Stephen Coleman: The moral dangers of non-lethal weapons

http://www.ted.com Pepper spray and tasers are in increasing use by both police and military, and more exotic non-lethal weapons such as heat rays are in the works. At TEDxCanberra, ethicist Stephen Coleman explores the unexpected consequences of their introduction and asks some challenging questions.

TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes. Featured speakers have included Al Gore on climate change, Philippe Starck on design, Jill Bolte Taylor on observing her own stroke, Nicholas Negroponte on One Laptop per Child, Jane Goodall on chimpanzees, Bill Gates on malaria and mosquitoes, Pattie Maes on the "Sixth Sense" wearable tech, and "Lost" producer JJ Abrams on the allure of mystery. TED stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design, and TEDTalks cover these topics as well as science, business, development and the arts. Closed captions and translated subtitles in a variety of languages are now available on TED.com, at http://www.ted.com/translate

If you have questions or comments about this or other TED videos, please go to http://support.ted.com

• Category

  News & Politics

[Ian W]

Don't you think that might be a bit of an oversimplification? In any philosophy class on ethics, you soon find out that extreme pacifism is extremely indefensible in many situations, and I highly doubt that you would let an axe murderer massacre your family if you were holding a gun. No one likes violence, but we should not ask the question "should we use violence" but rather "how much violence can be justified in certain situation and why?".

[OhManTFE]

Proactive violence is unethical. Reactive violence is acceptable.

[GoodTimeTraveler]

re 2200 uses of OC; you seem to conveniently exclude any data of any conditions

police officers faced in apprehending perps *before* the use of OC was allowed. ie, how many perps or police were injured & how much property had been damaged *before* OC was allowed.

Before moving to allow OC police must have realized both perp and police were being ingured during apprehensions; thus allowing less-lethal methods to be be considered.

Therefore, the 2200 uses of OC is absolutely meaningless.

[GoodTimeTraveler]

How is it police are guilty, while perps are innocent?

Instead of cherry-picking, Mr. Coleman, did you also research the thousands of cases world-wide where non-lethal action has spared both police and perp???

The *problem* is not the police, it's people. *People* have lost respect, are indifferent, and ignore authority.

Also, non-lethal techniques near battle zones? Are you mad? The *intention* of rioters is to riot; the *intention* of terrorists is to KILL. Are you aware of this?!?

[mrericsully]

I don't know the specific situation of the grandmother in bed, but he seemed to ignore the possibility that "a more threatening position in bed" could have been the person reaching under a pillow or between the mattress to retrieve a firearm, and that maybe by hitting her with a tazer, they avoided having to engage in a physical struggle to subdue/control/arrest her in her bed, or they might have prevented her from introducing a weapon into the mix.

[mrericsully]

It was frequently taught to us that excessive force was a violation of Constitutional protection against unlawful seizure.

The situation is more complex than he makes it out to be.

[mrericsully]

If you only give an officer limited options, the jump from one level to the next will occur more rapidly. Our "Use of Force" continuum began with officer presence, then to verbal direction, "hands on" control, pepper spray, nightstick, "less than lethal munitions" then to lethal force. Without less than lethal munitions, my options were "hands on" then lethal force. He seems to be making the conclusion that they're being used excessively and without sufficient provocation.

[mrericsully]

It IS easier to subdue an individual who is temporarily blinded, in pain, and having difficulty breathing than it is to wrestle/fight/subdue him. How many of those cases might have escalated to use of a nightstick, punch or kick, but instead resulted in the subject getting sprayed, he didn't adequately address.

When we first started using OC spray, the number of times we used it increased, but the number of times we ended up using other levels of force decreased, as did officer injuries.

[mrericsully]

One point he didn't make when he gave the statistic of over 2200 OC spray uses was to see how many times police officers encountered a resistive subject. He only said that it was something to fill the gap between the "the time to shout and the time to shoot," without discussing, how many incidents escalated beyond "time to shout" but not to "time to shoot" that resulted in officers/subjects engaging in physical fights, with the resultant injuries that would likely have occurred as a result.

[mrericsully]

He did raise some interesting points. Some of the examples aren't the norm, and, and least on their surface, would not have been in compliance with the use of force policy that I helped craft, taught and used to evaluate many use of force incidents in my time.

The more options an officer has, the better, in most cases. The attitude "I can use any less than lethal option because it won't kill them" still has to pass the legal requirement of appropriate level of force for the resistance given.

[Khyrid]

And not only did you win but don't forget all the other amazing feats you achieve every day. This definitely warrants bragging. I think this may be your life's greatest achievement.

[Khyrid]

Yes, everything you said is correct. I am a fat retard. Also I have a small penis and I'm a fag. My mom is fat and likes to suck cocks, as do I. Anything else?