June 1, 2008
The Pentagon's Ray Gun
David Martin Reports On A Non-Lethal Weapon Straight Out Of Buck Rogers
-
Play CBS Video Video The Pentagon's Ray Gun Straight out of Buck Rogers and perfect for crowd control, this non-lethal weapon could help eliminate the deaths incurred while trying to control crowds, especially in Iraq. But it's not in Iraq yet, reports David Martin.
-
(CBS)
-
Interactive Military 101 Basic training to learn all about America's fighting force.
-
Interactive Battle For Iraq The government, the insurgency, key players, background and photos.
What if we told you the Pentagon has a ray gun? And what if we told you it can stop a person in his tracks without killing or even injuring him? Well, it’s true. You can’t see it, you can't hear it, but as CBS News correspondent David Martin experienced first hand, you can feel it.
Pentagon officials call it a major breakthrough which could change the rules of war and save huge numbers of lives in Iraq. But it's still not there. That because in the middle of a war, the military just can't bring itself to trust a weapon that doesn't kill.
It's a gun that doesn't look anything like a gun: it's that flat dish antenna which shoots out a 100,000-watt beam at the speed of light, hitting any thing in its path with an intense blast of heat.
An operator uses a joystick to zero in on a target. Visible only with an infrared camera, the gun, when fired emits a flash of white hot energy - an electromagnetic beam made up of very high frequency radio waves.
Col. Kirk Hymes, head of the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate, is in charge of the ray gun which is being tested at Moody Air Force Base in southern Georgia.
The targets at the base are people, military volunteers creating a scenario soldiers might encounter in Iraq, like angry protestors advancing on American troops, who have to choose between backing down or opening fire. Off in the distance, half a mile away, the operator of the ray gun has the crowd in his sights.
Unlike the soldiers on the ground, he has no qualms about firing away because his weapon won't injure anyone.
He squeezes off a blast and the first shot hits like an invisible punch. The protestors regroup and he fires again, and again. Finally they’ve had enough. The ray gun drives them away with no harm done.
Officially called the "Active Denial System," it does penetrate the body, but just barely.
What happens when the beam hits a person?
"It's absorbed in the top layer, 1/64th of an inch, which is about three sheets of paper that you’d find in your printer," Col. Hymes explains.
"And it’s hitting what inside that 1/64th of an inch?" Martin asks.
"Well, right within that 1/64th of an inch is where the nerve endings are," Hymes says.
You have to feel the ray gun to believe it, and there's only one way to do that. Martin, who voluntarily became a target, described the sensation of being hit by the ray gun like scalding water.
What makes this a weapon like no other is it inflicts enough pain to make you instantly stop whatever it is you’re doing. But the second you get out of the beam the pain vanishes. And as long as it's been used properly, there's no harm to your body.
Produced by Mary Walsh
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Recent Segments
Scroll Left Scroll Right


- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 11
- next
See all 210 CommentsRadiation''s effects long-term effects are subtle but deadly. Only rigorous, long-term clinical studies done by objective researchers over years can verify that the weapon ray is harmless to humans. Anecdotal assertions by the Pentagon prove nothing.
Years from now, your reckless reporter and other Pentagon volunteers may experience high rates of various cancers. Their children may suffer high rates of birth defects.
A retrospective clinical study done by trained medical researchers may prove then that ray weapon was not, in fact, harmless. But by then, it will be too late.
At that point, CBS 60 minutes will have another good story: How reckless the Pentagon had been back in 2008, and how a few volunteers and a CBS reporter had allowed themselves to be duped, tragically.
It will be a good story unless, because of a groundswell of public support due to your drum-beating story on Sunday, the Pentagon deploys the ray weapon worldwide prematurely before proper health studies are done. Then, the story will be very different. It will be a tragedy of untold proportions both medically and politically.
Ian, London.
2. Rules of engagement?? That sounds pretty hostile, CBS.
3. If we can''t discuss someone with "comparisons to Hitler" what do we do if we really think someone does look like Hitler? What did they do in Germany? Censorship and book burning....
4. How ''bout the choice of "hostile victims" for the ray gun? Now THAT image really sends a message, huh?
5. What happened to real investigative journalism? We could sure use some of that right now; my guess is that CBS''s own reporters would like to do some of that...how bout a story about what really happened with Rove and Siegelman for example, or their connections to organized crime/military in the South. Help, CBS...
This weapon is a precurser to murder not a preventative.
I''''m reasonably sure that Raytheon or somebody else has made the torture version and it is in use by the CIA and others right now.
Posted by CBS_Oliver
.. .. ..
Only from the mind of CBS_Oliver
I do not want anything from Iraq except to understand why we are there in the first place and why we are there now.
After that is understood, I want those repsonsible to held accountable.
The fact that its taken so long to approve this thing is proof that too many political hacks don''t want success in Iraq. I''d say to do one better and invent a gadget which remotely detonates these suicide bombers before they get close enough to hurt anyone.
The impulse to run the other way is so strong that anyone who keeps coming has to be considered a threat.
"It could be used to read someone''s mind, in effect, because you immediately know what someone''s intention is. If they continue to come at you, then you''re fairly sure they''re not a tourist. They''re probably a terrorist or an adversary who wants to do you harm," Payton explains.
I AGREE 100% - SHOOT AT THEM FIRST, DETERMINE THEIR THREAT LATER.
Declare lethal war on anyone tring to set up or operate such a device in OUR country. You have the right and DUTY as an American to speak your mind and to defend yourself and other from Death or grave bodily injury and this IS capable of injuring and killing on a mass scale.!
The constitution states this better not ever be used by the military on cilvilians the US (except maybe on a military base).
PS. If you see this vehicle driving or parked, crash into it. Don''t shoot at the antenna as it''s made to take damage. Only the generator providing power to the device, it''s computer or the operator or the officer autorizing its use would be a weak point. Aim well.
It makes most sense to fight armed enemies with lethal weapons and unarmed protesters with respectful leadership or, if violence develops, with methods like water cannons.
Weapons aimed at disabling large numbers of people will rightly be seen as vile.
David Martin and CBS should get some decent values and some backbone and stop pushing this thing for the military and Raytheon.
Even the idea of it makes enemies.
We have a problem! We spend more money on our military than the rest of the world COMBINED. Our priorities are no longer defensive or reasonable. Wake up America! Now you know why the government has to borrow money from the Chinese to fund the military industrial complex. Eisenhower was right!
This weapon is a precurser to murder not a preventative.
I''m reasonably sure that Raytheon or somebody else has made the torture version and it is in use by the CIA and others right now.
Being a Marine, I would rather not face an enemy (whose intentions are deadly) with a inside-out microwave oven that gives him a warm feeling. Besides, that phased-array dish on top looks like one Hell of a target.
Therein lies the problem, in the hands of a sadistic soldier, or later, a policeman, it won''t be used properly.
A few seconds of severe discomfort from this ray gun?
OR
A lingering death over several months of severe agony from conventional weapons after jagged shards of metal, moving at high velocity, have torn away considerable portions of your flesh and internal organs?
In fact, why is the kind of death I''ve just described considered as permissible in modern warfare while a quick death in a few minutes from Sarin is banned and so is an uncomfortable, but relatively quick death in a few days from an anthrax infection?
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 11
- next
See all 210 Comments