Used to blind electro-opticsensors and enemy personnel [114].

Optical, High Intensity Lights .High intensity hydrogen-chloride light on a reflector equipped hand-heldcandle holder [529].

Optical, Illuminating-Grenade . Innight ambushes in Vietnam the MK1 Illuminating Grenade, which produced55,000 candlepower for 25 seconds, effectively blinded Viet Cong caught inthe center of its illumination zone for short periods of time.

Optical, Isotropic Radiators .Special munitions that illuminate or bloom with laser-bright intensitycausing the same retinal or optical damage as LEL (low energy laser)weapons. Isotropic radiation is generated by an explosive burst thatsuperheats a gaseous plasma surrounding it, causing a laser-bright flash[246].

Optical, Laser . LightAmplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation.

Optical, Laser-Argon Beam . SeeObscurant, Laser-Argon Beam.

Optical, Laser-Anti-Oil Storage Tank . Man-portable laser system with a back-pack power supply designedfor use against storage tanks in the Gulf War. Use debated[16,577].

Optical, Laser Countermeasures System[LCMS] . AN/PLQ-5. M-16 rifle-mounted and backpack-powered 42 pound system. Can detect and disrupt optical and electro-opticaltargeting systems at "stand-off ranges." While not specificallyintended to harm human eyes, the system was canceled so U.S. troops wouldnot be subjected to war crimes concerns [277,520].

Optical, Laser Dazzle System [LDS] . U.K. Royal Navy's low energy laser system deployed during the1982 Falklands war by two of its frigates [475,476].

Optical, Laser-Infrared CO 2 .Laser which can heat the skin of a target to cause pain but will not burnthe skin. Application against the hand of a suspect holding a knife or gunto a hostage [253].

Optical, Light Flashing Devices .Devices which are much like a photographer's flash bulb but at a greatlyincreased power. They are used to disorient target individuals by causingtemporary flash blindness [23:206].

Optical, Low Energy Laser-Antilethal . See Antilethal, Low Energy Laser.

Optical, Low Energy Laser-Eye Safe . A continuous wave laser, mounted on a M-16/M-203 rifle, thatproduces a high-intensity glare strong enough to temporarily delay anddisorient an adversary so that he can't complete a mental task, likecutting a fence or walking on rough terrain. Effective range of severalhundred meters. Laser powered by 6 rechargeable AA size batteries [310:19].

Optical, Mobile Test Unit . Mid-1970s Army tactical laser concept utilizing a medium powdered laser mountedon a Marine Corps armored personnel carrier called the Mobile Test Unit.Used to shoot down some helicopter drones [435].

Optical Munitions . A class ofnon-lethal weapons which rely upon either a multi-directional or uni-directional intense burst of light [isotropic radiator (laser)] generatedby the high-explosive shock heating of an inert gas [543].

Optical, Stroboscopic Device .Devices employed against demonstrators which cause stroboscopic flashing.Same principle as a discotheque "strobe." In the 5-15 hertz rangethese devices can cause various physical symptoms and in a small portion ofthe population may trigger epileptic seizures [23:206].

O. Projectiles

Projectile, Bag-Bean . Fabricsacks filled with lead shot (usually No. 9) weighing from 40 to 150 grams,designed to be fired from 12 gauge shotguns and 37mm (40mm) launchers. Thebags conform to the shape of the target on impact, producing less damagethan a solid hard projectile. The bags are rolled in the cartridge andunroll after exiting the launch barrel. These projectiles are designed fordirect impact on the target, therefore accuracy is important to ensureeffective impacts. The level of energy delivered ranges from 40 to 100-footpounds, depending on the distance the projectile has to travel. Also knownas Flying Bean Bag or Shot Bag.

Projectile, Bag-Bean-Rubberized, Gun . A prison gun which utilizes rubberized bean bag projectiles.Used for movement of cell blocks and surprise advances [385].

Projectile, Bag-Stun . Early formof nonlethal projectile composed of a 5 1/4 ounce canvas pouch filled withmetal buckshot which spread into a 3-inch diameter pancake in flight. Knownto cause serious injury [511:672].

Projectile, Bag-Stun, Launcher .An obsolete gun which delivered a cartridge containing a 4" diameterstun-bag loaded with 1/5 to 1/2 lb. of shot. It could be used as handgun orwith an extension as a shotgun. It has been replaced by the 12 gaugeshotgun and the 37 (and 40) mm launchers [529]. Also known as the stungun.

Projectile, Ball-Rubber, Grenade . An explosive anti-riot device which hurtles a largenumber of small "stinging" rubber balls at rioters when ignited.May or may not contain riot control agents [373].Also known as stingballor stinger grenade.

Projectile, Ball-Rubber, Round .The common usage of this term now refers to a number of 5/8 in. rubberballs fired from a 12 ga. shotgun. The 3/8 in. ball is also common. Bothhave a hardness of about 50 shore. These rounds have maximum effect whenfired in confined spaces, where multiple bounces augment the number ofimpacts on the target with sufficient force to sting rather than hurt. Theeyes are the most at risk of damage, due to the small size and velocity ofthe balls. The older use of this term refers to a rubber ball fitted with a"Blake" attachment to a shotgun. The ball can be solid or filledwith liquid or gas. Various designs existed for point or area targets[529].

Projectile, Barricade Penetrating. Any projectile which delivers a riot control agent into abarricade situation via a window or plate-glass. One such projectile is afin stabilized injection-molded plastic device which disperses a highly-volatile liquid CS agent [2:150,82].

Projectile, Baton-Plastic . A PVCcylinder 1/2 inches in diameter and 4 inches long. Instead of being bouncedoff of the ground these rounds are directly fired at the intended target.Causes a bruising impact blow with a claimed effective range of 30 to 65yards. At point blank range this round can be fatal. First used by theBritish Army in Northern Ireland in February of 1973 as a replacement forrubber bullets [2:159,511:672]. Also known as riot baton round, plasticbullets or PVC bullets.

Projectile, Baton-Rubber . Pliablerubber cylindrical projectiles delivered from the riot gun or British Armysignal gun. Aimed at crowd's legs or at the ground for ricochet effect intoa crowd [165,529]. Also known as rubber baton or rubber bullet 6-inch.

Projectile, Baton-Wooden . Woodencylinder delivered by a riot gun or by a British Army signal gun [529].Also known as broomstick round.

Projectile, Baton-Wooden Multiple . A 37-38mm round which disperses 5 wooden pellets which can befired from a distance or ricocheted into the mob. Direct fire at close orpoint blank range can cause serious or fatal injuries [2:158].

Projectile, Baton-Wooden Whistling . A short fluted cylinder made of wood and fired at low-velocityfor crowd dispersal. This round makes a whistling sound when fired.Whistling sound and visibility of round valued over kinetic impact. Firedby a Hong Kong Pellet Gun [165].

Projectile, Chaff-Ceramic .Dropped or fired in front of an aircraft which when ingested by a jetengine will destroy its turbine blades and other mechanisms[356:35].

Projectile, Gas Vortex . If a gasvortex, a highly stable phenomenon, was projected at some velocity, thedifference in pressure on the leading and trailing edges would produce animpact. Potential use in crowd and riot control situations[556:19].

Projectile, Launcher-ARWEN . Anti-Riot Weapon Enfield. A hand-held, cylinder fed, shoulder-launched 37mmanti-riot weapon which is used to launch a variety of impact devices suchas bean bags, pellets, rubber and wooden baton rounds, etc.

Projectile, Launcher-Blake Impact Gun . Aluminum alloy-type, golf ball sized projectile fitted to abolt-action shotgun [529].

Projectile, Launcher-Velocity Adjusting . Small arms weapon with an adjustable muzzle velocity intendedfor delivery of less-than-lethal munitions such as rubber or PVC bullets.The purpose of the adjustment is to tailor the velocity to the range[35].

Projectile, Launcher-Very Pistol .A 37mm pistol used to fire tear gas and other nonlethal projectiles.

Projectile, Liquid Filled .Several types of hollow rubber projectiles have been manufactured. The mostrecent, in a 12 ga. shotgun size, is filled with a liquid dye to mark thetarget for subsequent identification, in addition to the impact effect. Theworking range is from 5 to 75 feet. Older types included a 3 inch diameter,.5 lb. rubber ball filled with water, to be used as an impact projectile.The range was 75 ft. The launcher was large and heavy [529].

Projectile, Mine-Claymore .Modular Crowd Control Munition. A nonlethal claymore-type mine whichdisperses blunt impact ordnance for crowd control purposes[373].

Projectile, Muzzle Launch Ordnance [MLO] . MLO MA/RA 88 less-than-lethal shot for the M16A2 Rifle. Mustdisorient targets at effective ranges of 30-70 meters, not create shrapnel,and be of minimal hazard [338,373].

Projectile, Ricochet-Soft Plastic . Polyethylene pellets 1/16" in diameter delivered from astandard 12-gauge shotgun aimed to ricochet. Available in larger sizes[529].

Projectile, Ring Airfoil Grenade, Launcher . Launcher Adapter, M234 Designed for attachment to M16A1 rifle.Uses blank cartridge (M755) to propel either Soft Ring Airfoil Grenade(M742) or Sting Ring Airfoil Grenade (M743).

Projectile, Ring Airfoil Grenade-Soft. Soft RAG, M742. A rubberized donut shape with airfoil cross-section that is launched spinning from M234 adapter attached to M16A1rifle. A series of cavities in the projectile body contain packets of CSpowder. Target impact opens the CS packets and disseminates the chemical(powder). This system has been replaced by the Non-Lethal 40mm SpongeGrenade.

Projectile, Ring Airfoil Grenade-Sting . Sting RAG, M742. A rubberized donut shape with airfoilcross section that is launched spinning from the M234 adapter attached toM16A1 rifle. Intended as an initial deterrent via kinetic energy impact.Can also be used as a training round. This system has been replaced by theNon-Lethal 40mm Sponge Grenade.

Projectile, Rock Salt . Large saltcrystals fired from shot guns. Crowd dispersal method.

Projectile, Rubber . Theseprojectiles can be solid (homogeneous) or clad (composite). Solid rubberprojectiles can be further classified by density, ranging from high density(hard), to soft (foam). The shape of the homogeneous projectiles variesfrom a right cylinder (35mm diameter by 3 inches long) to a cylinder with ahemispherical nose, to short cylinders (35mm diameter by 1 1/2 inches long-multi-projectiles, soft foam) to hard, finned shape projectiles (12 gauge),and balls about 5/8 inch. The large cylinders fired to strike the ground infront of the target individuals, bouncing up to hit them. Depending on thedistance from the ground impact to the target, the impact point can rangefrom the knees to the head, producing different results. Past experiencewith this method of firing has shown that.

Projectile, Shards-Ceramic . Firedagainst aircraft to disable their engines or to degrade their stealthcapabilities [16].

Projectile, Splatt-Thixotropic .Special Purpose Low Lethality Anti-Terrorist. Any projectile that deformsat impact, without penetrating the body. One materiel preparation designedto accomplish this action is described in the patent. The whole projectileis made of this substance, not just the tip. The older usage of this termreferred to any caliber shotgun shell with grease or soft putty on the tipwhich would deform at impact [529].

Projectile, Sponge Grenade . 40mmnonlethal projectile developed for the M203 grenade launcher made out ofspongy material. Can either be used as a kinetic weapon or with theinclusion of a CS or marking dye wafer. Potentially fatal within 25 metersor if an eye shot occurs. Successor to the discontinued Soft/Sting AirfoilGrenade System.

Projectile, Water Stream . Mobileunit which projects a continuing stream of water for riot control purposes[529].

Projectile, Water Stream-Electrical . See Electrical, Water Stream.

P. Reactants

Reactant, Acetylene, Grenade . Onepound bomb containing calcium carbide and water. Upon detonation, forms abubble of acetylene gas seven feet in diameter. When sucked into the airintake of a diesel at concentrations as little as one percent, the gaswould cause the fuel in each cylinder to ignite prematurely, with enoughforce to break piston rods [144,387].

Reactant, Chemical Compounds .Chemical compounds which are magnitudes more powerful than hydrofluoricacid. A mixture of hydrochloric acid (HCI) and nitric acid(H2NO3) will dissolve most noble metals, such as goldand platinum, and organic compounds. Could be delivered by binary weaponsto attack structures, armored fighting vehicles, roads, roof tops andoptical systems [16,246,356].Also known as supercaustics, superacids,supercorrisive bases, C+, and tire eaters.

Reactant , CloudSeeding. Silver iodide dropped into clouds over the Ho Chi Minhtrail during the Vietnam War in order to promote additional rainfall whichwould degrade Viet Cong logistics [434]. See also Reactant,Operation Popeye.

Reactant, Combustion Alteration .This technology consists of chemical additives that either contaminate orchange the viscosity characteristics of fuel to degrade standard engineperformance. The additives may be ingested as a vapor through air intakes,mixed with fuel during the intake cycle or applied directly to a fuelsource causing almost instant engine failure [302:13,16].

Reactant, Liquid Metal Embrittlement [LME] . Agents operate by altering the molecular structure of basemetals or alloys and could significantly interfere with the operation ofthe aircraft, vehicles, metal treads and bridge supports to which they wereapplied. LMEs are clear and have little or no perceptible residue, whethersprayed on or applied with felt-tip markers. Some ambiguity exists becauseLMEs may refer to both liquids and liquid metals [16,302,356].

Reactant, LME Graffiti . Graffitiused to mask an LME strike against a bridge or other target. Greatpotential for terrorist use. Example, phone call to law enforcement statingthat an LME strike has been conducted against one of a number of bridges ina city using red LME graffiti.

Reactant , OperationPopeye. The cloud-seeding campaign conducted by the U.S. militaryduring the Vietnam War. 2,602 Popeye flights were flown through 1972 inhopes of interdicting the flow of Communists troops and supplies along theHo Chi Minh Trail [434].

Reactant, Pyrophoric Particles .Particles which when ingested in a combustion chamber give off heat andthus overheat the chamber which causes thermal failure. Caesium would beone likely candidate [144,356]. Also known as polystyrenepeanuts.

Q. Riot Control Agents

Riot Control Agent, Area Dispensers . RCA dispensers mounted in the walls and ceilings of prisonfacilities. They provide law enforcement personnel the ability to movegroups out of or from one area to another through CS and OC dispersement[385].

Riot Control Agent, CA . 4-Bromobenzylcyanide. CA was one of the first tear agents used. It is not aseffective as CN or CS and is obsolete. CA produces a burning sensation ofthe mucous membranes and severe irritation and tearing of the eyes withacute pain in the forehead [584:52]. Also known as BBC, larmine, andcamite.

Riot Control Agent, Chemical Mace . Small spray can containing a 0.9 per cent solution of agent CNin a variety of petroleum based carriers including a mixedfreon/hydrocarbon solvent. First introduced in 1966. CS-Mace then developedin 1968 by suggestion of the U.S. Army [2:213-214,165].

Riot Control Agent, CN .Chloroacetophenone. A lacrimator that causes irritation to the upperrespiratory passages and may cause irritations to the skin. On average, itincapacitates for approximately 3 minutes. Discovered by the German chemistGraeber in 1869. Replaced for most purposes by CS [13:19,529].

Riot Control Agent, CR . Dibenz-(b,f)-1,4-oxazepine. Newer riot control irritant developed in England in1962 by the British chemists Higginbottom and Suchitzsky. About 5 timesmore effective than CS. In addition, CR is much less toxic than CS. CR isnot used in its pure form (a yellow powder) but dissolved in a solution of80 parts of propylene glycol and 20 parts of water to form a 0.1-percent CRsolution. It is used in solution as a riot control agent. Eye pain,discomfort and excessive tearing occur with sometimes painful sensitivityto strong light or temporary blindness. Symptoms can persist for 15 to 30minutes. Dubbed "fire gas" by the media because of the burningsensation it caused to the skin of rioters when used in Northern Irelandfrom 1973-1974. Authorized U.S. Army use in 1974[2:180,67,584:59].

Riot Control Agent, CS . Ortho-chlorobenzalmalononitrile was made the standard riot control agent by theArmy in 1959. The term "CS" is derived from the two scientists,B.B. Carson and R.W. Sloughton, who first prepared it in 1928.First used byU.S. civilian law enforcement in 1968 during the riots in Washington D.C.While an effective riot control agent, which incapacitates on average from5 to 10 minutes, decontamination and cross-contamination is a considerableproblem in urban environments [13:19,82,337].

Riot Control Agent, CS1 .Specially formulated to prolong persistency and increase the effectivenessof CS. Unlike CS, CS1 is a free-flowing (micropulverized) agent powderconsisting of 95-percent crystalline CS blended with 5-percent silicaaerogel. This formulation reduces agglomeration and achieves the desiredrespiratory effects when dispersed as a solid aerosol [584:59].

Riot Control Agent, CS2 . CSblended with silicone-treated silica aerogel, which causes it to repelwater. This treatment improves the physical characteristics of CS byreducing agglomeration and hydrolysis. This form of CS prolongs theeffectiveness for both immediate and surface contamination effects. Whendisturbed, CS2 reaerosolizes to cause respiratory and eye effects. A cloudof waterproofed CS can be kicked up by people walking in the street orgrass two months after it has settled [13:50,584:59].

Riot Control Agent, CSX . A formof CS developed for dissemination as a liquid rather than as a powder. Onegram of powdered CS is dissolved in 99 grams of trioctylphosphite (TOF). Aswith CS, CSX stings and irritates the eyes, skin, nose, throat, and lungsof exposed personnel [584:59].

Riot Control Agent, Disperser-Fogger . Conventional insecticide blower adopted for CS and CN dispensingin Vietnam. Produces a fog-type emission for up to a 15 minute period.Conceptual basis was to fill Viet Cong tunnel complexes with large amountsof the CS agent. Another fogger was a handheld gasoline-operated devicewhich dispenses either CS, CN or inert fog at 0.7 gallon/hour [2:178,165].Also known as mighty mite (M-106) and pepper fogger.

Riot Control Agent, Disperser-Liquid . An Army riot-control agent disperser visually resembling a man-carried flamethrower. Fully loaded weight is approx. 55 pounds. DispersesCS mixed with a trioctylphosphate solvent. [2:178,165]. Also known asliquid stream projector.

Riot Control Agent, Disperser-Powder . Modified Dry-Powder Fire Extinguisher. Powdered CS and CNdispersal [165].

Riot Control Agent, Grenade ElectricallyActivated . A riot control grenade with a male,electrically activated screw-in socket connection in place of a standardfuse. This enables the grenades to be incorporated into electrical systems,in fixed installations, where they can be activated by a trip device orswitch, at will. This is of special importance in security of buildings,and vital installations, providing a dependable, economical protectivesystem that can be locally installed. This system, with variations, is nowin use in commercial security systems, as well as in U.S. government andembassy installations [2:133].

Riot Control Agent, Grenade-M73A .Army riot control grenade in use prior to the M47-Type CS Grenade. As of1992, the M7A3 was still in use because of technical problems with the M47[67].

Riot Control Agent, Grenade-M47 CS . Basic riot control grenade employed by the Army. Its contentsare expelled as a vapor from a taped-over port in the grenade body, causingthe grenade to "skitter" around on the ground, making itdifficult for rioters to throw back. As of 1992, it has not seen tacticalaction [67].

Riot Control Agent, Homemade Face Filters . Wet rags and other devices made by prison inmates to counter theeffects of riot control agents [385].

Riot Control Agent, Lacrimator . Ariot control irritant that will cause blinding tears upon contact with theeyes [444]. Also see Riot Control Agent, CN.

Riot Control Agent, Launcher -Handy Andy. U.S. Army hand-hold type throwaway munitionconsisting of an aluminum tube with a hand-activated striker in the base.On ignition, the E24 propels a cylindrical rubber projectile containing 50grams of CS burning formulation to distances of 70-100 yards [2:179].

Riot Control Agent, Launcher-Riot Gun . A weapon designed specifically to fire tear gas munitions of 37-mm diam. [444:2]. Also known as 1 1/2-in gun, 38-mm gun, gas gun, and teargas launcher.

Riot Control Agent, Mine . Ananti-personnel mine filled with a riot control agent. For perimeter usearound detention camps or secured facilities.

Riot Control Agent, OC . OleoresinCapsicum. A food product obtained from chili peppers which are dried andground into a fine powder. When mixed with an emulsifier such as mineral,vegetable, soy oil or water, it may be sprayed from a variety of dispensersand used as an irritant for safely controlling violent persons or viciousanimals and/or restoration and maintenance of order.

Riot Control Agent, Ring Airfoil Grenade-Soft . See Projectile, Ring Airfoil Grenade-Soft.

Riot Control Agent, Sponge Grenade . See Projectile, Sponge Grenade.

Riot Control Agent, Tear Gas-Invisible . Invisible tear-gas clouds are produced by blast munitions loadedwith dust or liquid agents. Invisible tear gas cannot be seen by riotersonce it first emerges from a grenade or mechanical dispenser and thereforeproduces a greater psychological panic-producing effect than tear smoke[2:161-162].

Riot Control Agent, Tear Gas-Visible . Visible tear-gas clouds (tear smoke) emanate from burninggrenades and projectiles. Tear smoke is highly visible and plainlyindicates the area covered to police and rioter alike [2:161-162].

II. Nonlethal Weapons Concepts

A. Ethical

Ethical, Biological Weapons Convention [BWC],1972 . This convention prohibits the development,production, stockpiling or retention of microbial or biological agents foruse as weapons. Would likely preclude the use of biodegrading microbes[16,508].

Ethical, Blinding Laser Ban, 1995 . The Department of Defense prohibits the use of lasersspecifically designed to cause permanent blindness of unenhanced vision andsupports negotiations prohibiting the use of such weapons. However, lasersystems are absolutely vital to our modern military. Among other things,they are currently used for detection, targeting, range-finding,communications and target destruction...accidental or incidental eyeinjuries may occur on the battlefield as the result of the use oflegitimate laser systems. This prohibition was initiated by the UnitedStates in concurrence with other, mostly Western, nations [457].

Ethical, Certain Conventional Weapons Convention,1980 . Prohibits or restricts weapons which are deemedto be excessively injurious or to have indiscriminate effects. Microwave,radio-frequency radiation, and visible light pulsing at brain-wavefrequency may violate this convention [20:49-54,508:45]. Also known asInhumane Weapons Convention.

Ethical, Chemical Weapons Convention [CWC],1993 . This convention, while not in force, precludesthe use of toxic chemicals as a method of warfare. A toxic chemical is onewhich 'though its chemical action on life processes can cause death,temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals.' Howsupercaustics would be interpreted within this convention is unknown[16,508].

Ethical, Environmental ModificationTechniques Ban, 1977. Found inConvention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use ofEnvironmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD). Bans any technique forchanging- through deliberate manipulation of natural processes- thedynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota,lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space which will havewidespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction,damage or injury to any other State Party [20:68-69].

Ethical, Geneva Protocol, 1925 .Whereas the use in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and ofanalogous liquids, materials or devices, has been justly condemned by thegeneral opinion of the civilized world; and Whereas the prohibition of suchuse has been declared in Treaties to which the majority of Powers of theworld are Parties; and To the end that this prohibition shall beuniversally accepted as part of International Law, binding alike theconscience and the practice of nations. Extended to bacteriological methodsof warfare. The United States has interpreted the Protocol of 1925 as notprohibiting the use of riot control agents [20:57-58].

Ethical, New Martyrdom . Apotential form of martyrdom arising from the long-term incapacitationcapacity that some nonlethal weapons provide. Examples are permanentlyblinding or disrupting the nervous systems of opposing soldiers. Thoseliving, rather than dead, would represent a new form of

martyr. References to the horrors of the gassings of theFirst World War would undoubtedly be made [149:10-11].

Ethical, Tennessee vs. Garner . A1985 court case (475 U.S. 1) which held that the use of deadly force toapprehend an apparently unarmed, nonviolent fleeing felon is unreasonableseizure under the Fourth Amendment. Stimulated law enforcement interest inless-than-lethal weapons.

B. Functional

Functional, Bouchon . The completemetal fuze assembly of a diversionary device or similar grenade, usuallyconsisting of a safety pin, safety "spoon," and a percussion typeignition device.

Functional, Deflagrate . To burn;consume; to burn rapidly with intense heat and dazzling light.

Functional, Deflagrating Canister . A canister which is designed to burst or burn. When used with adiversionary device, this type of canister is designed to burst or burn ata low enough pressure to prevent the bouchon from being thrown.

Functional, Deflagrating Explosive . Any explosive which deflagrates rather than detonates. Alsocalled a "low" explosive, it is characterized by relatively slowburning processes with progressive reaction rates and buildup of pressurewhich creates a heaving action.

Functional, Deployment Sequence .The first of three functions when a diversionary device is deployed. Itrefers to the manner and place in which a diversionary device is deployed.See also Functional, Ignition Sequence and Functional,Firing Sequence.

Functional, Detonate . To explodeviolently and noisily; also called a "high" explosive it ischaracterized by very rapid chemical reactions, thus causing tremendouslyhigh pressure and brisance (shattering action).

Functional, Detonating Explosive .Any explosive which detonates rather than deflagrates. Also called a"high" explosive, it is characterized by very rapid chemicalreactions, thus causing tremendously high pressure and brisance (shatteringaction).

Functional, Firing Sequence . Thesecond of three functions when a diversionary device is deployed. It refersto the mechanical action of the bouchon, (fuze assembly). See alsoFunctional, Deployment Sequence and Functional, IgnitionSequence.

Functional, Fuse . A narrow tubefilled with combustible material, or a wick saturated with such material,for setting off an explosive charge. A pyrotechnic device which serves asthe initiator to an explosive charge (e.g. M-3A1, friction type fuse).

Functional, Fuze . Any of variousdevices for detonating bombs, projectiles, or explosive charges. Amechanical device used as the initiator to an explosive charge (e.g. M-201A1, percussion type fuze).

Functional, Hybrids . Weapons thatcan be switched from "lethal" to "nonlethal" by asimple mechanism, having multiple barrels, or using ammunition which can beswitched at launch (single barrel, lightened logistic chain) [529].

Functional, Ignition . Setting athing on fire, to cause something to burn.

Functional, Ignition Sequence .The third of three functions when a diversionary device is deployed. Itrefers to the events which take place during the burning of the charge. Seealso Functional, Deployment Sequence and Functional,Firing Sequence.

C. Operational

Operational, Brevity Code . A oneor two word phrase which, when transmitted on a radio, carries a muchlarger meaning. Used to keep transmission time to a minimum without undulytying up valuable "air time." Usually repeated twice to ensureunderstanding.

Operational, Denial System .Components of a security system that prevent an intruder or adversary fromcompleting an intrusive hostile act on a fixed sight [359].

Operational, Dirty Battlefield . Abattlefield operational environment in which civilians and othernoncombatants are mixed in with combatants [56].

Operational, Environmental Warfare . A form of attack based on purposeful environmental degradationby a state or non-state group against an opponent. An early example wouldbe the salting of the fields of Carthage by the Romans. The most recentexample would be the blowing up of 732 oil wells in Kuwait and thereleasing of oil into the Persian Gulf by Iraq in 1991.

Operational, Immediate Action Drill . Any action, technique or procedure which is initiated by anevent rather than a signal [5].

Operational, Lethal-Nonlethal Coordination . A process by which hardkill and softkill weapons are made toenhance the effects of one another rather than degrade each others'performance. Applied to the defensive systems of a warship[570].

Operational, Long Term Disablement . The outcome of the application of nonlethal force thataffects the opponent beyond duration of the confrontation or conflict.Blinding, maiming or psychologically deranging the opponent represent formsof long term disablement. This form of disablement burdens a society and isanathema to the Western definition of nonlethality.

Operational, Mobile Security System . Area/fixed site denial or delay systems that are portable,leveraging on nonlethal technology and minimal installation costs[402].

Operational, Mobile Tactics . Aprocedure used against rioters in which an anti-riot team is embarked onvehicles, rapidly driven near rioters, whereupon they quickly disembark andrush toward the crowd, followed by another team which repeats the procedureand exploits the momentum gained by the original team.

Operational, Nonlethal-Lethal Effect . A nonlethal attack which purposefully sets up an opposingsoldier or vehicle for a fatal attack. Example, a soldier struck to theground by a stick'em' and then shot by a conventional round or killed by anartillery barrage.

Operational, Nonlethal Weapons, Non-Western . Weapons which are designed to cause long-term disablement tomilitary personnel and civilians. These weapons may be employed by eithernon-state forces or non-Western nation-states. Forms of nonlethal non-Western weapons include blinding lasers, disease organisms, and geneticalteration [149:3].

Operational, Nonlethal Weapons, Western . Weapons that are explicitly designed and primarily employed soas to incapacitate personnel or materiel, while minimizing fatalities,permanent injury to personnel, and undesired damage to property and theenvironment. Unlike conventional lethal weapons that destroy their targetsprincipally through blast, penetration and fragmentation, non-lethalweapons employ means other than gross physical destruction to prevent thetarget from functioning. Non-lethal weapons are intended to have one, orboth, of the following characteristics: a. they have relatively reversibleeffects on personnel or materiel, b. they affect objects differently withintheir area of influence [229:1-2].

Operational, Passive Deterrents .A genre of nonlethal weapons that does not affect the physiology of thetarget individual. Includes dyes, personal alarms, and scent sprays.

Operational, Rules of Engagement [ROEs] . Generally, rules that provide implementation guidance on actionsto exercise 1. the inherent right and obligation of self-defense and 2. theapplication of force for mission accomplishment by national/multinationalmilitary forces in international not domestic situations. The manyboundaries to ROE's include international laws and treaties, nationalpolicy and custom. Standing Rules of Engagement refer to those generallyintended for all situations, but tailored ROE's for specific situations mayaugment those standing rules. This is a general, not legal, description.

Operational, Second Order Effect .A nonlethal attack ultimately resulting in an unintentional death. Forexample, a pilot, blinded by a laser unable to safely land his or heraircraft or a patient dies because the power to an incubator or iron longin a hospital is cut off due to the destruction of a powerplant.

Operational, Short Term Disablement . A form of disablement which has relatively reversible effects onpersonnel or materiel [230:1].

Operational, Tailored Weaponry .Alternative, and likely more accurate, term for nonlethal weaponry. Suchweaponry is qualitatively advanced over traditional firearms and munitionsbecause it allows for precision control over the application of politico-military force. Rather than killing (100% force) or not-killing (0% force)an opponent these weapons offer new capabilities in the 1-99% range betweenno action and lethal force.

D. Physiological

Physiological, Acetylcholine Effect. The temporary effect an organism experiences after long periodsof high stress, characterized by a total emotional surrender. Derived froman overabundance of the compound acetylcholine which is active in thetransmission of nerve impulses.

Physiological, Diversion . Adiversion which acts directly on a person by affecting one or more of thefive senses.

Physiological, Impulse Noise .Noise which lasts less than one second.

Physiological, Lag Time . Thephysiological time lag which occurs between the time a stimulus isperceived until the body responds. In a healthy, well-rested human, thistakes about three-quarters of a second.

Physiological, Rhodopsin. A purplish protein pigment, contained in the rodsof the retina, that is transformed by the action of light and is necessaryfor vision in dim light.

Physiological, SensoryOverload. A temporary inability of an organism to correctlyinterpret and appropriately respond to life's stimuli because of the volumeof input.

Physiological, UlsterTechniques. Psychophysiological techniques employed by the Britishin Northern Ireland based on sensory deprivation which can lead to long-lasting post-traumatic neurosis. Methods used included hooding, maskingnoise, wall standing, inadequate diet, sleep deprivation and some physicalbrutality [532].

E. Theoretical

Theoretical, Environmental Security . The recognition that the natural environment in whichhumans exist must be protected for their continued benefit. Because of themagnitude of many environmental problems, they require regional notnational level solutions.

Theoretical, Fourth Epoch War .Strategic level theory of war utilizing an energy paradigm of Westerncivilization. The magnitude of change forecast is equivalent in scale tothe Dark Ages, 378-732, and the European Renaissance, 1346-1648. Duringthese transformations a new energy source is demonstrated on thebattlefield, the dominant polity form "fails," the non-statesoldier achieves dominance on the battlefield, crime and war blur, a neweconomy emerges, social classes shift, and advanced forms of battlespaceand weaponry develop [633:23-25].

Theoretical, Fourth Generation Warfare . Operational level theory of warfare which views military changebased upon advances in either technology or ideas. The emerging "ideabased" fourth generation is thought to be based on terrorism and lowintensity conflict [633:19-21].

Theoretical, MTR . A militarytechnical revolution was declared by the Soviets to be taking place back inthe 1980s. This revolution is based on emerging technologies, electronicand information systems and non-nuclear deep strike munitions, and willqualitatively alter the conduct of future war. The MTR is the conceptualforerunner to the revolution in military affairs (RMA) [640:2]. See alsoTheoretical, RMA.

Theoretical, New Gunpowder Revolution . The perception that the wide scale application of nonlethaltechnology on the battlefield will be as significant as the fielding ofgunpowder based firearms during the European Renaissance [149:9].

Theoretical, Nonlethality . Thetheory that overwhelming nonlethal force could be used to defeat lethalforce [418:24].

Theoretical, Post-Engine, Mechanical,Energy . For more advanced forms of nonlethal weaponrysuch as lasers and acoustics to properly function post-engine (mechanical)forms of energy will be required [149:7]. See also Theoretical,Fourth Epoch War.

Theoretical, RMA . Revolution inMilitary Affairs. Operational level theory which views military technical,doctrinal, and force structure changes now taking place equivalent inmagnitude to the 1920's and 1930's when armored warfare, strategic bombing,and amphibious and carrier operations developed. The RMA is generallyaccepted by the U.S. Armed Forces and Office of Net Assessment [640].

Theoretical, RPMA . Fourth EpochWar theory perception that a revolution in political and military affairs(RPMA) is taking place. Far larger than a revolution in military affairs(RMA), this historical transition will result in the eventual demise of thenation-state, the blurring of crime and war, and the rise of new competingpolity forms [633]. See also Theoretical, Fourth Epoch War.

Theoretical, Sixth Generation Warfare . Soviet (Russian) view of future warfare based upon faultyhistorical modeling which does not differentiate between strategic andoperational level change. The current military revolution is said to beequivalent in magnitude to the 1920s & 1930s or the 1950s & 1960s.Attributes of the new form of warfare developing will include theascendancy of aerospace operations, the growing importance of electronicwarfare and the computerization of armed combat [634]. See alsoTheoretical, MTR.

Theoretical, Third Wave War .Theory of future war modeled on "waves" of economic basedcivilizations. First wave civilizations are agricultural, second wavecivilizations are industrial and emerging third wave civilizations areinformational. Future warfare will be informational based with the GulfWar representing the first of these conflicts. Magnitude of current changenow taking place viewed as equivalent to that of the Industrial Revolution[633:21-23].

Theoretical, Twenty-First Century Politico-MilitaryForce Matrix . Nonlethal technology, when coupled withtraditional forms of lethal weaponry, allow for the application of short-term incapacitation, long-term incapacitation, and deadly force against thephysical and mental/perceptual attributes of human targets and the hardwareand software attributes of machine targets. This advanced form of politico-military force application can be expressed in a matrix [149:4].

Theoretical, War,Clausewitzian. A struggle between nation-states or theircoalitions over the preservation and extension of national sovereignty.

Theoretical, War, Post-Clausewitzian . A struggle between competing forms of social and politicalorganization over which the eventual successor to the nation-state will bebuilt [633:27].

Theoretical, Weapons of Mass Protection . Nonlethal, antilethal, and information warfare weapons [418:16].

REFERENCE LISTING

I. Books

[1] Anderberg, MajGen. Bengt & Wolbarsht, Dr.Myron L. (1992). Laser Weapons: The Dawn of a New Military Age. NewYork, New York: Plenum Press.

[2] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1981). Riot Control: Materieland Techniques. 2nd Edition. Boulder, Colorado: Paladin Press. (1stEdition. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Stackpole Books, 1969).

[3] Clede, Bill. (1987). Police Nonlethal Force Manual:Your Choices This Side of Deadly Force. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania:Stackpole Books.

[4] Doswald-Beck, Louise., ed. (1993). Blinding Weapons:Reports of the Meetings of Experts Convened by the International Committeeof the Red Cross on Battlefield Laser Weapons 1989-1991. Geneva,Switzerland: International Committee of the Red Cross.

[5] Heal, Charles "Sid." (1991). TheDiversionary Device Reference Manual. Doylestown, Pennsylvania:National Tactical Officer's Association.

[6] Manual of Tear Gas Information.(1967).Alternative title

Training Officer's Tear Gas Blue Book

. Saltsburg, Pennsylvania: Federal Laboratories.

[7] McLaughlin, Vance. (1992). Police and the Use ofForce: The Savannah Study. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger.

[8] Momboisse, Ramond M. (1970). Riots, Revolutions andInsurrections. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Publisher.

[9] Momboisse, Ramond M. (1969). Confrontations, Riots,Urban Warfare. MSM Enterprises.

[10] Jones, Eugene S. (1970). Law Enforcement ChemicalAgents and Related Equipment. Santa Cruz, California: Davis Publishing,Co.

[11] Swearengen, Thomas F. (1966). Tear Gas Munitions: AnAnalysis of Commercial Riot Gas Guns, Tear Gas Projectors, Grenades, SmallArms Ammunition, and Related Tear Gas Devices. Springfield, Illinois:C.C. Thomas.

[12] United States Marine Corps. (1940). Small Wars.1st Printing. Manhattan, Kansas: Sunflower Press. (2nd Printing, 1996).

[13] Verwey, Wil D. (1977). Riot Control Agents andHerbicides in War: Their Humanitarian, Toxicological, Ecological, Military,Polemological, and Legal Aspects. Leyden: A.W. Sijthoff.

II. Chapters

[14] Cook, Dr. David L. (1992). Refractive Error. Vision,What Every Pilot Needs to Know. Atlanta, Georgia: Invision Press, 42.

[15] Foreman, Dave & Haywood, Bill., eds. (1987). Roadsand Tires, Vehicles and Heavy Equipment. EcoDefense: A Field Guide toMonkeywrenching. Tucson, Arizona: Ned Ludd Books, 89-156.

[16] Kokoski, Richard. (1994). Non-lethal weapons: a casestudy of new technology developments. Stockholm International PeaceResearch Institute (SIPRI). SIPRI Yearbook 1994. Oxford, England:Oxford University Press, 367-386.

[17] O'Connor, Paul G. (1994, Aug.). Waging Wars withNonlethal Weapons. Magyar, Dr. Karl P., ed. Challenge and Response:Anticipating US Military Security Concerns. Maxwell Air Force Base,Alabama: Air University Press., 333-344.

[18] Powell, William. (1971). Natural, Nonlethal, and LethalWeapons. The Anarchist Cookbook. Secaucus, New Jersey: BarricadeBooks, Inc., 77-110.

[19] Reaves, Brian A. & Smith, Pheny Z. (1993). Table15a. Types of nonlethal weapons authorized for use by officers in local lawenforcement agencies, 1993. Law Enforcement Management andAdministrative Statistics, 1993: Data for Individual State and LocalAgencies with 100 or More Officers. Washington, District of Columbia:U.S. Department of Justice, 169-180.

[20] Reisman, W. Michael & Antoniou, Chris T., eds.(1994). Using Force (selected protocols and conventions). The Laws ofWar: A Comprehensive Collection of Primary Documents on International LawsGoverning Armed Conflict. New York, New York: Random House.

[21] Sapolsky, Harvey M. (1994). War without Killing.Sarkesian, S. & Flanagin, J., eds. U.S. Domestic and NationalSecurity Agendas. Contributions in Military Studies, Vol. 152.Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press., 27-40.

[22] Summers, Harry G. (1985). Operation Ranch Hand.Vietnam War Almanac. New York, New York; Facts on FilePublications, 66-67.

[23] Stockholm International Peace Research Institute(SIPRI). (1978). Non-penetrating kinetic energy projectiles & Electric,acoustic and electromagnetic-wave weapons. Anti-personnel Weapons.London, England: Taylor & Francis Ltd., 108-110, 202-210.

[24] Toffler, Alvin & Heidi. (1993). War Without Blood?War and Anti-War: Survival at the Dawn of the 21st Century. Boston,Massachusetts: Little, Brown and Company, 125-136.

III. Documents

[25] AAI Corp. (1979). Incapacitating Agent WeaponsTechnology. Baltimore, Maryland.

[26] Adams, J.P. (1966, Apr.). Teargas injuries; aclinical study of hand injuries and an experimental study on its effects onperipheral nerves and skeletal muscles in rabbits. The Journal of BoneSurgery, 48.

[27] Adams Schmidt, Dana. (1971, 11 Jan.). Pentagon saysdefoliation may help South Vietnamese economy. The New York Times.

[28] Aerospace Daily. (1995, 28 Jul.). Lack of DODrequirements prevents non-lethal technology growth, 141.

[29] Aerospace Daily. (1995, 28 Jul.). SASCprovides $37.2 million for new non-lethal weapons office, 141.

[30] Aerospace Daily. (1993, 12 Aug.). RegardingNon-Lethal Weapons, 245.

[31] Aerospace Daily. (1992, 6 Mar.). PentagonEyes Minimum-Lethality Weapons, 377.

[32] Aftergood, Steven. (1994, Sep.-Oct.). The Soft-KillFallacy: The Idea of Non-Lethal Weapons is Politically Attractive andPurposefully Misleading. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists,50, (5) 40-45

[33] Agence France-Presse. (1995, 24 Feb.). Goo,suds and bean bags: new additions to US arsenal in Somalia, Internet.

[34] Air Force Times. (1995, 17 Jul.). Waves ofGoo, 55, (50) 32.

[35] Air Force Times (1994, 11 Apr.).Crimebusters!

[36] Alexander, John B. (1996, Jun.). Shoot, But Not toKill. International Defense Review, 29, (6) 77-78.

[37] Alexander, Dr. John B. (1996, Mar.). Non-LethalWeapons Demand Expands as Missions Change. National Defense,80, (516) 34-35.

[38] Alexander, John B. (1995, 9 Mar.). Non-lethalWeapons and the Future of War. LA-UR 95-699. Invited presentation tothe Harvard-MIT Seminar on the Future of War. John M. Olin Institute forStrategic Studies, Harvard University Center for InternationalAffairs.

[39] Alexander, John B. (1994, 2 Nov.). NonlethalWeapons: Concepts, Applications, & Issues. LA-UR 94-3580. Presentedto the Bourn's College of Engineering, University of California,Riverside.

[40] Alexander, John B. (1994, 27 Sep.). NonlethalAntimateriel Application of Superacids and Other Very Aggressive ChemicalAgents. LA-CP 94-203. Presented to NATO Advisory Group on AerospaceResearch and Development, Rome, Italy.

[41] Alexander, John B. (1994, 23 Aug.). A Proposalfor Non-Lethal Force Development. LA-CP 94-190. Presented to DefenseScience Board, University of California, Irvine.

[42] Alexander, John B. (1994, Jul.). Deeskalation undder Bedarf von Schonenden Waffen (Deescalation and the Need forNonlethal Weapons) with Dipl Ing Ulrich Rieger. LA-UR 94-2205. Published inGerman by Deutsche Aerospace.

[43] Alexander, John B. (1994, May.). NonlethalWeapons: A Need for New Options. LA-UR 94-1497. Presented at theInternational Symposium for Common Defense 1994 "Keeping thePeace," Arlington, Virginia.

[44] Alexander, John B. (1994, 28 Mar.). NonlethalWeapons as Force Options for the Army. LA-UR 94-861. Presented to theNational Research Council, Board on Army Science and Technology, NationalAcademy of Science.

[45] Alexander, John B. (1994, 24 Jan.). NonlethalDefense Briefing. LA-UR 94-72. Presented to NATO AGARD, Paris,France.

[46] Alexander, John B. (1993, 27 Oct.). NonlethalWeapons and Limited Force Options. LA-UR 93-3747. Presented to theCouncil on Foreign Relations, New York, New York.

[47] Alexander, John B. (1993, 2 Jun.). Nonlethal WeaponsTechnology. Proceedings of the MIT Conference on the PoliticalImplications of Non-Lethal Warfare Technologies. Lexington,Massachusetts.

[48] Alexander, John B. (1993, 7 Mar.). New Weapons for aNew World Order: The Pentagon looks to nonlethal technology. The BostonGlobe, 70.

[49] Alexander, John B. (1992, 13 Nov.). RethinkingNational Security Requirements & the Need for Nonlethal WeaponsOptions. LA-UR 92-3773. Submitted to President-Elect Clinton'sTransition Team.

[50] Alexander, John B. (1992, 29 Sep.). PotentialNon-Lethal Policy Issues. LA-UR 92-3206. Submitted to the Wall StreetJournal.

[51] Alexander, John B. et al. (1992, May).Antimateriel Technology. LA-12319-PR Laboratory-Directed Researchand Development.

[52] Alexander, John B. & Gates, Robert. (1991,Sep.). Contingency Mission Technology. LA-UR 91-3161.

[53] Alexander, John B. (1990, Sep.). FutureApplications of Directed Energy Weapons in Non-Lethal Defense. LA-CP90-393.

[54] Alexander, US Army Ret. Col. John B. (1989, Oct.).Antimateriel Technology. Military Review, 69, (10) 29-41.

[55] Alexander, Lexi & Klare, Julia L. (1995-1996,Win.). Nonlethal Weapons: New Tools for Peace. Issues in Scienceand

Technology, 12

, (2)67-74.

[56] American Defense Preparedness Association. (1996, 6-7 Mar.). Non-Lethal Defense II Conference: Proceedings & UpdatedAttendee Roster. Alexander, John B., chair. The Ritz-Carlton Hotel,Tysons Corner, McLean, Virginia.

[57] Americans for Effective Law Enforcement. (1988).Use-of Force Tactics and Non-Lethal Weaponry. Alert Issue, (3) 2-6.

[58] Amnesty International, National Office. (1988).Israel and the Occupied Territories: the misuse of tear gas by Israeliarmy personnel in the Israeli Occupied Territories. New York, NewYork.

[59] Amouyal, Barbara. (1990, 19 Nov.). Use of NonlethalWeapons May Alter Military Strategy. Defense News, 5,7.

[60] Amouyal, Barbara & Munro, Neil. (1990, 5 Nov.).Labs Rush Nonlethal Arms for Mideast Deployment. Defense News,10, 1.

[61] Anderberg, Bengt, Bring, Ove E. & Wolbarsht,Myron L. (1992, Aug.). Blinding Laser Weapons and InternationalHumanitarian Law. Journal of Peace Research, 29, (3) 287-297.

[62] Anderberg, Bengt & Wolbarsht, Myron L. (1992,May). Hand-Held Laser Weapons are Waiting in the Wings. Armed ForcesJournal International, 129, (10) 60.

[63] Anderson, Col. Gary W. (1996, Jul.). There's ABetter Way: Tomorrow's Missions Cry Out For A Mix of Lethal and Non-LethalWeapons. Armed Forces Journal International, 133, (12) 15.

[64] Anderson, S.E. (1971, Jan.). CS and its use. TheMilitary Review.

[65] Anderson, Jon R. (1995, 8 May.). Fighting with newpurpose: Marines' new 'experimental' unit looks at future wars. NavyTimes, 30. Marine Corps Edition.

[66] Andrews, Andy E. & Alexander, John B. (1993,Oct.). Softer Response Required as Global Threats Change. NationalDefense, 78, (491) 23-24.

[67] Applegate, Rex. (1992, Dec.). Riot Control: Army andNational Guard Unprepared to Rule the Mob. Soldier of Fortune, 43-47, 71.

[68] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1978, Feb.). New U.S. ArmyRiot Control Developments. Law & Order, 56-57, 62.

[69] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1974, Jul.). Guns & theLaw: Multipurpose Police Handgun Developments, Non-Lethal Police WeaponryMay be the Most Significant Development in the History of Law Enforcement.Guns, 28.

[70] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1973, Jun.). Guns & theLaw: New Ideas for Law Enforcement Part 2. Guns, 24.

[71] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1972, Sep.). Guns & theLaw: Non-Lethal Weapons and the Law. Guns, 30.

[72] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1971, Dec.). Guns & theLaw: Non-Lethal Weapons, Part IV. Guns, 34.

[73] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1971, Aug.). Guns & theLaw: Non-Lethal Weapons, Part III. Guns, 26.

[74] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1971, Jul.-Aug.). NonlethalPolice Weapons. Ordnance, 56, (307) 62-66.

[75] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1971, Jul.). Guns & theLaw: Non-Lethal Weapons, Part II. Guns, 28.

[76] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1971, Jun.). Guns & theLaw: Non-Lethal Weaponry. Guns, 32.

[77] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1970, Sep.). Guns & theLaw: Pepper Fogger. Guns, 30.

[78] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1970, Aug.). The FerretBarricade Round, A 12 Gauge Riot Shotgun Projectile that Requires NoAttachment. Law & Order, 112.

[79] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1970, Apr.). Guns & theLaw: Tear Gas Grenades. Guns, 26.

[80] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1970, Feb.). Guns & theLaw: Ferret Barricade Round. Guns, 28.

[81] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1969, Nov.). New Weaponry forRiot Control. The National Guardsman, 10.

[82] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1969, Sep.-Oct.). Riot Control1969. Ordnance, 54, 180-184.

[83] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1968, Oct.). Mace Revisited.Law & Order, 50.

[84] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1968, May.). Super SonicSound- A New Police Weapon. Law & Order, 28.

[85] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1967, Aug.). Guns & theLaw: The Long Riot Baton. Guns, 28.

[86] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1967, Jun.). Guns & theLaw: New Weapon Against Crime. Guns, 28.

[87] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1967, May.-Jun.). Weapons forRiot Control. Ordnance, 51, 604.

[88] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1966, Jun.). The ChemicalMace, Evaluation of a New Police Weapon for Mob Control or IndividualDefense. Law & Order.

[89] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1966, May.-Jun.). The ChemicalMace. The National Sheriff, 8.

[90] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1965, Sep.-Oct.). "SoftSoaping" The Rioters. The National Sheriff, 4.

[91] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1965, Sep.). Bubbles &Banana Peels, A New "Soft" Weapon for Destroying Dignity. Law& Order, 22.

[92] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1965, Mar.). The New Multi-Purpose Riot Control Grenade. Law & Order, 53.

[93] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1964, Jul.-Aug.). New RiotControl Weapons. Ordnance, 67.

[94] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1964, Jul.). A Commentary onRiot Control Chemical Tear Gas....CN and CS. Law & Order, 41.

[95] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1964, Mar.) The Long RiotBaton. Law & Order, 36.

[96] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1963, Oct.). Smoke vs. the MobCancer. The Police Chief.

[97] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1963, Oct.). A New PoliceShock-Baton. Law & Order, 16.

[98] Applegate, Col. Rex. (1963, Mar.). The Organizationand Tactics of Professional Riot Control Forces. Army, 53.

[99] Arbetter, Lisa. (1994, Jun.). A Pepper Pinch.Security Management, 38, 14-15.

[100] Arbrogast, Walter W. (1976, Jan.). Soft/StingRing Airfoil Grenade Civil Disturbance Control System. EdgewoodArsenal, Maryland: Weapons Systems Concept Office.

[101] Arkin, William. (1995, Dec.). Vienna Meeting SetsBan on Blinding Laser Weapons. Laser Focus World, 31, (12),62.

[102] Arkin, William. (1995, 17 Jul.). Ban Tactical LaserWeapons: DoD Maintains Blinding is Not Violation of War. DefenseNews, 20.

[103] Arkin, William. (1995, 10 May.). The Pentagon'sBlind Ambition (Blinding Laser Weapons). Opinion-Editorial. New YorkTimes (Late New York Edition), A23.

[104] Army Times. (1994, 10 Oct.). Perry seeksdirective on nonlethal warfare feat, 34.

[105] Arquilla, John & Ronfeldt, David. (1992).Cyberwar is Coming! RAND Pamphlet P-7791. Santa Monica, California:The RAND Corporation.

[106] Ary, USMC. Maj. Vaughn A. (1996, Aug.). NewRules of Engagement for Today's Missions. Unpublished paper.

[107] Atkinson, Rick.(1995, 26 Feb.). Bullets tobeanbags: A military evolution. The Kansas City Star, A-1.

[108] Atkinson, Rick. (1995, 25 Feb.). Marines test newarsenal for Somalia. Washington Post, Internet.

[109] Atwal, Kay & Tapscott, Mark. (1993, Apr.). Non-lethal Laser Rifle Testing at Fort Bragg, Naval Anti-Missile Laser isReadied for Sea. Defense Electronics, 25, 18-19.

[110] Audsley, David (1989, Fal.) Flash/SoundDiversionary Device Evaluation. The Tactical Edge, 6.

[111] Aviation Week & Space Technology.(1995). Panel's Report Backs Nonlethal Weapons-High-Priiority EmergingMissions May Bring Development Push, 143, (16) 50.

[112] Aviation Week & Space Technology. (1994,24 Jan.) Government/Military: John B. Alexander, program manager forNonlethal Defense, Los Alamos (NM) National Laboratory (AerospaceLaureate), 140, (4) 19-20.

[113] Aviation Week & Space Technology. (1993,24 May.). Army Prepares for Non-Lethal Combat (Low Collateral DamageMunitions program). 138, (21) 62.

[114] Aviation Week & Space Technology. (1992,7 Dec.). Nonlethal Weapons Give Peacekeepers Flexibility. 137, (23)50-51.

[115] Bacon, LtCol. Douglas C. (1980, Oct.). BattlefieldLasers: A New Problem With an Old Cure. Military Review, 60(10) 33-39.

[116] Baker, David. (1994, Oct.). Wizard Wars & AirPower in the 21st Century-- Part 2. Air International, 47,214-217.

[117] Balzar, John. (1995, 25 Feb.). Marines take a Tipfrom L.A. Riots Somalia: Southland crowd control failures lead to non-lethal devices that may cut casualties as troops shield U.N. pullout.Los Angeles Times, Internet.

[118] Bandman, A.L. & Savateyev, Med Col. N.V.(1977). Toxicology of CR. Voyenno-Meditsinskiy Zhurnal, 3,84-86. UDC 615.9:623. 459.43., 126-130.

[119] Barrie, Darwin N. (1988, Jun.). Maricopa County'sevaluation of less-than-lethal electronic devices. The Police Chief,55, (6) 17.

[120] Barry, Col. John L., Everett, LtCol. Michael W.& Peck, LtCol. Allen G.(1994). Nonlethal Military Means: NewLeverage for a New Era. Policy Analysis Paper 94-01, National SecurityProgram. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University, John F. KennedySchool of Government.

[121] Barry, J. & Morganthau, T. (1994, 7 Feb.).Soon, 'Phasers on Stun.' Newsweek, 123, (6) 24-26.

[122] Baugham, T. Frank. (1942). The ABC of PracticalRiot Gun Instruction. Washington, District of Columbia: National RifleAssociation.

[123] Beal, Cliff. (1995, Dec.). Bang! Bang! You're NotDead. Focus, 63.

[124] Becker, Jon B. (1996, Spr.). The Legal Aspects ofDiversionary Devices. The Tactical Edge, 53.

[125] Becker, Jon B. & Heal, Charles. (1996, Feb.)Less-Than-Lethal Force: Doctrine must lead the technology rush.International Defense Review, 29, (2) 62-64.

[126] Beecher, W. (1966, Feb.). Chemical versus VietCong: right or wrong? The National Guardsman, 20.

[127] Begert, USMC. LtCol. Matthew. (1996, 5 Jun.).Non-Lethal Applications: A USMC View. Slide Series. U.S. Army Testand Evaluation Command, "Visions of Future Conflict- Test TechnologyDrivers," Symposium, Johns Hopkins University, Laurel, Maryland.

[128] Begley, Sharon. (1994, 7 Feb.). One Pill Makes YouLarger, One Pill Makes You Small... Newsweek, 123, (6)37.

[129] Bender, Frank. (1974, Nov.-Dec.). Ring AirfoilGrenades. National Defense.

[130] Bernstein, Theodore. (1985, 22 Jan.). Evaluationof the Electric Shock Hazard for the Nova XR 5000 Stun Gun.Unpublished. Madison Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin.

[131] Betts, R. & Denton, F. (1967, Oct.). Anevaluation of chemical crop destruction in Vietnam. RAND CorporationMemo. RM-5446 ISA/ARPA. Santa Monica, California.

[132] Biggs, M. (1990). Non-Lethal Weapons: A tool forlaw enforcement, 6 (1) 37-43.

[133] Blumenfeld, Stewart N. (1968). Employment of theRiot Control Agent CS in Vietnam. Office of the Science Advisor,Military Assistance Command, Vietnam.

[134] Blumenthal, R. (1970, 15 Mar.). US shows signs ofconcern over effect in Vietnam of 9-year defoliation program. The NewYork Times.

[135] Blundy, David & Pringle, Peter. (1974, 27Oct.). New Ulster riot control gas worries experts. London Times.

[136] Bodenheimer, T.S. & Rose, L. (1968, Aug.).Mace. Survival, 10.

[137] Boffey, P. M. (1971, Jan.). Herbicides in Vietnam,AAAS study finds widespread devastation. Science, 171.

[138] Bowers, M.B. et al. (1960, Jun.). Interim report ofCS exposures in plant workers. U.S. Chemical Warfare LaboratoriesTechnical Memo. CWL-TM-24-50.

[139] Brady, LtCol. Robert. (1995, July.). Tofflersmissed importance of nonlethal weapons. Letters to the Editor. SpecialWarfare, 8, (3) 45.

[140] Bramwell, E.C.B. (1961, Feb.). Skin reaction andsensitivity to CS. Porton Tech Paper 757.

[141] Breit, J.M. (1965, Mar.). NonlethalIncapacitating-Weapon: Liquid Stream Projector Feasibility Study.Technical Paper No. RAC-TP-168 submitted to Advanced Projects Agency,Washington, D.C. under contract No. SD-212). McLean, Virginia: ResearchAnalysis Corporation.

[142] Brennan, Dennis T. (1976, Apr.). Riot ControlWithout Bloodshed: The Soft/Sting Ring Airfoil Grenade. A FeasibilityReview of the U.S. Army's Experimental Civil Disturbance Control System.Cleveland, Ohio: City of Cleveland, Office of the Mayor.

[143] Bruel, P.V. & Olesen, H.P. (1973). InfrasonicMeasurements. B.K. Technical Review, 3, 14-25.

[144] Budiansky, Stephen. (1987, 20 Jul.). All stuck up,no way to go. U.S. News & World Report, 62.

[145] Bunker, Robert J. (1996, Aut.). AdvancedBattlespace and Cybermaneuver Concepts: Implications for Force XXI.Parameters, 26 (3) 108-120.

[146] Bunker, Robert J. (1996, May.-Jun.). NonlethalDefense II Conference. Military Review, 76, (3) 90.

[147] Bunker, Dr. Robert J. (1996, Feb.). Fourth EpochWar: Strategic Considerations and Responses. Prepared for Command'sWarfighting Lab, Marine Corps Combat Development Command (MCCDC). NSSPReport 96-1. San Bernardino, California: National Security Studies Program,California State University, San Bernardino.

[148] Bunker, Robert J. (1995, 28 Aug.). U.S. Must Seizethe Future With Tactical Laser Development. Defense News, 15, 19.

[149] Bunker, Robert J. & Moore, T. Lindsay. (1996,Feb). Nonlethal Technology and Fourth Epoch War: A New Paradigm ofPolitico-Military Force. Land Warfare Paper No. 23. Arlington,Virginia: Institute of Land Warfare, Association United States Army.

[150] Bureau of Prisons, U.S. Department of Justice.(1949, Nov.). Use of Tear Gas and Smoke.

[151] Burnett, Richard. (1993, 24 Oct.). ContractorsHatch New Weapons. The Orlando Sentinel.

[152] Burnett, W.A. et al. (1961, May). The influence ofparticle size on the subjective effects of CS. Porton Tech. Paper776.

[153] Business Week. (1972, 29 Jul.). The hunt fornonlethal guns, (2239) 34-36.

[154] California Legislature & Assembly, Committee onCriminal Justice. (1977). Less-Than Lethal Weapons: Hearing, LosAngeles, California Oct 22, 1976. Sacramento, California: AssemblyPublications Office.

[155] Campbell, C. (1992, 27 Sep.). The lethal bomb thatdoes not kill. Sunday Telegraph, 6.

[156] Campbell, Donald & Egner, Donald O. (1976,Jan.). Modeling for Less-Lethal Chemical Devices. TechnicalMemorandum 2-76. Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland: U.S. Army HumanEngineering Laboratory.

[157] Cantrow, Ellen. (1988, Oct.). Not TearsAlone (Israeli use of tear gas in West Bank and Gaza). TechnologyReview, 91, 16-17.

[158] Capaccio, Tony. (1995, 23 Jan.). U.S. CommandersState Uses for Non-Lethal Technology. Defense Week, 16,3.

[159] Casey, Joe D. (1988, Feb.). Research andDevelopment Needed for Less-Than-Lethal Weapons. The Police Chief,55, (2) 7.

[160] The Center for Advanced Command Concepts andTechnology (ACT). (1995, Nov.). Operations Other Than War (OOTW): TheTechnological Dimension. Washington, DC: National Defense University.

[161] Chemical Weapons Convention Bulletin.(1994, Mar.), 23.

[162] Chief of the Defence Staff, Canada. (1976, 1 Sep.).Riot Control Agent Dibenz (b,f) -1, 4 - Oxazepine (CR). Canadian ForceTechnical Order. NSN 1365-21-873-1605. C-77-206-000/AF-000.

[163] Chicago Police Department, Training Division.(1961). Tear Gas Manual. Chicago, Illinois.

[164] Cline, Ray S. (1991, 27 Feb.). Warfare's New Era.Washington Times, 58.

[165] Coates, Joseph F. (1972, Jun.). Non-Lethal PoliceWeapons. Technology Review, 49-56.

[166] Coates, Joseph F. (1972). Nonlethal,Nondestructive Warfare. P-569. Arlington, Virginia: Institute forDefense Analyses.

[167] Coates, Joseph F. (1970). Nonlethal andNondestructive Combat in Cities Overseas. Washington, District ofColumbia: Institute for Defense Analyses, Science and TechnologyDivision.

[168] Coates, Joseph F. (1969). Nonlethal ChemicalAgents. Washington, District of Columbia: International Association ofChiefs of Police.

[169] Coates, Joseph F. (1968, May.). Safe PoliceWeapons. Science and Technology, (77).

[170] Coates, Joseph F. (1967, Nov.). NonlethalWeapons for Use by Law Enforcement Officers. Study No. S-271.Arlington, Virginia: Institute for Defense Analysis, Science and TechnologyDivision.

[171] Collins, John M. (1995, 14 Sep.). NonlethalWeapons and Operations: Potential Applications and PracticalLimitations. CRS Report for Congress 95-974 S. Washington, District ofColumbia: Congressional Research Service.

[172] Commandant's Warfighting Lab (CWL). (1995, Dec.).Draft Non-Lethal Technology Functional Concept. Quantico, Virginia:United States Marine Corps. Under Redraft.

[173] Commodity Management Office, Department of theArmy. (1969, Jul.). Riot-Control-Agent CS, Munitions and Dispersers.Edgewood Arsenal, Maryland.

[174] Computerworld. (1990-1991, 24 Dec.-1 Jan.).Joy to the World, 24, 72. Computer viruses as nonlethalweapons.

[175] Conine, Ernest. (1975, 26 Sep.). A NonlethalSubstitute for the Handgun? Los Angeles Times.

[176] Cook III, USAF. Maj. Joseph W, Fiely, USAF. Maj.David P. & McGowan, USAF. Maj. Maura T. (1995, Special Edition.).Nonlethal Weapons: Technologies, Legalities, and Potential Policies.Airpower Journal, 9, (SE) 77-91.

[177] Cook, III. Maj. Joseph W. et al. (1994, 27 Jun.).Non-Lethal Weapons and Special Operations. For HQ USAF/XOXI. AirForce Academy, Colorado Springs, Colorado: USAF Institute for NationalSecurity Studies.

[178] Cook, Nick. (1992, 10 Oct.). Russia leads in"pulse" weapons. Jane's Defence Weekly, 18, (15)5.

[179] Cooper, Pat & Holzer, Robert. (1996, 29 Apr.).Loophole Allows Officials to Deny Technology Funds (non-lethals).Defense News, 11, (17) 12.

[180] Cooper, Pat. (1996, 22-28 Jul.). DOD GuidesNonlethal Weapon Use. Defense News, 11, (29) 8.

[181] Cooper, Pat. (1995, 24 Jul.). Nonlethals GetFunding Plan: Senators Urge U.S. Military to Explore Technology.Defense News, 10, 18.

[182] Cooper, Pat. (1995, 27 Feb.-5 Mar.). U.S. TestsNonlethal Weapon Policy in Somalia. Defense News, 10, 28.

[183] Cooper, Pat & Erlich, Jeff. (1996, 5-11 Feb.).U.S. Troops to Field Shortstop Against Shells in Bosnia. DefenseNews, 11, 22.

[184] Cooper, Pat & Opall, Barbara. (1994, 19-25Sep.). Perry Plans to Launch Nonlethal Warfare Effort. Defense News,9, 6.

[185] Cooper, Pat & Opall, Barbara. (1994, 10 Oct.).Perry seeks directive on nonlethal warfare feat. Army Times, 34.

[186] Council for Science and Society. (1978).Harmless Weapons. Chichester, Great Britain.

[187] County of San Diego Office of The MedicalExaminer.(1994, 1 Jul.). Autopsy Report on Daniel Lee Price ME#94-1204.

[188] Craig, F.N. et al. (1960, Jun.). Breathing patternsduring exposure to CS. U.S. Army Chemical Warfare Laboratories Rep.CW2-2399.

[189] Creasy, W.M. (1958, May.-Jun.). ToxicologicalWarfare. Ordnance, 42.

[190] Crichton, D. (1959). A study of the toxicity of CS.Porton Tech. Paper 672.

[191] Crichton, D. et al. (1959, declassified 1968,Jun.). Agents for riot control: the selection of T. 792 (o-chlorobenzalmalonoitrile) as a candidate agent to replace CN. Porton Tech. Paper651.

[192] Crime Control Digest. (1992, 30 Nov.).Detroit, LAPD, 26, (48). Studying Use of Non-Lethal Weapons.

[193] Criminal Justice Newsletter. (1994, 1 Aug.).California Agencies Search for Less-Lethal Weapons, 25, (15)2.

[194] Crockett, Thompson S.(1969). Police ChemicalAgents Manual. Washington. District of Columbia: InternationalAssociation of Chiefs of Police.

[195] Cuadros, Jaime H. (1995, 24 May.). Non-Lethaland Less-Than-Lethal Weapons. Advanced Weapon Systems AWJC-8.

[196] Cuadros, Jaime H. (1994, Jan.). Non-LethalWeapons: Course Outline. Presented at the 7th ASLET InternationalTraining Seminar, Washington, District of Columbia. Hacienda Heights,California: Arts and Engineering.

[197] Cuadros, Jaime H. (1993, Nov.). Kinetic EnergyLess-Lethal Projectile Technology. Presented at the Non-Lethal DefenseConference, Johns Hopkins University, Laurel, Maryland. Hacienda Heights,California: Arts and Engineering.

[198] Cuadros, Jaime H. (1993, Sep.). TerminalBallistics of Non-Lethal Projectiles. Presented at 14th AnnualSymposium on Ballistics, Quebec, Canada. Hacienda Heights, California: Artsand Engineering.

[199] Cuadros, Jaime H. (1993, 1 Jun.). A TrainingManual for Flexible Baton Selection and Use. Hollister, California: MKBallistic Systems.

[200] Cuadros, Jaime H. (1993, Apr.). A ComparisonBetween Rubber Bullets and Shot Bags. Hollister, California: MKBallistic Systems.

[201] Cuadros, Jaime H. (1992, 30 Nov.-3 Dec.). A Non-Lethal Projectile Concept for Military, Law Enforcement and CivilianUse. Presented at the Small Arms Division Meeting, American DefensePreparedness Association, San Antonio, Texas. Hacienda Heights, California:Arts and Engineering.

[202] Curtis, Liz. (1982). They Shoot Children: TheUse of Rubber and Plastic Bullets in the North of Ireland. London,England: Information on Ireland.

[203] Daley, Dorthy E., Hayes, Roger M. & Swint,Lloyd, E. (1995, Jul.). Oleoresin capsicum: don't let the fancy name foolyou (pepper spray). Corrections Today, 57, 24.

[204] Davidson, Keay. (1992, 2 Feb.). War without Deathmay be on its Way. San Francisco Examiner, 1.

[205] Davis, Malcolm. (1994, Apr.-May.). How to win warswithout actually killing. Asia-Pacific Defense Reporter, 20,36-37.

[206] Davis, Sherman L. (1970, Jun.). Riot ControlWeapons for the Vietnam War. Historical Monograph AMC 56M. EdgewoodArsenal, Maryland: Edgewood Arsenal, U.S. Army MunitionsCommand.

[207] de Bakker, et al. (1990, Aug.). Laser Weapons atSea. International Defense Review, 23, (8) 853-856.

[208] Debban, LtCol. Alan W. (1993, Spring). DisablingSystems: War-Fighting Option for the Future. Airpower Journal,7, (1) 44-50.

[209] Debban, Alan W. (1993, 22 Feb.). DisablingTechnologies and Applications. HQ USAF/XOXT BackgroundPaper.

[210] De Caro, Chuck. (1994). Sats, Lies, and Video-Rape: The Soft War Handbook. McLean, Virginia: Aerobureau Corporation.

[211] Defense Daily. (1994, 25 May.). DOD to AdoptPolicy on Non-Lethal Weapons by Late 1994, 183, 301-302.

[212] Defense Electronics. (1995, March). RussiansContinue Work on Sophisticated Acoustic Weaponry, 26, 12.

[213] Defense Electronics. (1992, Mar.). DOD Urgedto Adopt Nonlethal Warfare Strategy, 24, 22.

[214] Defense Electronics. (1992, Mar.). Examplesof Nonlethal Weapons, 24, 22.

[215] Defense News. (1996, 8-14 Jul.). CountermineTechnologies Flow From Increased Threat, 10.

[216] Defense News. (1996, 10-16 Jun.). OlinOrdnance to Test Nonlethal Vehicle Trap, 11, (23) 27.

[217] Defense News. (1996, 6-12 May.). Open Doorfor Nonlethals, 11, (18) 18.

[218] Defense News. (1996, 11-17 Mar.). NonlethalTechnology Wins Commander Nod, 11, (10) 2.

[219] Defense News. (1995, 25 Sep.-1 Oct.). LaserStance Is on Target, 26.

[220] Defense News. (1994, 19-25 Oct.). MilitaryStudies Unusual Arsenal.

[221] Defense News. (1994, 19-25 Sep.). PerryPlans to Launch Nonlethal Warfare Effort, 6.

[222] Defense News. (1994, 28 Mar.-3 Apr.). DoD toBoost Nonlethal Options, 46.

[223] Defense News. (1994, 7-13 Feb.). Lasers,Viruses, May Rule No-Fly Sky Zone, 1, 45.

[224] Defense News. (1993, 22-28 Nov.). Non-LethalWeapons Group Set to Form in March, 1, 14.

[225] Defense News. (1993, 11-17 Jan.). U.S.Explores Mind-Control Technology, 4, 29.

[226] Defense Week. (1994, 18 Jan.). CIA Asked toReview "Buck Rogers" Weapon, 6.

[227] Defense Week. (1992, 19 Oct.). Army Gives aBoost to Exotic Non-Lethal Weapons.

[228] de la Taille, Renaud. (1980). Brief Survey ofNon-Wounding Anti-Riot Weapons. FSTC-HT-1092-79. Charlottesville,Maryland: U.S. Army Foreign Science and Technology Center.

[229] Department of Defense Directive. (1996, 9 Jul.).Policy for Non-Lethal Weapons. No. 3000.3.

[230] Department of Defense. (1994, 14 Oct.). DODActivities in Non-Lethal Weapons. 94-S-4521.

[231] Dettling, J.R. & Mawhinney, R.C. (1972, 2Oct.). Stun-Gun Preliminary Terminal Effects Study. MB-R-72/77. SanRamon, California: MBA Associates.

[232] Dobbs, Herbert H. et al. (1990, Sep.).Assessment of Mission Kill Concept, Requirements, and Technologies.Prepared by System Planning Corporation, Arlington, Virginia. Washington,District of Columbia: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

[233] Dworetzky, Tom. (1987, Nov.). Bag-em with the Un-Gun (Less-Lethal Bean Bag Weapons). Discover, 8, 26-27.

[234] The Economist. (1994, 15 Oct.). Thou ShallNot Blind (inhumane laser guns). 333, (7885) 54.

[235] Edgewood Arsenal, MD, Directorate of MedicalResearch. (1983). Special Summary Report of Toxicology of CN, CS, andDM. Washington, District of Columbia: International Association ofChiefs of Police. First published in 1965, Sep.

[236] Edgewood Arsenal, MD. (1967, Oct.).Characteristics of Riot Control Agent CS. EASP 600-1/AD 661 319.Edgewood Arsenal, Maryland: Department of the Army.

[237] Egner, D.O. & Williams, L.W. (1975).Standard Scenarios for the Less Lethal Weapons Evaluation Model.Technical Memorandum 20-75. Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland: U.S. ArmyHuman Engineering Laboratory.

[238] Egner, D.O. & Campbell, D.(1975, Aug.).Testing and Evaluation of Chemical Weapons. Aberdeen ProvingGrounds, Maryland: U.S. Army Land Warfare Laboratory.

[239] Egner, D.O. et al. (1974, May.). TheEffectiveness of Less Lethal Weapons Utilizing Chemical Agents.Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland: U.S. Army Human EngineeringLaboratory.

[240] Egner, D.O. et al. (1973). A MultidisciplinaryTechnique for the Evaluation of Less Lethal Weapons. Aberdeen ProvingGrounds, Maryland: U.S. Army Land Warfare Laboratory.

[241] Ellis, R.H. & Kellog, J.C. (1966, Sep.).Implications of the Use of Incapacitating Agents in Warfare. ReportNo. 7675-2225 submitted to Headquarters, U.S. Air Force, Washington D.C.,under contract No. AF 49 (638)-1584. Hartford, Connecticut: TravelersResearch Center.

[242] Ehmke, Charles. (1966). The Use of Non-LethalChemical Agents in Limited Warfare. Thesis. Maxwell Air Force Base,Alabama: Air Command and Staff College.

[243] Epstein, J.S. & Kelso, M.A. (1995, 14 Mar.).Non-Lethal Weapons, An Overview of Policy and Technology. SlideSeries. Center for International Security and Arms Control, StanfordUniversity.

[244] Evancoe, Paul. (1994, Jun.). Tomorrow's Weapons ofChoice? Military Technology, 18, 68-71.

[245] Evancoe, Paul. (1994, May.-Jun.). Non-lethalAlternatives Weighed by Law Officers. National Defense, 73,(498) 28-30.

[246] Evancoe, Paul. (1993, Dec.). Non-LethalTechnologies Enhance Warrior's Punch. National Defense, 73,(493) 26-29.

[247] Evancoe, Paul & Bentley, Mark. (1994, May).CVW: Computer Virus as a Technology Weapon. Military Technology,18, 38-40.

[248] Evers, Stacey. (1993, 19 Nov.). Police, PrisonsWant Cheap Non-lethal Technologies. Aerospace Daily, 299.

[249] Facts on File. (1995, 19 Oct.). BlindingLaser Weapon Ban Implemented. 55, (2864) 781.

[250] Faul, Denis. (1982, Oct.). Plastic Bullets-Plastic Government: Deaths and Injuries by Plastic Bullets, August 1981-October 1982.

[251] Ferretti, F. (1976, 4 Jan.). Zap! New York TimesMagazine, 13-16.

[252] Fetter, Gregory. (1992, 22 Apr.). The Ring AirfoilGrenade- A Weapon Whose Time Has Come. World Weapons Review, (134),5-8.

[253] Fischetti, Mark. (1995, Jan.). Less-Than-LethalWeapons. Technology Review, 98, (1) 14-15.

[254] Flatau, Abraham et al. (1974). Summary ofTechnical Presentations for the STING RAG Validation In-Process Review andSoft RAG-Concept Feasibility In-Process Review. Aberdeen ProvingGround, Maryland: U.S. Army Armament Command.

[255] Flatau, Abraham. (1976, 15-16 Sep.). The XM234Launcher Adapter for M16 Rifle. Unedited Preliminary Summary Report.Presented at the 1976 Annual Meeting, Small Arms Systems Division, AmericanDefense Preparedness Association, Picatinny Arsenal, Dover, New Jersey.

[256] Florig, H. Keith. (1988, Mar.). The futurebattlefield: a blast of gigawatts? IEEE Spectrum, 25, (3) 50-54.

[257] Fortune. (1994, 11 Jul.). How Cops willRearm, Tom Clancy Style, 16.

[258] Foster-Miller, Inc. A. Mangolds. (1990). SoftKill of Fielded Weapons Systems. Weston, Massachusetts.

[259] Frost, Dr. Gerald & Shipbaugh, Dr. Calvin.(1994, 1 Feb.). GPS Targeting for Non-Lethal Systems. RANDPublication RP-262, Santa Monica, California: The RANDCorporation.

[260] Fulghum, David A. (1994, 19 Sep.). Air Force MayDelay JPATS, TSSAM (Carbon-Fiber Weapon). Aviation Week & SpaceTechnology, 141, (12) 26-27.

[261] Fulghum, David A. (1993, 24 May.). EMP Weapons LeadRace for Non-Lethal Technology. Aviation Week & SpaceTechnology, 138, (21) 61.

[262] Fulghum, David A. (1993, 22 Feb.). ALCMS GivenNonlethal Role (air-launched cruise missiles fitted with electromagneticpulse generators). Aviation Week & Space Technology, 138,(8) 20-22.

[263] Fulghum, David A. (1992, 17 Aug.). US Weighs Use ofNonlethal Weapons in Serbia If U.N. Decides to Fight. Aviation Week& Space Technology, 137, (7) 62-63.

[264] Fulghum, David A. (1992, 27 Apr.). Secret Carbon-Fiber Warheads Blinded Iraqi Air Defenses. Aviation Week & SpaceTechnology, 136, (17) 18-20.

[265] Fulton, Roger. (1995, Sep.). The Law EnforcementTechnology Network. Law Enforcement Technology, 26.

[266] Fulton, Roger. (1995, Sep.). When Law EnforcementMet Industry...Transferring Military Technology. Law EnforcementTechnology, 56.

[267] Futrell, A. (1988). History and development ofthe side-handle baton power strike and the PPCT side-handle baton system.Millstadt, Illinios: PPCT Research Publications.

[268] Gallego, F. & Daly, M. (1990, 13 Jan.). Laserweapon in Royal Navy service. Jane's Defence Weekly.

[269] Galston, A.W. (1968, Jun.). Military uses ofherbicides in Vietnam. The New Scientist.

[270] Galston, A.W. (1967, Aug.-Sep.). Changing theenvironment: herbicides in Vietnam. Scientist and Citizen, 2.

[271] Garwin, Richard L. (1994, Oct.). Secret Weapons forthe CNN Era. Harper's, 289, (1773) 17-18.

[272] Gee, USA. Maj. Robert W. (1994, Dec.). MilitaryPolice Nonlethal Technology Program. Briefing Slides. Battle LabSupport Division. Fort McClellan, Alabama: U.S. Military Police School.

[273] General Ordnance Equipment Corporation. (1968).A Series of Reports on Chemical Mace Non-Lethal Weapons.

[274] Gips, Michael. (1995, Apr.). One-stop shop.Security Management, 39 (4) 11. Law enforcement database(less-than lethal).

[275] Goldblat, J. (1970, Apr.). Are tear gas weapons andherbicides permitted weapons? Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists,26.

[276] Gongwer, L.E. et al. (1958, Nov.). The comparativeeffectiveness of four riot control agents. U.S. Army Chemical WarfareLaboratories Tech. Memo. CWL-TM-24-18.

[277] Goodman, Jr. Glenn W. (1994, Jul.). Upping theNonlethal Ante: Pentagon Funds A New Weapons Initiative. Armed ForcesJournal International, 131, (12) 13.

[278] Goodman, Jr. Glenn W. (1988, May.). US ElectronicSystems Highly Vulnerable to Radio-Frequency Beam Weapons. Armed ForcesJournal International, 87, (10) 20.

[279] Gourley, Scott R. (1995, Apr.). The Sniper's LatestNightmare. International Defense Review, 66.

[280] Gray, Jan M. (1995, 17 Jul.). Uses of NonlethalForce in Army Operations. White paper, draft. Fort Monroe, Virginia: USArmy Training and Doctrine Command.

[281] Grossman, Elaine M. (1994, 15 Apr.). Pentagon toSet Priorities in Non-lethal Technologies, Weapons. Inside the AirForce, 1.

[282] Grossman, Jon. (1991, Jul.). Military Lasers: ACostly Search for Ultimate Weapons. Photonics Spectra, 25,(7) 84-92.

[283] Grudowski, Mike. (1995, 13 Apr.). Not-so-lethalweapons (police weapons). New York Times Magazine, 40-41.

[284] Gunther, Judith, Suzanne, Kantra & Langreth,Robert N. (1994, Sep.). The Digital Warrior. Popular Science,245, 60-64.

[285] Gurganious, Joseph T. (1974). Riot ControlBarrier: Concept Development and Feasibility Test. Aberdeen ProvingGround, Maryland: U.S. Army Land Warfare Laboratory.

[286] Gutentag, P.J. & Hart, J. (1960, Apr.). Theevaluation of CS aerosols as a riot control agent in man. U.S. ArmyChemical Warfare Laboratories Rep. CWL-2365.

[287] Hammick, Murray. (1991, Aug.). Laser protection forAFV's: the eyes have it. International Defense Review, 818-821.

[288] Hanley, William C. (1968). Berkeley PoliceDepartment Use of Chemical Mace. City Manager Report No. 68-37.Berkeley, California.

[289] Hannant, Philip. (1977). Nonlethal Weapons forLaw Enforcement. Thesis. Central Missouri State University.

[290] Hansen, George. (1966). Non-Lethal Gases forGuerrilla Warfare. Professional Study. Maxwell Air Force Base,Alabama:

Air War College.

[291] Harris, Bill. (1993, May.). Less-than-lethalmunitions to give Army greater flexibility. Ordnance, 22-23.

[292] Hartford Democrat/AP News. (1978, 20 Dec.).At CSL 1978 Was A Year of Advances: Riot Control Device & New ArmyWeapon (Sting RAG).

[293] Hayeslip, Ph.D. David W. & Preszler, Ph.D.Alan. (1993, Mar.). NIJ Initiative on Less-Than-Lethal Weapons. NCJ133523. Research in Brief.

[294] Headquarters, Department of the Army. (1993).Grenade, Hand: Riot Control, CS, ABC-M7A3, (1330-6963), AmmunitionSurveillance Procedures. Supply Bulletin; SB 742-1330-94-322.Washington, District of Columbia.

[295] Headquarters, Department of the Army. (1989).Operator's Manual: Cartridge, 40-Millimeter, Riot Control CS, XM674 andCartridge, 40-Millimeter, Red Smoke RS, XM675. Tecnical Manual; TM 3-1310-244-10. Washington, District of Columbia.

[296] Headquarters United States Air Force, SpecialTechnical Plans Division. (1991, 13 Sep.). Position Paper on the AirForce Role in Development of Disabling Systems/Strategy.

[297] Heal, Sid. (1994, Win.). Diversionary Devices:"Down and Dirty." The Tactical Edge, 26-30.

[298] Heal, Sid. (1990, Spr.). Flashbangs: Why and How,Part III. The Tactical Edge, 7-11.

[299] Heal, Sid.(1990, Win.). Flashbangs: Why and How,Part II. The Tactical Edge, 20-22.

[300] Heal, Sid. (1990, Jul.). Flashbangs: Effective Useof Diversionary Devices. The Police Chief, 18-24.

[301] Heal, Sid. (1989, Fal.). Flashbangs: Why and How.The Tactical Edge, 9-11.

[302] Heal, Sid & Evancoe, Paul. (1996, Sep.-Oct.).Nonlethal Disabling Technology: A Future Reality. Police and SecurityNews, 3-16.

[303] Heal, Charles S. & Kolman, John. (1989).Flash/Sound Diversionary Devices. Training Key #391, 17.Alexandria, Virginia: International Association of Chiefs of Police

[304] Hearing on Public Sale of Protective Sprays.(1969). Consumer Subcommittee on Commerce, 91st Congress, First Session.

[305] Hecht, Jeff. (1992, Aug.). Lasers Designed toBlind. New Scientist, 135, (1833) 27-31.

[306] Hellreich, A. et al. (1967, Jan.). The effects ofthermally-generated CS aerosols on human skin. Edgewood ArsenalTechnical Report. 4075, AD809485.

[307] Hemenway, David & Weil, Douglas. (1990, Win.).Phasers on Stun: The Case for Less Lethal Weapons. Journal of PolicyAnalysis and Management, 9, (1) 94-98.

[308] Herby, Peter. (1995, Mar.-Apr.). Outlaw blinding:Weapons intended to blind soldiers on the battlefield must, like chemicaland biological weapons, be banned. The Bulletin of the AtomicScientists, 51, (2) 4.

[309] Herskovitz, Don. (1993, Aug.). Killing Them Softly.Journal of Defense Electronics, 16, 41-42.

[310] Heun, Christopher T. (1996, Sep.). Holograms HaltContraband; New Sensor Detects Bombs (Saber 203 Info). NationalDefense, 81, (520), 19.

[311] Higgins, John. (1967). Non-Lethal ChemicalWeapons in Counterinsurgency. Thesis. Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama:Air Command and Staff College.

[312] Hiltermann, Joost & Arkin, William. (1995, 23Oct.). No Blinding Lasers. Defense News, 29. Letters to the Editor.

[313] Himmelspach, Darlene. (1995, 18 Oct.).Leathernecks' new devices are not deadly, but they're effective. SanDiego Union-Tribune, Internet.

[314] Himsworth, Sir H. et al. (1971). Report of theenquiry into the medical and toxicological aspects of CS. Part II.London, England: Her Majesty's Stationary Office.

[315] Hoffman, Lisa. (1996, 10 Aug.). Pentagon backs useof nonlethal weapons. The San-Diego Union Tribune, A-25.

[316] Holland, P. (1974). Cutaneous Reactions Produced byDibenz-(b,f)-1,4-oxazepine (CR). British Journal of Dermatology.

[317] Holzer, R. & Munro, N. (1992, 13-19 Apr.).Microwave weapon stuns Iraqis. Defense News, 1.

[318] Horgan, John. (1994, Apr.). Bang! You're Alive: Anunusual trio wins support for "nonlethal" weapons. ScientificAmerican, 270, (4) 22-24.

[319] House, W.B. et al. (1967, Dec.). Assessment of theecological effects of extensive or repeated use of herbicides. MidwestResearch Institute Report. AD 824314.

[320] Howard, Stuart & Hitt, William D. (1966, 2May.). Intercultural differences in olfaction. ARPA-Project AGILEReport. Columbus, Ohio: Battelle Memorial Institute.

[321] Hu, Howard, et al. (1989, 4 Aug.). Tear Gas:Harassing Agent or Toxic Chemical Weapon. Journal of the AmericanMedical Association, 262, 660.

[322] Huddle, F.P. (1969). Technology-assessment ofthe Vietnam defoliant matter; a case history. U.S. Congress, House ofRepresentatives, 91st. Congress., Cie. on Science and Astronautics.

[323] Hunter, John C. (1994, May.). Pepper Spray. Focuson Use of Force. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 63, 24-26.

[324] Hunter, USAF. Maj. Roger C. (1994, Fal.). DisablingSystems and the Air Force. Airpower Journal, 7, (3) 43-47.

[325] Hurlburt, T.D. Beaulieu, M., & Pickman, S.(1985, Jul.). An evaluation of use force--Part II: Non-deadly force.The Program Evaluation Section, Orlando Police Department.

[326] Hust, Gerald. (1994). Taking DownCommunications. Thesis. Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama: School ofAdvanced Airpower Studies.

[327] Ingram, J.T. (1942, Dec.). Dermatitis from exposureto tear gas. The British Journal of Dermatology, 54.

[328] Inside the Army. (1995, 31 Jul.). DraftConcept for Non-Lethal Capabilities in Army Operations, 18-19.

[329] Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis. (1996,May.). Nonlethal Weapons: Emerging Requirements for SecurityStrategy. Cambridge, Massachusetts.

[330] Institute for Law and Justice. (1995, Jan.). LawEnforcement Options. Newsletter on Less-Than-Lethal TechnologyDevelopment, 1, (1) 1-8.

[331] International Association of Chiefs of Police.(1970-1971). Police Center Weapons Report Series. Washington,District of Columbia.

[332] International Association of Chiefs of Police.(1970). Police Chemical Munitions Handbook. Riot Control AgentInformation Series No. 03-1. Washington, District of Columbia.

[333] International Association of Chiefs of Police.(1970). Tactical Use of Riot Agents. Riot Control Agent InformationSeries No. 04-1. Washington, District of Columbia.

[334] International Association of Chiefs of Police.(1970). Aerosol Irritant Projectors: A National Survey.Gaithersburg, Maryland. See also The Police Chief. (1970, Jan.).

[335] International Association of Chiefs of Police,Professional Standards Division. (1969). The Evaluation of CS Aerosolsas a Riot-Control Agent in Man. Washington, District of Columbia.Originally Issued in April 1960 by U.S. Army Chemical Corps Research andDevelopment Command, Chemical Warfare Laboratories.

[336] International Association of Chiefs of Police,Police Weapons Center. (1968). Selected Military Reports on CS RiotControl Agents. Gaithersburg, Maryland.

[337] International Association of Chiefs of Police,Professional Standards Division. (1967). Characteristics of Riot ControlAgent CS. Washington, District of Columbia.

[338] International Defense Review. (1995, Nov.).More Less-Than Lethal Weaponry for US, 28, 14.

[339] International Defense Review. (1994, Jul.).Less Than Lethal, 27, (7) 29.

[340] Isenberg, David. (1996, Spr.). Forum: NonlethalWeapons. Issues in Science and Technology, 12, (3) 15-16.

[341] Jackson, L. (1989). The effect of Tennessee vs.Garner on the use of deadly force by non-sworn private securitypersonnel. Millstadt, Illinois: PPCT Research Publications.

[342] Jamieson, J.P., Hull, R. & Battershill, P.(1990, Jul.). Recommendations of the Committee on the Use of Less ThanLethal Force by Police Officers in British Columbia. British ColumbiaPolice Commission.

[343] Janes Infantry Weapons. (1989). Ring AirfoilCivil Disturbance Control System, 495.

[344] JAYCOR. (1994, 19 Sep.). Policy Study: Non-Lethal Technologies. Washington, District of Columbia.

[345] Jolley, H.W. & Carpenter, W.L. (1968, Feb.).Tear gas dermatitis. The Journal of the American MedicalAssociation, 203.

[346] Jones, Anita. (1995, 4 Dec.). ARPA Has Mission.Defense News, 26. Letters to the Editor.

[347] Jones, G.R.N. (1971, Jun.). CS in the balance.New Scientist and Science Journal, 203.

[348] Journal of Electronic Defense. (1993, Aug.).The Sound of Waco, 16, 42. Using sound as a nonlethal weapon.

[349] Kalman, S.M. (1970, 28 May.). Drugs asWeapons. Seminar paper, Department of Bio-chemistry, U.C. Berkeley.

[350] Kerby, M. (1988). Analysis of impact weaponpower and energy duration of batons. Millstadt, Illinois: PPCT ResearchPublications.

[351] Kiernan, Vincent. (1994, 19 Nov.). 'Ban Cruel LaserWeapons' Says Red Cross. New Scientist, 144, 11.

[352] Kiernan, Vincent. (1994, Sep.). Lasers seen as anaid to law enforcement. Laser Focus World, 30, (9) 49-50.

[353] Kiernan, Vincent. (1993, 11 Dec.). War over weaponsthat can't kill. New Scientist, 140, (1903) 14-16.

[354] Klaaren, USAF. Maj. Jonathan W. & Mitchell,USAF. Maj. Ronald S. (1995, Spe.). Nonlethal Technology and Airpower: AWinning Combination for Strategic Paralysis. Airpower Journal,9, (SE) 42-51. Excerpt from a 1993 Air Command and Staff Collegeresearch project authored by Chingono, Maj. Biltim, et al.

[355] Knoth, Arthur. (1995, Oct.). Laserpainting thebattlefield. International Defense Review, 79.

[356] Knoth, Arthur. (1994, Jul.). DisablingTechnologies: A Critical Assessment. International Defense Review,33-39.

[357] Kornblum, Ronald N. & Reddy, Sara K. (1991).Effects of the Taser in Fatalities Involving Police Confrontation.Journal of Forensic Sciences, 36, (2) 434.

[358] Koscove, Eric M. (1985, Dec.). The Taser Weapon: ANew Emergency Medical Problem. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 14,112.

[359] Kunze, Douglas R. (1995, May.-Jun.). Denial SystemsDeflect Terrorists from Mischief. National Defense, 55-56.

[360] Lancet (North American Edition). (1994, 17Dec.). Weapons Intended to Blind, 344, 1649-1650.

[361] Langreth, Robert. (1994, Oct.). Soft Kill.Popular Science, 245, (4) 66-69.

[362] Laser Focus World. (1996, Jun.). LaserIndustry Report: Blinding Laser Weapons Ban in Question?, 32, (6)67.

[363] Laser Focus World. (1993, Sep.). WashingtonReport: Lets Debate Laser Weapons, 29, (9) 65.

[364] Law Enforcement News. (1996, 31 Mar.). Civilliberties group wants FDA-style regulations-and more- for OC spray,22, (442) 1, 6.

[365] Law Enforcement News. (1996, 31 Mar.).Philly reports no problem with OC, 22, (442) 6.

[366] Law Enforcement News. (1996, 31 Jan.). Theeyes have it...OC spray is NYC cops' weapon of choice, 22, (438).

[367] Law Enforcement Technology (1995, Nov.).Surveillance and Weapons Detection, 5.

[368] Law Enforcement Technology (1995, Nov.).Weapons and Protective Systems, 10.

[369] Lawson, Chris. (1995, 17 Apr.). Words from a risingstar. Navy Times, 16. Marine Corps Edition.

[370] Leakey, Robert J. (1968). Utilization ofChemical Agents and Their Application to Civil Disturbances. Thesis.Washington State University.

[371] Levine, Robert A. & Stahl, Charles J. (1968,Apr.). Eye Injury Caused by Tear-Gas Weapons. American Journal ofOphthalamology, 65, 497.

[372] Lewer, Nick. (1995). Non-Lethal Weapons.Medicine and War, 11, (2) 78.

[373] Libby, Hildi S. (1996, 6-7 Mar.). Coordinated ArmyNon Lethal Program Overview. In American Defense Preparedness Association.Non-Lethal Defense II Conference: Proceedings & Updated AttendeeRoster. Alexander, Chair. John B. The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, TysonsCorner, McLean, Virginia.

[374] Linder, USA. Maj. Jim. (1995). NonlethalWeapons: Direct Employment Against Non-Combatants in MOOTW. UnpublishedResearch Paper. Newport, Rhode Island: US Naval War College.

[375] Livingston, Neil C. (1995, 1 Sep.). DazzlingAchievements. Sea Power, 38, (9) 43.

[376] Lorenz, F.M. (1996, Aut.). Non-Lethal Force: TheSlippery Slope to War? Parameters, 26, (3) 52-62.

[377] Lorenz, Col. F.M. (1995, Nov.-Dec.). Forging Rulesof Engagement: Lessons Learned in Operation United Shield. MilitaryReview, 75, (6) 17-25.

[378] Lorenz, Col. Frederick M. (1995, Sep.). "Less-Lethal" Force in Operation United Shield. Marine Corps Gazette,79, (9) 68-76.

[379] Los Angeles Times. (1994, 20 Dec.). Not SoDeadly Weapons, A4.

[380] Los Angeles Times. (1995, 13 Oct.). PentagonCancels Controversial Laser, A16.

[381] Lynch, Gregory R. (1995). The Role of Non-LethalWeapons in "Special Wars." Thesis. Monterey, California:Naval Post Graduate School.

[382] Maclean's. (1995, 6 Mar.). Sticky 'Em Up,108, 11. Marines use sticky foam in Somalia

[383] Macleod, Ian F., Villarreal, J.E. & Seevers,M.H. (1968, Jun.). Report on Mark IV Chemical Mace. Ann Arbor,Michigan: University of Michigan Medical School.

[384] Madden, J.F. (1951, Jan.). Cutaneoushypersensitivity to tear gas (CN), a case report. The American MedicalAssociation Archives of Dermatology and Syhpilology, 63.

[385] Mahan, Jim. (1996, 6-7 Mar.). Prison Requirements.In American Defense Preparedness Association. Non-Lethal Defense IIConference: Proceedings & Updated Attendee Roster. Alexander,Chair. John B. The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Tysons Corner, McLean, Virginia.

[386] Manley, Harriot. (1993, Mar.). Guide to Self-Defense Devices. Good Housekeeping, 27, 28-30.

[387] Mar, Roland K. (1986, Sep.). Bang-Less Tank Killer.U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings, 112, (19) 112-113.

[388] Marconi, Andrew. (1974, Dec.). What's New on theBeat. Mechanix Illustrated.

[389] Marine Corps Combat Development Command (MCCDC).(1996, Nov.). Joint Concept for Nonlethal Weapons. Draft. Quantico,Virginia.

[390] Marine Corps Gazette. (1996, Jun.). Lab toHold Nonlethals Experiment, 80, (6) 6.

[391] Marine Corps Gazette. (1996, May.). CorpsLeads Nonlethal Weapons Program, 80, (5) 6.

[392] Marine Corps Systems Command (1996). NonLethalWeapons Program. Briefing Slides & Draft Memorandum. Quantico,Virginia.

[393] Margolis, R.J. (1974, 8 Dec.). Stun guns, bean bagsand dumdums. Washington Post.

[394] Martin, USN. Capt. M.D. (1991, 29 May). Non-Lethal Weapons. Policy Planning Paper. Office of the Under-Secretary ofDefense (Policy).

[395] Matthews, William. (1994, 11 Apr.). Crimebusters!Cops put defense technology to work. Air Force Times, 31.

[396] Mayer, J. (1966). Crop destruction in Vietnam.Science, 152.

[397] MBA Associates. (1970, 24 Jul.). TechnicalMemorandum: Non-Lethal Projectile. MB-TM-70 12-2. San Ramon,California.

[398] MCCDC, Concepts Division, Nonlethal CoordinationCell. (1996). Marine Corps Systems Command: Nonlethal WeaponsProgram. Brief. Quantico, Virginia.

[399] McConnell, A.F. (1970). Mission: Ranch Hand. AirUniversity Review, 21.

[400] McGrew, Dan. (1996, 22 Apr.). The Name of the Gameis Killing. Navy Times, 46, (29) 54. Marine CorpsEdition.

[401] Meadows, Sandra I. (1996, Jul.-Aug.). WarfightersWant Weapons That Disable But Don't Kill. National Defense,81, (519) 24.

[402] Meadows, Sandra I. & Williams, Robert H. (1995,May.-Jun.). Movable Systems Shepherded Course of Defense Security.National Defense, 52.

[403] Mechanical Engineering. (1994, Apr.).Lawbreakers Beware the Web of Justice, 116, (4) 86.

[404] Memorandum of Agreement between the UnitedStates Army and United States Marine Corps for Non-Lethal WeaponsDevelopment, Test & Evaluation and Fielding. (1996).

[405] Merchant, Julie. (1994, Jul.). Threat Weapons andWeapons Technologies: Implications for Army SOF. Special Warfare,7, 32-39.

[406] Meselson, M. (1971, Mar.). Tear gas in Vietnam andthe return of poison gas. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists,27.

[407] Meyer-Arendt, Jurgen R. (1968, Mar.). Efficiencyand Limitations of Lasers as Weapons. American Journal of Optometry andArchives of American Academy of Optometry, 188-191.

[408] Meyer, Sgt. Greg. (1992, Aug.). Nonlethal Weaponsvs. Conventional Police Tactics: Assessing Injuries and Liabilities. ThePolice Chief, 59, (8) 10-17.

[409] Meyer, Greg. (1991). Nonlethal Weapons versusConventional Police Tactics. Thesis. Los Angeles, California:California State University, Los Angeles.

[410] Michigan State University, Vietnam Advisory Group(Saigon, Vietnam). (1959). Tear Gas Training Manual. Reports andDocuments, Ser. 2, No. 39. Saigon, East Lansing: Michigan StateUniversity.

[411] Miller, Craig. (1994, 1 Jul.). Poway Man Dies AfterHit With Spray. San Diego Times Advocate, B1.

[412] Miller, W.L. (1964, Nov.-Dec.). Smoke'em out!Ordnance, 64.

[413] Miller, W.L. (1964, Jul.). Chemicals vs.guerrillas. Marine Corps Gazette, 48.

[414] Mohr, USAF. Capt. George C., et al. (1965, Sep.).Effects of Low Frequency and Infrasonic Noise on Man. AerospaceMedicine, 36, (9) 817-824.

[415] Morehouse, Maj. David A. (1992). A New StrategicEra: A Case for Nonlethal Weapons. Thesis. Fort Leavenworth, Kansas:U.S. Army Command and General Staff College.

[416] Morgan, J.P. (1992, Aug.). Oleoresin Capsicum.The Police Chief, 59, 22-23.

[417] Morris, Chris & Janet. (1995, 13 Nov.). EndBattle Over Nonlethals: Congress Must Heed Call for Needed Weapons.Defense News, 40.

[418] Morris, Chris & Janet, & Baines, Thomas.(1995, Spring). Weapons of Mass Protection: Nonlethality, InformationWarfare, and Airpower in the Age of Chaos. Airpower Journal,9, (1) 15-29.

[419] Morris, Janet & Morris, Chris. (1990, 1994).Nonlethality: A Global Strategy. West Hyannis Port, Massachusetts:Morris & Morris.

[420] Morris, Chris & Morris, Janet. (1994).Nonlethality: An

Overview

. WestHyannis Port, Massachusetts: Morris & Morris.

[421] Morris, Chris & Morris, Janet. (1993).Nonlethality and Psyops. West Hyannis Port, Massachusetts: Morris& Morris.

[422] Morris, Janet & Morris, Chris. (1992).Creating an Office of Nonlethality: A New Paradigm for a New Era.Washington, District of Columbia: US Global Strategy Council.

[423] Morris, Janet., Krivorotov, Victor & Morris,Chris. (1992). The Age of Chaos. West Hyannis Port, Massachusetts:Morris & Morris.

[424] Morris, Janet & Morris, Chris. (1991).Nonlethality: Development of a National Policy and Employing NonlethalMeans in a New Strategic Era. Washington, District of Columbia: USGlobal Strategy Council.

[425] Morris, Janet. (1991, Sep.). Enter NonlethalWeaponry. IEEE Spectrum, 28, (9) 58.

[426] Morris, Janet & Morris, Chris. (1990).Toward a Nonlethal Strategy. West Hyannis Port, Massachusetts:Morris & Morris.

[427] Morrison, David C. (1995). More-Than-LethalWeapons. National Journal, 27, (29) 1919.

[428] Morrison, David C. (1994, Oct.). Crime-Fighting2001. Government Executive, 26, 42-44.

[429] Morrison, David C. (1994, 16 Apr.). Robocops.National Journal, 26, (16) 889-893.

[430] Morrison, David. (1992, 7 Nov.). War Without Death?National Journal, 24, (45) 2589.

[431] Morrison, David C. (1992, 6 Jun.). Alternatives toBashing. National Journal, 24, (23) 1358-1360.

[432] Morrison, David C. (1992, 28 Mar.). Bang! Bang!You've been inhibited. National Journal, 24, (13) 758-759.

[433] Morrison, David. (1989, May.). Tactical LaserWeapons. Lasers and Optics.

[434] Morrison, David C. (1987, 14 Mar.). Snow Jobs(emulsifying agents). National Journal, 19, (11) 651.

[435] Morrison, David C. (1987, 4 Mar.). When Eyes Becomethe Targets. National Journal, 19, (14) 822-823.

[436] Morrison, David C. (1985, May.). Laser Weapons ComeDown to Earth; Their Targets Electronic and Human Eyes. HighTechnology, 5, 69-70.

[437] Munro, N. & Opall, B. (1992, 19-25 Oct.).Military studies unusual arsenal. Defense News, 3.

[438] Munro, N. (1990, 5 Mar.). Army tests hand-heldlaser rifles. Defense News.

[439] National Institute of Justice. (1995, Sep.). NewTechnologies Demonstrated for Law Enforcement. Technology Beat, 1-5.

[440] National Institute of Justice, Office of Scienceand Technology. (1995, 18 Sep.). Matrix of Law Enforcement TechnologyRequirements, Studies, Evaluations & Standards (Draft).

[441] National Institute of Justice. (1995, 14 Jun.).CJ Management & Training Digest, 1 (11) 1-4. Focuses onNonlethal Weapons.

[442] National Institute of Justice. (1995, Jan.). NIJAwards in Fiscal Year 1994. NCJ 152109. Research in Brief.Washington, District of Columbia: U.S. Government Printing Office, 9, 11-13.

[443] National Institute of Justice. (1985, Sep.).Hand-Held Aerosol Tear Gas Weapons. Technology Assessment Program,NIJ

Standard 0110.00. Washington, District of Columbia: U.S.Government Printing Office.

[444] National Institute of Justice. (1985, Sep.).Barrier-Penetrating Tear Gas Munitions. Technology AssessmentProgram, NIJ Standard 0111.00. Washington, District of Columbia: U.S.Government Printing Office.

[445] Navy Times (1996, 5 Aug.). Nonlethals getofficial DoD nod. Marine Corps Edition., 24.

[446] Navy Times. (1995, 9 Oct.). Special Opspulls blind laser. Marine Corps Edition., 32.

[447] Navy Times. (1995, 27 Feb.). Corps hopes alittle goo goes a long way there. Marine Corps Edition., 3.

[448] Neild, R. & Robison, Perry J. (1970, 15 Feb.).Tear gas: a blunder. The Sunday Times.

[449] Neven, Thomas E. (1993, Dec.). Nonlethal Weapons:Expanding Our Options. Marine Corps Gazette, 77, (12) 61-62.

[450] New Scientist. (1973, 29 Mar.). Anti-crowdweapons work by causing fits 57, (839) 726.

[451] New Scientist. (1973, 20 Sep). 'Squawk box'technology. 59, (864) 667.

[452] New Scientist. (1973, 20 Sep). Army testsnew riot weapon. 59, (864) 684.

[453] Nicholson, Thomas Gerald. (1969). The Use ofChemical Mace by Army Military Policemen. Staff Study ASDIRS, 3079.Fort Leavenworth, Kansas: U.S. Army Command and General StaffCollege.

[454] Nollinger, Mark. (1995, Feb.). Surrender or We'llSlime You. Wired, 3, 90.

[455] Noorani, A.G. (1995). Landmines and Blinding LaserWeapons. Economic and Political Weekly, 30, (48).

[456] O'Connell, USAF. Capt. Edward P. & Dillaplain,USAF. 1stLt. John. (1994, Win.). Nonlethal Concepts: Implications for AirForce Intelligence. Airpower Journal, 7, (4) 26-33.

[457] Office of Assistant Secretary of Defense (PublicAffairs). (1995, 1 Sep.). DOD Announces Policy on Blinding Lasers.Washington, District of Columbia.

[458] Official Journal of the European Communities:Information and Notices. (1995). Blinding Laser Weapons, 38,(340) 39.

[459] Olmstead, Bob. (1975, 14 Sep.). For Crowd Control:A Stunning New Weapon. Chicago Sunday Sun-Times.

[460] Olson, Donald N. (1972, Aug.). A KineticallyNon-Hazardous Ring Airfoil Projectile for Delivering Riot ControlAgent. EATM 2200-6. Edgewood Arsenal, Maryland: U.S. Army MunitionsCommand.

[461] O'Malley, MPC. Maj. Dennis J.(1974, Win.). 'Less-Than-Lethal Firepower: A Possible Solution.MPLEJ, 16-17.

[462] Opall, Barbara. (1990, 5 Nov.). Labs Rush NonlethalArms for Mideast Deployment. Defense News, 1.

[463] Opall, Barbara. (1992, 17 Feb.). Pentagon ForgesStrategy on Non-Lethal Warfare. Defense News, 1, 50.

[464] Opall, Barbara. (1992, 2 Mar.). Pentagon UnitsJostle Over Non-Lethal Initiative. Defense News, 6.

[465] Opall, Barbara. (1994, 28 Mar.-3 Apr.). DoD toboost nonlethal options. Defense News, 46.

[466] Optics and Photonics News. (1995).Scatterings: Ethics of Laser Weapons Questioned, 6, (8), 6.

[467] Ordog, Gary J., Wasserberger, Jonathan &Schater, Theodore., et al. (1987). Electronic Gun (Taser©) Injuries.Annals of Emergency Medicine, 16, 73-78.

[468] Orion International Technologies, Inc. (1989).Precision Guided Weapons Countermeasures Test and Evaluation Directorate(OTD) Pamphlet 1-89.

[469] Page, J.A. (1969). Of 'Mace' and men: tort law as ameans of controlling domestic chemical warfare. The Georgetown LawReview.

[470] Panique, Jr. Chester H. (1995, May.). WhatMethods will California Use to Identify and Inform Technology Developers ofTheir Needs by the Year 2004? Command College Graduate Project, Class20, Center for Leadership Institute.

[471] Parks, W. Hays. (1988, Nov.). Memorandum of Law:The Use of Lasers as Antipersonnel Weapons, The Army Lawyer, 3.

[472] Parlor, USMCR. Michael B. (1991, 29 May.). Non-Lethal Weapons: A Policy Planning Paper.

[473] Patel, Tara. (1995, 23 Sep.). US Fights Ban onLaser Warfare. New Scientist, 147, 6.

[474] Peak, Ken. (1990, Feb.). The Quest for Alternativesto Lethal Force: A Heuristic View. Journal of Contemporary CriminalJustice, 6, (1) 8-22.

[475] Pengelley, Rupert. (1995, Jul.). Eyewash NoDefense: Lasers Still Cause Concern. International Defense Review,28, (7) 1.

[476] Pengelley, Rupert. (1994, Apr.). Wanted: a watch onnon-lethal weapons. International Defense Review, 27, (4) 1.

[477] Penneys, N.S. (1971, Jan.-Feb.). Contact dermatitisdue to chloroacetophenone. Federation Proceedings, 30.

[478] Penneys, N.S. et al. (1969, Aug.). Contactdermatitis due to o-chloroacetophenone and chemical mace. The NewEngland Journal of Medicine, 281.

[479] Peters, D.W.A. (1969, Oct.). Delivery of Anti-Riot Agents, Final Report No. 69-17. Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland:U.S. Army Limited War Laboratory.

[480] Pexton, Patrick. (1995, 17 Jul.). Shoot-- but notto kill: Major U.S. study pushes use of nonlethal weapons. NavyTimes, 32. Marine Corps Edition.

[481] Pilant, Lois. (1996, Mar.). Innovative Weaponry.The Police Chief, 63, (3) 36-42.

[482] Pilant, Lois. (1993, May.). Spotlight on...Selecting Nonlethal Weapons. The Police Chief, 60, (5) 45-55.

[483] Pine, A. (1993, 19 Dec.). Pentagon pushingnonlethal weapons. The Virginian-Pilot and the Ledger-Star, A1.First published in Los Angeles Times on 18 Dec.

[484] The Police Chief. (1988, Aug.). Models forManagement: Non-Lethal Electronic Restraint Weapons, 55, 79-80.

[485] The Police Chief. (1987, Sep.). A Less-Than-Lethal Alternative (Handler 12 Grip Action Baton). 54, 79.

[486] Pope, Canadian Forces. Maj. Stephen R. (1995,Jun.). Nonlethality and Peace Operations. Thesis. Fort Leavenworth,Kansas: U.S. Army Command and General Staff College.

[487] Porton. (1959, declassified 1968, Jun.). Agents forriot control: the selection of T. 792 (o-chlorobenzal malononitrile) as acandidate agent to replace CN. Porton Tech. Paper 651.

[488] Porton. (1959, declassified 1968, Jun.). A study ofthe toxicity of CS. Porton Tech. Paper 672.

[489] Potok, Mark. (1996, 20 May.). Wanted: Weapons thatdon't kill. USA Today, p. A3.

[490] Proceedings. (1966). Navy defends non-lethalwar gas, 92.

[491] Punte, C.L. & Owens, E.J. 1960, Feb.). Thephysiological effectiveness of CS in man with reference to aerosol particlesize. U.S. Army Chemical Warfare Laboratories Tech. Memo. CWL-TM-24-28.

[492] Purser, B.J. (n.d.). CR DecontaminationTrial. Program No. 23/71. Field Trial Report No. 27. Porton Down,Salsbury Wilts, England: Chemical Defense Establishment.

[493] Queen and Stander. (1941, Nov.). Allergicdermatitis following exposure to tear gas (chloracetophenone, CN). TheJournal of the American Medical Association, 117.

[494] Quimby, Freeman H. (1968, Jan.). The State ofTechnology in Nonlethal Guns. Washington, District of Columbia:Legislative Reference Service.

[495] Rapaport, Gary S. (1994, Feb.). Use of Deadly ForceAgainst Suspects with Aerosol Weapons: Some Preliminary Guidelines. Chief'sCouncil. The Police Chief, 10.

[496] Reinnagel, Richard E. (1968). Considerations inthe Use of Irritants in Law Enforcement. Buffalo, New York: WeaponsResearch Department, Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory, Inc.

[497] Rengstorff, R.H. (1969, Mar.). The effects of theriot control agent CS on visual activity. Military Medicine, 134.

[498] Richardson, Odie B. (1969). CS Munitions:Dispenser and Bagged Riot Control Agent, Helicopter, CS2, XM28: FinalReport. San Francisco, California: Department of the Army,

Army Concept Team in Vietnam. Project Number: ACG-83-86.7/61.

[499] Ricks, T.E. (1993, 5 Jan.). A kinder, gentler warmay be in order. Globe and Mail, 1. Toronto, Canada.

[500] Ricks, T.E. (1993, 4 Jan.). Nonlethal arms: newclass of weapons could incapacitate foe yet limit casualties. WallStreet Journal, 1.

[501] Ritsche, Daniel F. (1993). "Mace" andTear Gas Weapons. Wisconsin Briefs from the Legislative ReferenceBureau, Brief

93-3. Madison, Wisconsin: Legislative ReferenceBureau.

[502] Rivetti, Dominick J. (1987). What is the Futureof Less Than Lethal Weapons in Law Enforcement? Sacramento, California:State of California, Peace Officer Standards and Training.

[503] Roberts, Clifford. (1966). Nonlethal Agents inLimited War. Thesis. Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama: Air Commandand

Staff College.

[504] Rodwin, Robert. (1973, 27 Sep.). How dangerous isthe Army's squawk box? New Scientist, 59, (865) 730.

[505] Roos, John G. (1996, Jul.). Nowhere to Hide: High-Tech Counter-Sniper Systems Unmask Urban Terrorists. Armed ForcesJournal International, 123, (12) 18.

[506] Roos, John G. (1987, Dec.). Protecting Our Vitals:A Sticky Response to Terrorists. Armed Forces Journal International,124 (5) 32.

[507] Rose, S. & Smith, R. (1969, Sep.). CS- a casefor concern. The New Scientist.

[508] Rosenberg, Barbara Hatch. (1994, Sep.-Oct.)."Non-lethal" weapons may violate treaties. The Bulletin of theAtomic Scientists, 50, (5) 44-45.

[509] Rosenberg, Eric. (1995, 6 Mar.). Pentagon MemoSeeks To Better Explain Non-Lethal Weaponry. Defense Week,16, 5.

[510] Rosenhead, J. & Smith, P.J. (1971, 12 Aug.).Ulster Riot Control: A Warning. New Scientist, 374.

[511] Rosenhead, Jonathan. (1976, 16 Dec.). A new look atless 'less lethal' weapons. New Scientist, 672-674.

[512] Rothberg, S. (1970, Jul.). Skin sensitizationpotential of the riot control agents BBC, DM, CN and CS on guinea pigs.Military Medicine. Also published as Edgewood Arsenal TechnicalReport 4219.

[513] Rothstein, Linda. (1994, Mar.-Apr.). The"soft-kill" solution. Bulletin of Atomic Scientists,50, (2) 4-6.

[514] Rothstein, Linda. (1992, Jun.). More road blocks tochemical treaty? Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, 48, 7.

[515] Runions, Bradley. (1996, Jan.-Feb.). Less-LethalWeapons in Peace Operations: Broadening the Spectrum of Response.Peacekeeping and International Relations, 25, (1) 8-10.

[516] Sagalyn, Arnold & Coates, Joseph F. (1967, 17Sep.). Wanted: Weapons That Do Not Kill. New York Times Magazine.

[517] Samuels, D.W., Egner, D.O. & Campbell, D.(1969). Riot Control: Analysis and Catalog, Final Report, Report No. 69-14. Aberdeen Proving Ground: U.S. Army Land Warfare Laboratory,Research Analysis Branch.

[518] Sapolsky, Harvey M. (1995, Mar.). Non-LethalWarfare Technologies: Opportunities and Problems. Defense and ArmsControl Studies Program Working Paper. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Center forInternational Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

[519] The San Diego Union-Tribune. (1995, 13Oct.). Army told to scrap laser that can blind.

[520] The San Diego Union-Tribune. (1995, 21Sep.). Blinding laser shelved by U.S. Special Operations, A-12.

[521] Sapolsky, Harvey M. & Weiner, Sharon K. (1994,Oct.). War Without Casualties. Across the Board, 31, (9) 39-42.

[522] Saunders, Carol Silverman. (1995, Feb.). FutureFirearms. OMNI, 17, (5) 31.

[523] Savitz, D. (1966, Mar.). Gas and guerrillas-- Aword of caution. The New Republic.

[524] Scannell, Dr. Edward P. (1994, Dec.). NonlethalTechnologies Overview. Presentation Slides for Sixth Annual SO/LICSymposium and Exhibition, Washington, DC. Dec. 14-16, 1994. US ArmyResearch Laboratory, Weapons Technology Directorate. Adelphi, Maryland.

[525] Schmidt, Donald et al. (1994, 3 Mar.). Water-basedNon-stick Hydrophobic Coatings. Nature, 368, (6466), 39.

[526] Schmitt, Eric. (1995, 15 Feb.). Now, to the Shoresof Somalia With Beanbag Guns and Goo. The New York TimesInternational, A10.

[527] Scott, R. (1994). Offboard CountermeasuresTechnology Part 1: Soft Kill Payloads Get Smarter. Naval Forces,15, (4) 16.

[528] Scott, William B. (1995, 16 Oct.). Panel's reportbacks nonlethal weapons. Aviation Week & Space Technology,143, (16) 50-51.

[529] Security Planning Corporation. (1972, Mar.).Non-Lethal Weapons for Law Enforcement: Research Needs andPriorities. A Report to National Science Foundation, PB 209 635.Washington, District of Columbia.

[530] Senior Advisory Group for Low-Collateral, Less-Than-Lethal Weapons. (1994, May.). Columbus, Ohio: RACIC BattelleMemorial Institute.

[531] Serwer, Andrew E. (1994, 4 Apr.). Crime StoppersMake a Killing. Fortune, 129, (7) 109-111.

[532] Shallice, T. (1973). The Ulster depth interrogationtechniques and their relation to sensory deprivation research.Cognition, 1, 385-405.

[533] Shank, Ellsworth B. et al. (1974, Jun.). AComparison of Various Less Lethal Projectiles. Technical Report No. 74-79. Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland: US Army Land Warfare Laboratory.

[534] Shannon, James O. (1996, 10 May.). A Report ofthe Nonlethal (NLW) Coordination Project. Conducted by Los AlamosNational Laboratory at the United States Atlantic Command under theauspices of the Joint Program Office for Special TechnologyCountermeasures.

[535] Shorto, Russel. (1995, Mar.). Armageddon: killingthem softly. Gentlemen's Quarterly, 65, 152.

[536] Silverstone, A. (1970, Dec.). Lethal use of non-lethal weapons. Paper submitted at the International Meeting ofScientists on Chemical Warfare in Vietnam, Orsay.

[537] Smith, Senator Bob. (1996, Jun.). AppropriateResponse: Nontraditional Missions Demand Less-Than-Lethal Weapons. ArmedForces Journal International, 133, (11), 55.

[538] Smith & Wesson Chemical Company. (1965).Police Riot Control Training Manual. Rock Creek, Ohio.

[539] Sprang, W.O. (1965, Nov.). NonlethalIncapacitating Weapon: Extensible Billy Club. Technical Paper No. RAC-TP-194 submitted to Advanced Research Projects Agency, Washington D.C.McLean Virginia: Research Analysis Report.

[540] Stanton, USA. LtCol. Martin N. (1996, Nov.).Nonlethal Weapons: Can of Worms. U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings,122, (11) 58-60.

[541] Stanton, USA. LtCol. Martin N. (1996, Jan.). WhatPrice Sticky Foam? U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings, 122, (1)58-60. Reprinted in (1996, Aut.) Parameters, 26, (3) 63-68.

[542] Starr, Barbara. (1996, 6 Mar.). USA defines policyon non-lethal weapons. Jane's Defence Weekly.

[543] Starr, Barbara. (1994, 31 Oct.). USA tries to makewar less lethal. Jane's Defence Weekly, 10.

[544] Starr, Barbara. (1994, Jul.). Pentagon Maps Non-Lethal Options. International Defense Review, 27, (7) 30, 32.

[545] Starr, Barbara. (1994, 30 Apr.). USA studies non-lethal weapon priorities. Jane's Defence Weekly, 14.

[546] Starr, Barbara. (1993, Apr.). Non-lethal weaponpuzzle for US Army. International Defense Review, 26, (4)319-320.

[547] Steadman, Nick. (1996, May.). Nonlethal Weaponry.S.W.A.T., 60.

[548] Steele, David. (1995, Mar.). Guns for Raids andRiot Control. Gun World, 35, (8).

[549] Stefanye, David. (1971, 2 Nov.). Less LethalWeapons for the Civil Disturbance Control Mission. Washington, Districtof Columbia: U.S. Army Materiel Command.

[550] Stiner, Carl et al. (1994, May.). Report of theSenior Working Group on Military Operations Other Than War(OOTW).

Contract No. MDA972-93-C-0016. Advanced Research ProjectsAgency.

[551] Stolfi, R.H. et al. (1973, Mar.). Gradient andLess Lethal Devices in Control of Urban Violence. Report No. 1635.Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland: U.S. Ballistic Research Laboratories.

[552] Stratbucker, Robert A. (1989, 4 Aug.).Evaluation of the Ultron II Electronic Stun Device. Unpublished.University of Nebraska Medical Center.

[553] Striker, G.E. et al. (1967, Jan.). A clinico-pathologic study of the effects of riot control agents on monkeys: IV CSgrenade. Edgewood Arsenal, MD: Edgewood Arsenal Technical Report. 4071AD 808732.

[554] Stuck, Monte. (1972). Future U.S. Use of Non-Lethal Chemical Agents in Warfare. Staff Study. Norfolk, Virginia:Armed Forces Staff College.

[555] Sunday Telegraph Reporter. (1973, 6 Oct.).New riot gas condemned (CR).

[556] Sweetman, Sherri. (1987, Mar.). Report on theAttorney General's Conference on Less Than Lethal Weapons. NationalInstitute of Justice. Washington, District of Columbia: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office.

[557] Swett, Charles. (1995, Jan.). Nonlethal weaponssection. Review Essay: War and Anti-War. Special Warfare, 8,(1) 29.

[558] Swett, Charles F. (1994, 28 Nov.). Draft Non-Lethal Weapons Policy. Briefing Slides. Office of the AssistantSecretary of Defense, Special Operations/Low Intensity Conflict, PolicyPlanning. Washington, District of Columbia.

[559] Swett, Charles F. (1994, 21 Jul.). Draft Policyfor Non-Lethal Weapons. Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense,Special Operations/Low Intensity Conflict, Policy Planning. Washington,District of Columbia.

[560] Swett, Charles F. (1993, 9 Nov.). StrategicAssessment: Non-Lethal Weapons. Office of the Assistant Secretary ofDefense, Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict, Policy Planning.Washington, District of Columbia. Draft report.

[561] Tactical Technologies. (1995, 3 Feb.). Non-Lethal Weapons Offer New SO/LIC Capabilities, 5.

[562] Tapscott, Mark & Atwal, Kay. (1993, Feb.). Newweapons that win without killing on DOD's horizon; policy strife inPentagon may slow work on devices that could give the president moreoptions in a crisis. Defense Electronics, 25, (2) 41-46.

[563] Tapscott, M. (1993, Apr.). The non-lethal weaponsbattle. Defence, 37.

[564] Tapscott, Mark. (1993, Dec.). Reno Asks Aspin forNon-Lethal, Other DOD Weapons to Fight Crime. Defense Electronics,25, 8.

[565] Tatum, Chris. (1995, Mar.). Defensive Weapons Do'sand Don'ts. Security Management, 26-31.

[566] Technology Beat. (1995, Sep.). NewTechnologies Demonstrated for Law Enforcement, 2-4.

[567] Technology Review. (1995, Jan.). Trends,98, (1) 14.

[568] Tengroth, Bjorn M. (1993, Sep.). Laser WeaponsDesigned to Produce Blindness. Editorial. American Journal ofOphthalmology, 116, (3) 370.

[569] Tennenbaum, Abraham N. & Moore, Angela M.(1993, Sep.-Oct.). Non-Lethal Weapons: Alternatives to Deadly Force. TheFuturist, 27, (5) 20-23.

[570] The, Liang. (1995, Aug.). Getting the Act Together:Hardkill-Softkill Co-Ordination for Littoral Waters. InternationalDefense Review, 28, (8) 54-56.

[571] Thein, B.K. et al. (1976, Jan.). WeaponPerformance Testing and Analysis: The Modi-Pac Round, the No. 4 Lead-ShotRound, and the Flying Baton. Technical Memorandum 4-76. AberdeenProving Ground, Maryland: U.S. Army Human Engineering Laboratory.

[572] Thein, B.K., Shank, E.B. & Wargovich, M.J.(1974, May). Analysis of a Bean-Bag-Type Projectile as a Less LethalWeapon. Draft Report. Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland: U.S. ArmyLand Warfare Laboratory.

[573] Thomas, Bob & Means, Randy. (1990, Jul.).Objective Reasonableness Standard for Use of Non Deadly ForceEstablished. The Police Chief, 45.

[574] Thorpe, Terry. (1990, Mar.). Clearing the Way toDistraction Devices. Law Enforcement Technology, 16.

[575] Tigner, Brooks. (1996, 29 Apr.). Alliance StudyUrges Nations to Collaborate on Weapons (non-lethals), 11, (17) 12.

[576] Tigner, Brooks. (1994, 11-17 Jul.). NATO EyesPeacekeeping Tools. Defense News, 9, 4.

[577] Tillman, A.C. (1994, Jan.). Weapons for the 21stcentury soldier. International Defense Review, 27, (1) 37-38.

[578] Time. (1989, Jan.). Nonlethal bullets thatkill (rubber-clad metal balls used by Israelis to quell Palestinianuprising), 133, 33.

[579] Trebor Corporation International. (n.d.) Stun-Gun Preliminary Terminal Effects Study. Dublin, California.

[580] Trostle, L.C. (1990). The force continuum: Fromlethal to less-than-lethal force. Journal of Contemporary CriminalJustice, 6, (1) 23-36.

[581] Truong, Khong Q. (1985, Sep.). Evaluation of theMS Disperser as a Dissemination Device for Thickened Liquid Chemical AgentStimulant. CRDC-TC 84076. Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland: U.S. ArmyArmament, Munitions and Chemical Command, Chemical Research and DevelopmentCenter.

[582] USA Today. (1995, Apr.). New High-Tech ToolsAid Police, 123, 14-15.

[583] United States Army. (1996, Aug.). FM 311, RiotControl Agents, Herbicide Operations. Washington, District of Columbia:U.S. Government Printing Office.

[584] United States Army. (1990, 12 Dec). FM 3-9,Military Chemical Compounds and Their Properties. Washington, Districtof Columbia: U.S. Government Printing Office.

[585] United States Army. (1985, Nov.). FM 19-15,Civil Disturbance. Washington, District of Columbia: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office.

[586] US Army ARDEC. (1995, 2 Jun.). Grenade StunNonlethal Weapon XM84. Issue No. PSA-1359. Commerce Business Daily,3.

[587] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (1982). ArmyEquipment Data Sheets: Chemical Weapons and Munitions. TechnicalManual; TM 43-0001-26-2. Washington, District of Columbia: Headquarters,Department of the Army.

[588] U.S. Air Force Armament Laboratory. (1967). CBU-30/A Incapacitating Munitions Systems. AFATL-TR-67-178.

[589] U.S. Air Force Armament Laboratory. (1966).Design and Development of an Incapacitating Disseminator. ATL-TR-66-40.

[590] U.S. Air Force Tactical Air Command. (1969). ROCfor Non-Lethal Area Denial System. TAC-ROC-45-69. Langley Air ForceBase, Virginia.

[591] U.S. Army Engineering Laboratory (HEL). (1981, 7-9Dec. & 1982, 12-15 Jan.). An Acoustical Assessment of the ImpulseNoise of Grenade Simulators Exploding in Enclosures. Aberdeen,Maryland: Aberdeen Proving Grounds.

[592] U.S. Army Foreign Science and Technology Center.(1990). Incapacitating Agents, European Communist Countries. AST-162OR-100-90. Charlottesville, Maryland.

[593] U.S. Army Laboratory Command. (1988, Mar.).Warfighting with Emerging Technologies: Report on the Tech Base WarGames. Waterways Experiment Station.

[594] U.S. Army Research, Development, and EngineeringCenter. (1992, 23 Sep.). Low Collateral Damage Munitions (LCDM)Programs. Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey.

[595] U.S. Army Research Laboratory. (1993). Less-than-Lethal Weapons Development for Law Enforcement. ARL-TR-51.Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland.

[596] U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC).(1992, 4 Sep.). Operations Concept for Disabling Measures. Pamphlet525-XX, Draft.

[597] U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Foreign Affairs.Subcommittee on National Security Policy and Scientific Developments.(1970). Chemical-biological warfare: U.S. policies and internationaleffects report with an appended study on the use of tear gas inwar:...pursuant to House Resolution 143. Washington: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office.

[598] U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on ForeignRelations. Subcommittee on Oceans and International Environment. (1972, 26-27 Jul.). Prohibiting military weather modification. 92nd. Cong.,2nd Sess.

[599] U.S. Department of the Army. (1969, 9 Apr.).Employment of riot control agents, flame, smoke, antiplant agents, andpersonnel detectors in counterguerrilla operations. Training Circular3-16.

[600] U.S. Government Printing Office. An Actto Authorize the Export-Import Bank of the United States to ProvideFinancing for the Export of Nonlethal Defense Articles and Defense Servicesthe Primary End Use of Which Will Be for Civilian Purposes. (1995).Washington, District of Columbia.

[601] U.S. Special Operations Command & AdvancedResearch Projects Agency. (1995, 29 Dec.). Survey of Limited EffectsWeapons, Munitions, and Devices. 2nd Edition. MacDill Air Force Base,Florida.

[602] U.S. News & World Report. (1992, 28Sep.). A guide to self-defense devices, 88.

[603] Vasishtha, Ph.D., Niraj & Bera, Cristin S.(1995, 10 Jul.). Marking and Incapacitating a Fleeing Target (MIFT)using Non-Lethal Encapsulated Compounds, Volume I: Technical Proposal.Prepared for ARPA/ASTO, Southwest Research Institute.

[604] Wade, Nicholas. (1972, 9 Jun.). Technology inUlster: Rubber Bullets Hit Home, Brainwashing Backfires. Science,176, 1102-1106.

[605] Walker, Sam. (1994, 6 Sep.). 'Nonlethal' Weapons,James Bond Style. The Christian Science Monitor, 12.

[606] Wall Street Journal. (1994, 2 Aug.).Nonlethal Weapons: Freeze., or I'll Fire My Sticky-Goo Gun, 1.

[607] Wall Street Journal. (1993, 4 Jan.). NewClass of Weapons Could Incapacitate Foe Yet Limit Casualties, 1.

[608] Walsh, Don. (1985). The Ring Airfoil Grenade: AMiracle Munition The Army Ignores. Gung-Ho/Special Weapons, 20-25.

[609] Warden III, USAF. Col. John. (1994, Dec.). NonLethal Concepts of Operation. Presented at Sixth Annual SO/LIC-CDSymposium and Exhibition, Washington, District of Columbia. Draft.

[610] Wargovich et al. (1975, Sep.). Evaluation of thePhysiological Effects of a Rubber Bullet, a Baseball, and a FlyingBaton. Technical Memorandum 24-75. Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland:U.S. Army Human Engineering Laboratory.

[611] Washington Post. (1994, 23 Mar.). Pentagon,Justice Dept. Set Plans for Sharing of Nonlethal Technology, A3.

[612] Weapons Systems Concept Office, Development andEngineering Directorate. (1975, Oct.). Soft/Sting Ring Airfoil GrenadeCivil Disturbance Control System; Concise Summary Description. AberdeenProving Ground, Maryland.

[613] Weapons Systems Concept Office, Development andEngineering Directorate. (1975, Apr.). Development Plan for Soft RingAirfoil Munitions System--Revision C. Aberdeen Proving Ground,Maryland.

[614] Weigand, D.A. (1969). Cutaneous reaction to theriot control agent CS. Military Medicine, 134.

[615] Weiner, J.T. et al. (1960). A study of the acuteand subacute toxicity of aerosols of CS in small laboratory animals.Edgewood Arsenal, MD: Edgewood Arsenal Chemical Warfare Laboratory.2360.

[616] Weiner, Malcolm H. and Boyd, David. (1996, Sum.).Forum: Nonlethal Weapons. Issues in Science and Technology, 12, (4)12-13.

[617] Weiner, Malcolm H., chairman. (1995). NonlethalTechnologies: Military Options and Implications. Report of anIndependent Task Force. New York, New York: Council on Foreign Relations.

[618] Weinschenk, A. (1993, 24 Nov.). Non-lethal weaponsgroup set to form in March. Defense Weekly, 14, (46) 1.

[619] Weinschenk, A. (1993, 16 Feb.). Boosters again arepushing for "Office of Non-Lethality." Defense Weekly,2.

[620] Weiss, D.R., Brandt, D.J. & Tweet, K.D. (n.d.).Smart Gun Technology Requirements Preliminary Report. Contract IAA-94-IJ-R-021. Albuquerque, New Mexico: Sandia National Laboratories.

[621] Westbrook, E.E. & Williams, L.W. (1971, 30Apr.). A Brief Survey of Nonlethal Weapons. Report No. RACIC-TR-66,sponsored by ARPA Order No. 1509. Columbus, Ohio: RACIC Battelle MemorialInstitute.

[622] Westing, Arthur W. (1990, Feb.). Use of ChemicalWeapons Illegal? Letter to the Editor. Military Review, 70,(2) 82-83.

[623] Williams, Robert H. (1993, Oct.). Non-LethalDevices Slice Across Science Spectrum. National Defense, 78,(491) 25.

[624] Wilsnack, Richard W. et al. (1971, Mar.)Comprehensive Law and Order Assistance Research and Development(CLOARAD) Program, Technical Report No. 71-04. Aberdeen Proving Ground,Maryland: U.S. Army Land Warfare Laboratory.

[625] Witten, Benjamin. (1965). Non-Lethal Agents forDenial of Terrain in Limited Warfare Situations. Edgewood Arsenal,Maryland: U.S. Army Edgewood Arsenal, Chemical Research and DevelopmentLaboratories.

[626] Wolfowitz, Paul. (1991, 10 Mar.). Do We Need a NonLethal Defense Initiative? Memorandum to the Secretary of Defense.USD(P).

[627] Wright, Robin. (1995, 6 Sep.). Iraqis Admit toBroad, Virulent Germ War Plan. Los Angeles Times, A1, A11.

[628] York, Ken C, Gourley, Scott, & Arsentein, Seth.(1993, 3 Feb.). Non-Lethal Weapons Offer New SO/LIC Capabilities.Tactical Technology, 1-5.

[629] Yost, James Michael. (1993). Non-Lethal Weapons:A Study of Effectiveness in Reducing Injuries and Brutality Complaints.Thesis. Virginia Commonwealth University.

[630] Zaloga, S. (1990, May.). Soviets close to deployingbattlefield beam weapons. Armed Forces JournalInternational.

[631] Zekri, A.M.B. et al. (1995, Dec.). Acute Mass BurnsCaused By O-Chlorobenzylidene Malononitrile (CS) Tear Gas. Burns,21, (8) 586-589.

IV. Addendum

[632] Aviation Week & Space Technology. (1994,24 Jan.). NATO's Peek: Nonlethal Weapons. 140, (4) 33.

[633] Bunker, Robert J. (1996, Spr.). Generations, Wavesand Epochs: Modes of Warfare and the RPMA. Airpower Journal,10 23-25.

[634] Bunker, Robert J. (1996, Sum.). Ricochets andReplies: RPMA Update. Airpower Journal, 10 3, 117.

[635] Bunker, Robert J. (1997). Grenades, launched,Allied and DRV, Spencer C. Tucker, ed. The Vietnam War: AnEncyclopedia. New York, New York: Garland Publishing.

[636] Cooper, Pat. (1995, 20-26 Mar.). Naval Research LabAttempts to Meld Neurons and Chips: Studies May Produce Army of 'Zombies.'Defense News, 10, 1, 50.

[637] Hay, Jr. John H. (1974). Tactical and MaterielInnovations. Washington, District of Columbia: U.S. Government PrintingOffice.

[638] Linder, US Army. Maj. James B. (1996, Sept.-Oct.).A Case for Employing Nonlethal Weapons. Military Review, 76,(5) 25-29.

[639] Marine Corps Combat Development Command. (1996, 20-21 Aug.). Proceedings of the Non-Lethal Modeling and SimulationWorkshop. Hosted by Non Lethal Weapons Program & Non LethalCoordination Cell. Quantico, Virginia.

[640] Metz, Steven & Kievit, James. (1995, 27 Jun.).Strategy and the Revolution in Military Affairs. Carlisle Barracks,Pennsylvania: U.S. Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute.

[641] Office of the Judge Advocate General. (1995, 6Feb.). Legal Review of Barrier Foam. Alexandria, Virginia:Department of the Navy.

[642] Rauss, Patrick J. et al. (1996, 23-25 Jul.). FERET(Face-Recognition Technology) Recognition Algorithms in Proceedings ofthe Fifth Automatic Target Recognizer System and Technology Symposium.Sponsored by the Automatic Target Recognizer Working Group.

[643] Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition andTechnology. (1996, 22 Mar.). Nonlethal Weapons (NLW) ProgramImplementation. Memo.

[644] U.S. Department of Justice. (1996, Oct.). High-Speed Pursuit: New Technologies Around the Corner. National LawEnforcement and Corrections Technology Center Bulletin, 1-6.

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY

Lieutenant General Tad J. Oelstrom

Superintendent

Brigadier General Ruben A. Cubero

Dean of the Faculty

HEADQUARTERS, US AIR FORCE

DIRECTORATE OF NUCLEAR AND COUNTERPROLIFERATION

Major General Thomas H. Neary

Director

Colonel Thomas D. Miller

Chief, Policy Division

USAF INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY STUDIES

Lieutenant Colonel Peter L. Hays

Director

Lieutenant Colonel Jeffrey A. Larsen

Editor

Major Vincent J. Jodoin

Editor

Ms Marsha Taylor

Cover Design

INSS OCCASIONAL PAPERS

1. Explaining Weapons Proliferation: Going Beyond theSecurity Dilemma. Gregory J. Rattray, July1994

2. The Ukrainian Military: Instrument for Defense orDomestic Challenge? Oleg Strekal, November1994

3. North Korea's Nuclear Program: The ClintonAdministration's Response. William E. Berry, Jr.,March 1995

4. Environmental Assistance as National Security Policy:Helping the Former Soviet Union Find Solutions to its EnvironmentalProblems. Robert L. Dunaway, November 1995

5. Economic Power in the Sino-U.S. Relationship. Kevin F. Donovan, December 1995

6. Nuclear Proliferation: Diminishing Threat? William H. Kincade, December 1995

7. Nuclear Proliferation: The Diplomatic Role of Non-Weaponized Programs. Rosalind R. Reynolds, January1996

8. Five Minutes Past Midnight: The Clear and PresentDanger of Nuclear Weapons Grade Fissile Materials. Guy B. Roberts, February 1996

9. The International Legal Implications of InformationWarfare. Richard W. Aldrich, April 1996

10. Weapons Proliferation and Organized Crime: TheRussian Military and Security Force Dimension. Graham H. Turbiville, Jr., June 1996

11. Melancholy Reunion: A Report from the Future on theCollapse of Civil-Military Relations in the United States. Charles J. Dunlap, Jr., October 1996

12. Russia's Crumbling Tactical Nuclear Weapons Complex:An Opportunity for Arms Control. Stephen P. Lambertand David A. Miller, April 1997

13. Political-Military Affairs Officers and the Air Force:Continued Turbulence in a Vital Career Specialty. James E. Kinzer and Marybeth Peterson Ulrich, April 1997

14. Environmental Federalism and U.S. MilitaryInstallations: A Framework for Compliance. James M.Smith, June 1997

Home