laura@haddock.UUCP (10/22/87)
What will a police station/police fortress be like in the 2030's?
I am in the process of writing Yet Another Great American
Cyberpunk Novel (or at any rate a novel with touches of cyber
in it; not too much punk; but the world is Gibson-esque), and
knowing what fertile minds netters have, and knowing how easy
it would be for me to miss the obvious and leave out the
inevitable, I thought I'd ask for some ideas.
The world the story is set in is darker than this one, but not
thoroughly hostile yet. Society is affluent enough that computers
are all-pervasive, and most learning and working is done while
jacked in. Organ theft is the major crime, along with the usual
mugging, murder, robbery, etc., not to mention electronic crime.
What changes will have taken place to allow the police to deal
with crime fifty or sixty years from now? What will the police
be like?
It's a very minor part of the story, but I'd like to get it right.
Any ideas you have, send them along. (And if I ever get published
you can have your name in print in the acknowledgements if you want).
Thanks in advance.
--
Yet another missive from
The writer in the closet
{harvard | think}!ima!haddock!laura
"Think of it as evolution in action." -- Oath of Fealtystadler@apple.UUCP (10/23/87)
In article <1463@haddock.ISC.COM> laura@haddock.isc.com writes: > > >What will a police station/police fortress be like in the 2030's? > Simple. ------ ROBOCOP!!!!! --Andy Stadler "Anything you'd like to say to the kids of America, Mr. Robocop?" "Be good. Stay out of trouble."
masticol@paul.rutgers.edu.UUCP (10/23/87)
In article <1463@haddock.ISC.COM> laura@haddock.ISC.COM (The writer in the closet) writes: > What will a police station/police fortress be like in the 2030's? Likely prepared for a small-scale war, but operating under an uneasy truce with the major vendors of organized crime. Murder-for-organs will be acceptable to the police, as long as it doesn't happen in the wrong place or to the wrong person. The police may be financed through a protection scheme. (Pay up or fight 'em yourself.) Police and the big organized crime syndicates will co-ordinate to eliminate the small guys. In this way, a semblance of order is maintained for those who can afford it. The baddies may have anything up to fission bombs and (genetic-engineered) viruses, and the police will realize this and act accordingly. There will be a perpetual game of "push-me-shove-you" between police and the crime syndicates. Smart bullets and lasers will replace "dumb" handguns as weapons. Cops will augment their own senses with cybernetic devices, which the crooks will also have. The ability to interface electronics to the brain implies that machine-assisted telepathic (MAT) communication will be possible. The police will use this to communicate with each other and to extract information from unwilling informants. (The latter practice will be _highly_ illegal, but its victims will be ordered to forget it ever took place.) Police may work under direct interface to an "intelligence augmentation system." The cops will likely be very suspicious of AIs in their heads, and will not accept MAT communication with them. > The world the story is set in is darker than this one, but not > thoroughly hostile yet. Society is affluent enough that computers > are all-pervasive, and most learning and working is done while > jacked in. Then it's likely the police will work while jacked in, or will at least make extensive use of softs while on the job. The cops will have to have some people who can catch the cowboys, i.e., their own cowboys. If they're lucky enough to get people skilled in that sort of thing who want to do police work, great. Otherwise, they will have to bribe or blackmail (possibly in the same way Case was blackmailed) illegals to do police work, a very dangerous proposition (since they'd be letting criminals into their own system!) Either type of cyber-lawman would be a high-profile target for the bad guys. > Organ theft is the major crime, along with the usual > mugging, murder, robbery, etc., not to mention electronic crime. So they'll have to get some geneticists, too, to trace stolen organs, or have gadgets that can be used for this purpose. (DNA type matching.) Other than this, I'd think police action against organlegging would resemble action against the present related crimes (murder-for-hire, fencing, medicine-w/o-license, etc.) Tests for bootleg organs will be required along with by-then routine mandatory testing for drugs and disease. Citizens may be required to carry embedded chips identifying them and all organs they have (legally) had transplanted. Forging these chips (and altering databases to correspond) will be a lucrative sideline for the bad guys. By the way, here's an additional new type of crime (akin to cyanide in the Tylenol, or mabye subliminal advertising): suppose someone starts putting viruses in the softs that allow hypnotic control of the affected party? Even if the softs can't control the user, they may cause the person using the softs to act on advice harmful to the user or beneficial to the criminal. (Personally, I would be hard put to trust _anything_ that gets plugged into my brain.) Good luck on your novel - I hope this stuff isn't _too_ sinister for your purposes. ...-.- Steve
wenn@FRODO.GANDALF.CS.CMU.EDU.UUCP (10/24/87)
Although it isn't really cyberpunk (it isn't hi-tech enough nor gritty enough), one good book that speculates about mid-21st century police work is "The Doppleganger Gambit" by Lee Killough. It is really a police procedural novel set in the near future, but the setting is very well realised. For example, the police are called LEO's (Law Enforcement Officers), and the implications of this permiate the novel nicely [Member of a street gang to a female leo: "Here pussy, pussy, pussy"]. Recommended both for the bakcground and as a novel, /111 ifyoupushsomethinghardenoughitwillfallover-ly
ae4@psuvm.bitnet.UUCP (10/27/87)
In article: <1824@trex.rutgers.edu> masticol@trex.rutgers.edu (Stephen P. Masticola) writes: >The baddies may have anything up to fission bombs and >(genetic-engineered) viruses, and the police will realize this and act >accordingly. There will be a perpetual game of "push-me-shove-you" >between police and the crime syndicates. It's a nice thought, but I hardly think so. For one thing, setting off a tacnuke in your own city is _stupid_ - fallout and excessive carnage are bad for business, and you're likely to scare the civilian government doing something rash, like declaring martial law. Furthermore, you are going to have to operate in the neighborhood afterwards, and having to wear radiation/biowarfare armor wherever you go would be a genuine nuisance. What might be more likely would be for the evil slime to develop highly trained heavily-armed fast-strike squads. These would be made up of special- ists, deploying heavy firepower, but able to be highly selective in their targets (picture a vulcan autocannon blasting out a drug lab from the back of a passing truck. Or a sniper taking out a limo with a rocket launcher, as in Gibson's _Count_Zero_.) In short, the Mafia would go paramilitary, but would act like a surgeon, only cutting out the portions of the neighborhood which are bothering them, but trying to leave the rest of the city unharmed. >Smart bullets and lasers will replace "dumb" handguns as weapons. "Smart Bullets"? I might accept something the length of, say, a crossbow bolt having some sort of target-seeking capibility, and yes, I did see the movie "Runaway", but I canna' change the laws of physics, and I just don't see fitting all that circuitry, control jets and fuel inside of anything smaller than that. The level of weaponry of the cops would, of course, vary as you go from the doughnut patrol to the state police, but some things you'd be sure to see include: uzi- style assault rifles (already standard in Europe), with laser sights, would replace riot shotguns (equally effective, more selective) Body armor for all officers, possibly reinforced with composite plates to stop _really_ nasty ammunition All ammunition would use caseless cartridges (solid propellant stuck on the back of the bullet instead of powder in a shell) Laser guns only on large vehicles (they use up too much power!) S.W.A.T. teams going whole hog, becoming army units for all intents and purposes. Increased use of helicopters, possibly going over to VTOL aircraft, both to move units around in emergencies, and maybe replacing the patrol car. Anti-terrorist techniques would also improve: in a hostage situation, fast-acting anesthetic gas would be shot into the room: before the thug can do anything, they are waking up in jail. Hey, good luck with this stuff, whoever. Jon Acheson "Reality is that which hurts when you trip over it" Thag
norman@husc4.UUCP (10/28/87)
In article <1463@haddock.ISC.COM> laura@haddock.isc.com (The writer in the closet) writes: > > >What will a police station/police fortress be like in the 2030's? > No matter what the technical capabilities of the future police, it seems to me that you should consider the changes in the institutional structure of the police "department." It seems doubtful to me that the future police will be under the control of any monolithic governmental control; rather, there will be multiple independent police departments, each specializing in a different service which the government will contract with. There will be much policing of the police; the "crooks" will be able to purchase the power of the police, etc. What did Dickens say? They do the police in different voices? John Norman Department of English and American Literature and Language Warren House Box D-12 Harvard University Cambridge, MA 02138 617/495-2533 (Official business ONLY) UUCP: harvard!husc4!norman Internet: norman@hulaw1.HARVARD.EDU BITNET: NORMAN@HULAW1
masticol@paul.rutgers.edu.UUCP (10/30/87)
In article <23473AE4@PSUVMA> AE4@PSUVMA.BITNET (Jon Acheson) writes: > >The baddies may have anything up to fission bombs and > >(genetic-engineered) viruses, and the police will realize this and act > >accordingly. > It's a nice thought, but I hardly think so. For one thing, setting > off a tacnuke in your own city is _stupid_ - fallout and excessive carnage > are bad for business, and you're likely to scare the civilian government > doing something rash, like declaring martial law. Furthermore, you are > going to have to operate in the neighborhood afterwards, and having to wear > radiation/biowarfare armor wherever you go would be a genuine nuisance. So who said anything about setting it off in your own city? Ever read _Friday_? In that scenario, big corporations ran the world, and if you burned someone, one of your cities was next. Include organized crime as a nonlegal corporate entity, and the same policy would apply. However, just to prove that posession of atom bombs for use on one's own city does make some kind of perverse sense, consider the following: Then as now, setting off an atom bomb in your own city or planet is a terrorist tactic of last resort, to be used only if your mob is threatened with extinction. Having this sort of counterthreat around is a workable way to keep from being threatened with extinction. (If you decide to kill me, I'll make sure you and everyone you ever met are dead too.) The problem is it can backfire, and once you use it, you're committed, so you'd better have someplace else to go. > What might be more likely would be for the evil slime to develop highly > trained heavily-armed fast-strike squads. These would be made up of special- > ists, deploying heavy firepower, but able to be highly selective in their > targets (picture a vulcan autocannon blasting out a drug lab from the back of a > passing truck. Or a sniper taking out a limo with a rocket launcher, as in > Gibson's _Count_Zero_.) In short, the Mafia would go paramilitary, but would > act like a surgeon, only cutting out the portions of the neighborhood which > are bothering them, but trying to leave the rest of the city unharmed. Vulcan cannon and rocket launchers are available right now from your friendly neighborhood gunrunner. My guess is that the mob (I do _not_ specify which mob) is not using such toys because it has no need for them. As far as elite mob troops, it's pretty hard to keep any kind of discipline inside a criminal organization. Maybe they'd hire mercenaries when they needed to go up against hardened targets. One other point: the mob knows the value of soft-kill techniques better than our military does. When they want to take something over, they get inside and corrupt it. Then they own a going concern rather than a gutted shell. Extreme violence is a negative-sum game, and the mob, like business, plays to win. (Most of the time, anyway - feuds can get in the way of good sense.) > >Smart bullets and lasers will replace "dumb" handguns as weapons. > > "Smart Bullets"? I might accept something the length of, say, a crossbow > bolt having some sort of target-seeking capibility, and yes, I did see the > movie "Runaway", but I canna' change the laws of physics, and I just don't > see fitting all that circuitry, control jets and fuel inside of anything > smaller than that. And you can't make a computer that'll run more than a few hours, because of the mean lifetime of the tubes. Technology advances sometimes. Personally, I think that noninvasive interfacing of electronics to the brain assumes a lot more than a steerable, guided bullet does.
davidsen@steinmetz.UUCP (10/30/87)
In article <23473AE4@PSUVMA> AE4@PSUVMA.BITNET (Jon Acheson) writes: [ much previous discussion ] |smaller than that. The level of weaponry of the cops would, of course, |vary as you go from the doughnut patrol to the state police, but some things |you'd be sure to see include: | uzi- style assault rifles (already standard in Europe), with laser |sights, would replace riot shotguns (equally effective, more selective) One of the nice things about shotguns is that they (a) are short range weapons and less likely to do major damage if a shot goes wild, and (b) require a *lot* less aiming than a rifle. Part of the effect of the weapon is the terror effect. A friend once described a sawed-off shotgun: "It's a real crowd pleaser. You pull it out and they all go 'please, please!'". | Body armor for all officers, possibly reinforced with composite plates |to stop _really_ nasty ammunition While there's room for enhancement here, the laws of physics pretty much prohibit a truly effective body armor which can be carried by a reasonably mobile man. A powerful projectile could be stopped, but the energy would still have to go somewhere. That somewhere would be into the target. It might not penetrate, but it would incapicitate for sure. I would expect the victim to be unable to take action for at least 4-5 sec, far too long in a fight. There might be an upgrade of weapons, though. The same laws apply to firing a really highpower weapon, and the launch platform would have to be heavier to lower the recoil. | All ammunition would use caseless cartridges (solid propellant stuck on |the back of the bullet instead of powder in a shell) The technology is available today. Someone (Daisey?) made a 22 which used no case, and ignited the propellant using air heated by compression. Because propellants should not be exposed to heat, oil, humidity, etc, you would have to use a disposable magazine instead. It a neat idea, but not without drawbacks, and requires that the gun produce a sealed chamber, rather than the casing. Anyone who's ever seen a casing fail knows that a gun is not gas tight. | Laser guns only on large vehicles (they use up too much power!) Postulate a capacitor, or group of capacitors. Instead of using a bullet, you could discharge a cap to fire one "shot". Then you could recharge instead of reload. For continuous fire, though, I agree. | S.W.A.T. teams going whole hog, becoming army units for all intents and | purposes. Doesn't *your* SWAT team have flamethrowers already? | Increased use of helicopters, possibly going over to VTOL aircraft, both |to move units around in emergencies, and maybe replacing the patrol car. How about hovercraft or other ground effects machines. They will travel over much worse terrain than a conventional car. Even my 4X4 won't go on TOP of a lake. | | Anti-terrorist techniques would also improve: in a hostage situation, |fast-acting anesthetic gas would be shot into the room: before the thug can |do anything, they are waking up in jail. I'll leave it to a doctor to argue that one... I think that the speed of action would be limited by the rate of delivery to the brain... neither solution in blood, direct permeation of cells, or attack on nerve channels would seem to work fast enough. I think what you propose would only be accomplished by something direct acting, like radiation or sonic stunning. How about something which paralizes the voluntary muscles? -- bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) {uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
ugcherk@sunybcs.UUCP (10/30/87)
Keywords:
I think the aspects of the police force would depending on the degree of
technocyber permiation throughout the society. If the world is to be
Gibsonesque, then its inhabitants will literally be drowning in cyber tech.,
crushed under an avalanch of it. The society gets so complicated that people
on the streets are literally in another sub-world, and trying to police the
basic anarchy of the street-level existence becomes pointless and futile.
If the shear amount of computer technology present in Gibson's novels is also
present in your world, then I don't see the police as being much of a factor
at all. The gangs, cowboys, mobs, corporates, etc. become the whole society,
(Bye-bye white pickett fences:-) at least in the urban centers. The society
just flows as it will, pretty much without any centra "legal" control. I didn't
notice any mention of police in _Neuromancer_ nor _Count Zero_. Maybe I am
wrong about this, but from my personal preferences I have built my mental model
of Gibson's world without the presence of police. Any "government" would be
pretty impotent at the street level and would know better than to try to
meddle.
So if there are to be police in your world, I would not make a big enough thing
out of them to even have to describe any special gizmos and tactics that they
might use.
-- -- Kev -- --
SPOCK: "I suggest we use Truth Serum, Captain!"
NAAAAAWWW. Why don't we just put his brain in a tractor beam and DRAG the truth
out of him?!
..sunybcs!ugcherk "Hey, man... What planet is this?"lindsay@K.GP.CS.CMU.EDU.UUCP (11/02/87)
Note that the U.S. Army has scheduled a shoot-off between three competing designs for a new tank gun. All three are electric - that is, they use electrical energy to accelerate an outgoing round. If you want to get into the right frame of mind, then start reading magazines that have glossy ads for cluster bombs. (No, I don't mean Aviation Week.) Also, the architects of modern police stations have a worked-out theory (windows above head level, to eliminate sniping - etc.). So, these architects must have published in some forum. Find it ! However, criminals are mainly pretty stupid, and do advanced things by finding suckers/consultants/partners. International corporations (and Toshiba) are much more dangerous. Don -- Don lindsay@k.gp.cs.cmu.edu CMU Computer Science
joel@mit-amt.UUCP (11/02/87)
In article <6201@sunybcs.UUCP> ugcherk@joey.UUCP (Kevin Cherkauer) writes: > I didn't notice any mention of police in _Neuromancer_ nor _Count >Zero_. Maybe I am wrong about this, but from my personal preferences >I have built my mental model of Gibson's world without the presence >of police. Any "government" would be pretty impotent at the street >level and would know better than to try to meddle. You have indeed built your model from your personal preferences. I am reading _Neuromancer_ for the second time and you will find the police in the middle of the book, trying to isolate the Sense/Net building because they think the inhabitants have been dosed with a dangerous drug. They've been had, of course. The police don't seem to be very effective in GIbson's books. In a way this is already true in most urban areas - crime is either too random or too organized to stop. Serial murderers and other flagrant assholes get caught but your average low level drug dealer or organized extortion ring can usually operate for very long periods of time. If the latter is dealt with, it is usually by the Feds.
daveb@geac.UUCP (11/02/87)
In article <7731@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: |In article <23473AE4@PSUVMA> AE4@PSUVMA.BITNET (Jon Acheson) writes: |[ much previous discussion ] || Anti-terrorist techniques would also improve: in a hostage situation, ||fast-acting anesthetic gas would be shot into the room: before the thug can ||do anything, they are waking up in jail. | |I'll leave it to a doctor to argue that one... I think that the speed of |action would be limited by the rate of delivery to the brain... neither |solution in blood, direct permeation of cells, or attack on nerve |channels would seem to work fast enough. A useful drug here is one which lowers the blood pressure. If it can be convinced to take effect suddenly... (that's the problem with most diffusion-spread drugs, they ain't sudden enough). The robbers are holding up the bank. Suddenly one of the bankers grabs his chest, groans and falls over. The robber whirls around, tries to point his shotgun at the dying banker but can't seem to keep his balance. Seconds later everyone is laying on the floor, gasping... -- David Collier-Brown. {mnetor|yetti|utgpu}!geac!daveb Geac Computers International Inc., | Computer Science loses its 350 Steelcase Road,Markham, Ontario, | memory (if not its mind) CANADA, L3R 1B3 (416) 475-0525 x3279 | every 6 months.
david@daisy.UUCP (11/02/87)
Mr. Davidsen does not believe major advances in body armor are possible because the energy of the bullet has to go somewhere. He claims the result will be the incapacitation of the wearer for a few seconds. I disagree. If body armor is merely a passive device which dissipates energy, Mr. Davidsen would be right. However, what about non-passive armor? A gizmo which "sees" the incoming round and reacts, either to knock it down or to provide a counter-force, in between the bullet and the armor wearer? The U.S. Navy currently has a system called Phoenix which is supposed to shoot down incoming fire. (If you have been following the news, you know Phoenix works best when someone bothers to turn it on!) Is it conceivable that in ten or twenty or thirty years, Phoenix will be wearable? Not to shoot down incoming cruise missles, but perhaps to obliterate handgun and rifle fire... (Use a photon or neutral particle beam to burn up the bullet; Phoenix's "wall of steel" approach would throw you back on your butt with the reaction.) Silicon is cheaper than iron... or ceramic/kevlar armor, perhaps. -- David Schachter Cross-posting to rec.art.sf-lovers removed. #include disclaimer.std #include quote Return address: well!davids or daisy!david
daver@sci.UUCP (11/03/87)
In article <7731@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>, davidsen@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr) writes: > While there's room for enhancement here, the laws of physics pretty much > prohibit a truly effective body armor which can be carried by a > reasonably mobile man... _Hammer's Slammers_ has a nice discussion on weapons/armor of the future. Probably applicable. > How about hovercraft or other ground effects machines. They will travel > over much worse terrain than a conventional car. Even my 4X4 won't go on > TOP of a lake. But your 4x4 will go up a 30% slope. A hovercraft won't, unless it's got enough boost to go into ducted fan mode. I suspect that the police will have access to VSTOL aircraft (and maybe supersonic fighters), but that the typical police cruiser will be a lightly-armored landcar. More heavily- armored vehicles reserved for special situations. > > ...chemicals for hostage situations... > I'll leave it to a doctor to argue that one... I think that the speed of > action would be limited by the rate of delivery to the brain... neither > solution in blood, direct permeation of cells, or attack on nerve > channels would seem to work fast enough. > > I think what you propose would only be accomplished by something direct > acting, like radiation or sonic stunning. How about something which > paralizes the voluntary muscles? Like a .44 slug or a fragmentation grenade? I suspect that the police might adopt a somewhat simpler approach to hostages--find out where they are, and blast the shit out of the kidnappers. A trifle hard on the hostages, though. david rickel decwrl!sci!daver
max@zion.Berkeley.EDU (Max Hauser) (11/05/87)
This may be a little afield for alt.cyberpunk but Jon Acheson's provocative posting raised a point that, being of a technical bent, I'd like to follow up. In article <23473AE4@PSUVMA> AE4@PSUVMA.BITNET (Jon Acheson) writes: > ... Anti-terrorist techniques would also improve: in a hostage situation, >fast-acting anesthetic gas would be shot into the room: before the thug can >do anything, they are waking up in jail. Fast-acting anesthetics have been a staple soft weapon in science fiction at least since _Brave New World_ but despite massive research they seem no more practical today than fifty years ago. The good low-toxicity gases like ether and cyclopropane are typically explosive in mixture with air and they require dosage control, another big stumbling block. Nevertheless they are an irresistable idea. If anyone knows of innovations on this front I would be interested to hear of them. Why not -- this bears on the original request for future police speculations, the more so if the author wants realistic detail. Max Hauser UUCP: ...{!decvax}!ucbvax!eros!max Internet (old style): max%eros@berkeley Internet (domain style): max@eros.berkeley.edu
erc@tybalt.caltech.edu.UUCP (11/05/87)
In article <21598@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> max@trinity (Max Hauser) writes: >This may be a little afield for alt.cyberpunk but Jon Acheson's >provocative posting raised a point that, being of a technical bent, >I'd like to follow up. > >In article <23473AE4@PSUVMA> AE4@PSUVMA.BITNET (Jon Acheson) writes: > >> ... Anti-terrorist techniques would also improve: in a hostage situation, >>fast-acting anesthetic gas would be shot into the room: before the thug can >>do anything, they are waking up in jail. > >Fast-acting anesthetics have been a staple soft weapon in science >fiction at least since _Brave New World_ but despite massive >research they seem no more practical today than fifty years ago. > . . . (lines removed) It seems to me that much easier than a fast-acting anesthetic gas would be a bacteria or virus that causes unconciousness very quickly, yet can still be cured for several minutes (or more). If it is contagious through the skin, the only defense would be the equivalent of a space suit. I can very easily conceive of such a germ, and if we don't have it yet, I expect that there is someone looking for it. Along the same lines, it seems to me that germ warfare could be effectively used by the criminal element as well. Any nasty bug which you can innoculate your own people against would be useful. Imagine having a hide-out doused with such a germ. No unwanted visitors (for long). Eric R. Christian erc@tybalt.caltech.edu.uucp "Everything to excess . . . Moderation is for monks" Lazarus Long
boreas@bucsb.UUCP (The Cute Cuddle Creature) (11/06/87)
In article <7731@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: >In article <23473AE4@PSUVMA> AE4@PSUVMA.BITNET (Jon Acheson) writes: >| Increased use of helicopters, possibly going over to VTOL aircraft, both >|to move units around in emergencies, and maybe replacing the patrol car. > >How about hovercraft or other ground effects machines. They will travel >over much worse terrain than a conventional car. Even my 4X4 won't go on >TOP of a lake. Don't forget submarines! :-) (Imagine all the stuff you could smuggle that way! Forget panzerboys and panzers; I'd rather be a dolphin!) > bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) -- Michael. -- BITNet: ccmaj@bostonu \ Michael Justice, the Cute Cuddle Creature @ The Zoo ARPA: boreas@bucsb.bu.edu \ "Perhaps it was a result of anxiety."--_Mad_Max_ CSNET: boreas%bucsb@bu-cs \-----Boston-University-Graduate-School--CS---- New England R&D Net: geek@fourdia \ "Life is a series of disappointments, UUCP: ...!husc6!bu-cs!bucsb!boreas \ followed by death." -- Anonymous.
sorgatz@ttidca.UUCP (11/06/87)
In article <21598@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> max@trinity (Max Hauser) writes: >Fast-acting anesthetics have been a staple soft weapon in science >fiction at least since _Brave New World_ but despite massive >research they seem no more practical today than fifty years ago. > >If anyone knows of innovations on this front I would be interested to >hear of them. Why not -- this bears on the original request for >future police speculations, the more so if the author wants realistic >detail. > Well M-a-a-a-x, it so happens that the CIA *has* been using a flavor of ' this very tech for some moons now. The 'gun' is actually a dart pistol and the charge in the tip is nominally a morphine-deriv mixed with (drum roll please..) D M S O !! That's right! The DMSO causes the drug to move through the system at Warp 9...not much else is known about it, look into an article that was pubb'ed in 'Playboy'..sometime back in the 70's..it was titled: "They Call Me Mr. Death" ...the author explains about the instant sleep dart gun and many other devices the 'Company had him develop. TTFN! -- -Avatar-> (aka: Erik K. Sorgatz) KB6LUY +-------------------------+ Citicorp(+)TTI *----------> panic trap; type = N+1 * 3100 Ocean Park Blvd. (213) 450-9111, ext. 2973 +-------------------------+ Santa Monica, CA 90405 {csun,philabs,randvax,trwrb}!ttidca!ttidcb!sorgatz **
barth@ihlpl.UUCP (11/07/87)
In article <7731@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: >In article <23473AE4@PSUVMA> AE4@PSUVMA.BITNET (Jon Acheson) writes: >[ much previous discussion ] > >|smaller than that. The level of weaponry of the cops would, of course, >|vary as you go from the doughnut patrol to the state police, but some things >|you'd be sure to see include: >| uzi- style assault rifles (already standard in Europe), with laser >|sights, would replace riot shotguns (equally effective, more selective) > >One of the nice things about shotguns is that they (a) are short range >weapons and less likely to do major damage if a shot goes wild, and (b) >require a *lot* less aiming than a rifle. Part of the effect of the >weapon is the terror effect. A friend once described a sawed-off >shotgun: "It's a real crowd pleaser. You pull it out and they all go >'please, please!'". Yes, shotguns have many advantages over sub-machine guns or even assault rifles for police work. (An Uzi is actually the former and not the latter.) My guess is that the new "battlefield shotguns" or "assault shotguns" will become standard cop equipment. These are now being made for military use by various manufacturers in several different countries. They are generally "select-fire" weapons (like an assault rifle--can be fired semi-auto or full auto), and generally use 12 or 20-round drum mags (though some have 5 or 6-round clips). If a standard pump-action shotgun gets the job done with little precision in aiming needed, think what a 12-gauge full-auto burst would do! >| All ammunition would use caseless cartridges (solid propellant stuck on >|the back of the bullet instead of powder in a shell) > >The technology is available today. Someone (Daisey?) made a 22 which >used no case, and ignited the propellant using air heated by >compression. Because propellants should not be exposed to heat, oil, >humidity, etc, you would have to use a disposable magazine instead. It a >neat idea, but not without drawbacks, and requires that the gun produce >a sealed chamber, rather than the casing. Anyone who's ever seen a >casing fail knows that a gun is not gas tight. Heckler Und Koch are currently supplying the West German armed forces with an assault rifle that uses caseless ammunition. 888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 88 88 88 Sometimes an eel needs a hovercraft. Barth Richards 88 88 AT&T Bell Labs 88 88 Naperville, IL 88 88 -Bill Stapleton !ihnp4!ihlpl!barth 88 88 88 888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
clewis@lsuc.UUCP (Chris Lewis) (11/07/87)
In article <10785@sci.UUCP> daver@sci.UUCP writes: >In article <7731@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>, davidsen@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr) writes: >> I think what you propose would only be accomplished by something direct >> acting, like radiation or sonic stunning. How about something which >> paralizes the voluntary muscles? > >Like a .44 slug or a fragmentation grenade? I suspect that the police might >adopt a somewhat simpler approach to hostages--find out where they are, >and blast the shit out of the kidnappers. A trifle hard on the hostages, >though. Naw, nothing that drastic. There's a little item of ordinance called by some a "Thunderflash" (very appropriate). Effectively an enormous firecracker (paper casing). Big boom, big flash, but no metal fragments zipping around. Our militia uses these to simulate mines and mortars during training. Used to great effect by the SAS in quelling the Iranian hostage incident in London a couple of years back. They went in throwing a few of these things. The sonic blast completely disoriented the hostage takers and the troops were able to end the situation without killing anyone.
acm@bu-cs.BU.EDU (ACM) (11/12/87)
In article <4415@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> erc@tybalt.caltech.edu.UUCP (Eric R. Christian) writes: >In article <21598@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> max@trinity (Max Hauser) writes: >>In article <23473AE4@PSUVMA> AE4@PSUVMA.BITNET (Jon Acheson) writes: >> >>> ... Anti-terrorist techniques would also improve: in a hostage situation, >>>fast-acting anesthetic gas would be shot into the room: before the thug can >>>do anything, they are waking up in jail. >> >>Fast-acting anesthetics have been a staple soft weapon in science >>fiction at least since _Brave New World_ but despite massive >>research they seem no more practical today than fifty years ago. > >It seems to me that much easier than a fast-acting anesthetic gas would be >a bacteria or virus that causes unconciousness very quickly, yet can still >be cured for several minutes (or more). If it is contagious through the >skin, the only defense would be the equivalent of a space suit. I can >very easily conceive of such a germ, and if we don't have it yet, I expect >that there is someone looking for it. Actually it's quite likely that several (unnamed) governments are currently looking for such a thing. Unfortunately it's easy to see how such research could result in effects discussed in _The_Stand_ (King), _The_White_Plague_ (Herbert), or even _Vixen_03_ (Cussler). Scary thought, no? >Along the same lines, it seems to me that germ warfare could be effectively >used by the criminal element as well. Any nasty bug which you can >innoculate your own people against would be useful. Imagine having a >hide-out doused with such a germ. No unwanted visitors (for long). There would be considerable problems with this. First, it would require the hide-out to be completely airtight (read: airlock, air recycling equipment, etc) which would be far from cheap. Also, unless it is possible to have many slightly different viruses (viri?), antidotes would soon be had by many and it wouldn't matter. Even if it would be possible to vary the virus slightly, it might be possible to create antidotes that work over a wide range of viruses, limiting the effectiveness of the defense. I think that the only thing stopping this kind of technology is money. The cost of the item does not justify the expenditure necessary to create it. Moreover, the cost of using the item is also prohibitive. Easier to put in a good security system. Also safer -- could you imagine what would happen if the virus mutates on you? Eek. Probably a better way of doing this is to create some sort of brain-inhibiting system (perhaps one that introduces faulty signals). It need not be specific in what it inhibits or introduces -- just dumping a lot of signals into the brain would probably work just fine. The technology is much closer at hand (no genetic engineering!) and need not be fine-tuned. This, I suppose, would be analogous to the type of weapons Niven refers to as stunners or tasps (recall the Niven story "Jigsaw Man" [I believe] where people were captured through the use of a beam that paralyzed them, and also the use of tasps in _Ringworld_). No risk of mutation, less cost of development, less cost of use. But can we build it? Probably. Remember the introduction of taser guns to police? Taser guns are essentially big batteries with small guns that shoot probes into the victim. Electrical current paralyzes the victim (usually without harming him/her). All you need to do is find a way to do this without the wires in a limited field. Difficult, certainly, but not as difficult as designing a virus from scratch! jim frost madd@bucsb.bu.edu
max@zion.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (11/13/87)
In article <4415@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> erc@tybalt.caltech.edu.UUCP (Eric R. Christian) writes: >In article <21598@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> max@trinity (Max Hauser) writes: >>In article <23473AE4@PSUVMA> AE4@PSUVMA.BITNET (Jon Acheson) writes: >>> ... Anti-terrorist techniques would also improve: in a hostage situation, >>>fast-acting anesthetic gas would be shot into the room: before the thug can >>>do anything, they are waking up in jail. >>Fast-acting anesthetics have been a staple soft weapon in science >>fiction at least since _Brave New World_ but despite massive >>research they seem no more practical today than fifty years ago. >It seems to me that much easier than a fast-acting anesthetic gas would be >a bacteria or virus that causes unconciousness very quickly, yet can still >be cured for several minutes (or more)... I guess when all is said and done I still favor the "old-fashioned" approach of a hunchback with a bottle of chloroform. Not cyberpunk, to be sure, but not without a certain timeless panache... Max Hauser / max@eros.berkeley.edu / ...{!decvax}!ucbvax!eros!max "Warning: You are entering a nuclear-free zone. Possession or discharge of nuclear weapons within city limits may be subject to police citation."
barth@ihlpl.ATT.COM (BARTH RICHARDS) (11/14/87)
In article <21598@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> max@trinity (Max Hauser) writes: >In article <23473AE4@PSUVMA> AE4@PSUVMA.BITNET (Jon Acheson) writes: >> ... Anti-terrorist techniques would also improve: in a hostage situation, >>fast-acting anesthetic gas would be shot into the room: before the thug can >>do anything, they are waking up in jail. > >Fast-acting anesthetics have been a staple soft weapon in science >fiction at least since _Brave New World_ but despite massive >research they seem no more practical today than fifty years ago. > >The good low-toxicity gases like ether and cyclopropane are >typically explosive in mixture with air and they require dosage >control, another big stumbling block. Nevertheless they are an >irresistable idea. I would guess that research would be more along the lines of advanced forms of tasers or even ultra-low-frequency sound. Tasers may be developed that don't require a physical projectile, but use some form of EM waves (microwaves, perhaps?). ULFS has already been mucked about with to a very limited degree, and there are indications that, at certian frequencies and levels of amplifiation, it can cause severe disruption of bodily functions, possibly even death. I suppose it would be possible to find one or more frequency/amplifiction combinations that would cause instantaneous, but temporary, incapacitation. 888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 88 88 88 Barth Richards 88 88 Have you driven a fnord lately? AT&T Bell Labs 88 88 Naperville, IL 88 88 !ihnp4!ihlpl!barth 88 88 88 888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
leonard@qiclab.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) (11/23/87)
The first mention of a taser-like weapon that I ever saw was in _Gallagher's Glacier_ by Walt & Leigh Richmond. The inhabitants of a "company planet" mining colony stage a revolt. They have built the weapons under the eyes of the company without raising suspicion. Double-barrel motorized squirtguns as toys for the kids. Add a simple circuit and fill it with salt water and you have a short-range taser that uses twin streams of water instead of wires. (all you need it for is long enough to zap one guard [company cop] and take his gun...) As for the anaesthetics etc, I recall reading of several workable alternatives developed during the 60's. The weren't fast acting, but their effects were such that they would "sneak up" on you. First was an agent that would lower your blood pressure. You feel a bit light headed so you'd sit down, a bit later you start feeliing light headed again. This increases until you either lie down or pass out. In most cases it would level off at around this level. You can lie there, but if you try to get up (or get excited) you'll pass out. Real hard to fight in that condition. Second was a muscle relaxant. It was also slow acting. It worked its way up spinal cord. First the feet, then the ankles, and so on up the body. Since it only affected voluntary muscles, there is no danger of suffocation or the like (unless they wind up in some odd position when they fall down). Then, of course, we have the things that were developed for riot control. "liquid banana peel" and the isolation foam. The foam is a non-toxic, opaque foam. It deadens sound nicely. Visibility is around 2 inches. No good for stopping hostage situations, but they *would* be used for crowd control in a typical cyberpunk world. After all, they don't cause property damage the way tear gas and water cannons do.... -- Leonard Erickson ...!tektronix!reed!percival!bucket!leonard CIS: [70465,203] ...!tektronix!reed!qiclab!leonard "I used to be a hacker. Now I'm a 'microcomputer specialist'. You know... I'd rather be a hacker."