The Pentagon's Ray Gun

David Martin Reports On A Non-Lethal Weapon Straight Out Of Buck Rogers

(CBS)  One of the ray gun's biggest advantages is that it can stay out of harm’s way and still control a crowd.

Sid Heal wants to use it to control prison riots; the Navy could use it to fend off Iranians with their go-fast boats harassing American warships in the Strait of Hormuz. And the State Department could use it to protect American embassies like the one attacked by protestors in Belgrade.

Yet the Pentagon is spending just $13.1 million on the ray gun this year, out of a $475 billon defense budget.

Why is the Pentagon spending so little on technology that could change the rules?

"We don't have enough money to do the things that are the here and now, so it’s extremely competitive. So, yes, $13 million is chump change. I regret that," Sue Payton explains.

"Could you have fielded it sooner if you had more money to spend on it?" Martin asks.

"Yes," she says.

A report by the Pentagon’s Defense Science Board says the military is reluctant to spend much money on active denial until it has proven itself in the field.

"Sounds like a Catch-22. You can't get real money until it's fielded. But you can't field it until you get real money," Martin comments.

"That's exactly the way it is," Payton agrees.

Col. Hymes, who is in charge of all non-lethal weapons for the Pentagon, says the ray gun will be ready to go to Iraq this summer. But it’s swimming against the tide of conventional military wisdom. "The active denial system, being new technology, is gonna have a lot of stigma around it," Hymes says.

"I’ve never heard anybody use the word stigma with respect to a new weapon," Martin says. "If this system could kill people it would be easier to field?"

"Lethal systems have an easier time getting into our system," Hymes says.

"You’re going up against the culture of your own military?" Martin asks.

"Absolutely," Hymes says.

The ray gun has been tested on humans more than 11,000 times over ten years. The early tests, recorded with an infrared camera, were against people in their underwear so scientists could measure skin temperature. Their backs were turned so their eyes would not be exposed. Out of 11,000 tests there have been six cases of rashes and blisters, and two of more serious second degree burns. It’s now cleared for full power on any part of the body.

Some people claim they've been able to stand the beam for four or five seconds. So how long could Martin take the heat? Turns out about three seconds, before he ran off.

[reply60min]

people, especially of a foreign occupier and killer, have a right to protest, throw stones or otherwise. just because it becomes a "hands off" weapon suitable for great abuse and torture makes it that more repugnant. no longer do we see telephone generators connected to shock, or body guards filed lunging with cattle prods, instead it the imperceptible trigger finger of the tazer gun is used for torture by the us military. this is just another device to silence the occupied, torture the masses from speaking by a foreign occupier which is not welcome in the country.

[reply60min]

the us military pulled it off the field and initiated a pr campaign to see if the public would buy it to which martin, hymes and the soldiers are the actors. not mentioned is the possible abuse to put down real protesters of an foreign occupied country that have a legitimate right to protest. not mentioned is the concern that it can cook any exposed flesh including the cornea. maybe when martin and hymes turn 70 and wonder about their cataracts or why they need lens implants they will think back on their part in the propaganda campaign. martin never challenged they system by wetting down the simple shield so the microwaves boiled THAT surface water molecules. they never mentioned how the same fire hose spray like seen against whaling protesters nullifies it''s effects at sea. they never showed how a swarm of people can run a "pattern" towards the single beam device.

[reply60min]

If you followed the foreign news sources you would know the us already experimented with the system in iraq and only brought it back for public "vindication" after the outcry of it''s experimental and abusive use. Reports of badly burned men examined by iraqi doctors who could find no physical gunshot or other means of death. at that time the system had no timer interlock and the iraqi people were likely used as guinea pigs of extreme calibration studies. search video archives and you will find the same of us experimentation of flame throwers on anesthetized tied down live pigs. similar archives will reveal telling soldiers to exit the bunkers and stand up to observe nuclear blasts, aerosol spread near san francisco, etc.

[viewersteve]

How foolish for your reporter to take the Pentagon''s claims of "harmless" seriously. Standing in front of the weapon as a "demonstration" of its harmlessness could very well cost him his life.

Radiation''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.

[sousamm22]

This "ray gun" report was weak at best. The reporter missed asking the most obvious of questions--Is there any material that will reflect these high frequency waves? If such material exists then this weapon is useless. Since the question was not asked this report was useless.

[kirky01-2009]

As a Brit, I read and watched this article with interest. What struck me was the attempted humanity of the new weapon. It aims to disable without permanently injuring you - a novel idea for a state army. This is a crowd control device really, with fringe benefits for military applications when a military is involved in doing a Policemans job. The Cold War scenario is over and this is the future. As for a weapon of torture, has anyone been pistol whipped before? Shot in the leg? Knee? A comendable project imho.

Ian, London.

[change_b4_ss]

1. ONLY $13mm spent on the non-lethal version; odds that the $13 bill was spent on the one that really kills you?
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...

[Latrocinor]

A terror weapon from Raytheon and CBS''''s David Martin leads the way in promoting it.

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

[fatherteresa]

My neighbours are using this weapon on us right now and have been using it for a number of years. They are torturing us continuously, not only us but other neighbours in the vicinity.

[impeach_w]

I am a republican not a liberal Democrat.

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.

[cuamerica]

Too many of you bleeding hearts just don''t get it - There IS an enemy and they''ll use cowardly dishonorable tactics, like posing as peace protesters to get a chance to blow up as many people as possible.

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.

[impeach_w]

From the Article:
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.

[impeach_w]

What if we told you the military has a weapon that can only be used on unarmed cililians?

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.

[ruthshap]

I was appalled by the story on the latest weapon, a science fiction type ray gun that presumably will be used against protesters in Iraq and possibly against peaceful protesters here in the U.S. This weapon may not kill, but it is very painful and can blister and even burn some people. 60 Minutes interviewed military people, but why was there no interview with someone who could discuss the ethics of using such a weapon? Our media should be raising these tough questions, not merely going along with the flow. I expect better of 60 Minutes.

[cbs_oliver]

I''m with Scratch0058 on this summary - "Set phasers on ''''stupid''''!"

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.

[twestheimer]

I thought the military was supposed to protect the freedom of this country. Are war protesters seen as an enemy? This shows the military''s attitude towards legitimate protests.
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!

[cbs_oliver]

A terror weapon from Raytheon and CBS''s David Martin leads the way in promoting it.

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.

[scratch0058]

"Set phasers on ''stupid''!"
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.

[brianbwb-2009]

"And as long as it''s been used properly, there''s no harm to your body."

Therein lies the problem, in the hands of a sadistic soldier, or later, a policeman, it won''t be used properly.

[juwboy]

What would you prefer if you were an innocent civilian in the path of an advancing army?

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?