Riot control epoxy adhesives?

[Jalor]

Alright, for a school project I have to design a solution to any major problem in the world. My group, ever ambitious, has decided on nonlethal riot control devices. Most nonlethal weapons only work on single targets (tasers) or are inconsistent with effects (tear gas). Our idea is an epoxy spray that is sticky and can be sprayed over a large group, stopping them from rioting. The only problem is that none of us know how to make an epoxy cure more quickly. Is there anything likely to do so?

[Renegade Paladin]

No go; you'd stand a very good chance of suffocating a lot of people to death that way.

[Checkmate]

I once read a piece about some kind of technology they use to bomb ultra high sonic sound waves into crouds that would blast large amounts of people uncounscious without causing them any real harm.

[Rutskarn]

Spraying an epoxy into a crowd will probably have the following effects:

1.) Blinding them

2.) Causing skin rashes among the allergic, or even the not allergic, dependin

3.) Making a very expensive mess of whatever area they're in

4.) Not really doing much to stop the riot

Yeah. The concept was interesting, but the implementation would be near-impossible. You might want to try a different tack.


I once read a piece about some kind of technology they use to bomb ultra high sonic sound waves into crouds that would blast large amounts of people uncounscious without causing them any real harm.

Whenever you're knocking people indiscriminately unconscious, you're doing them harm. When people fall over without any way to check their falls, especially in an urban area, they can be seriously hurt.

Then again, it's difficult to stop a riot without injuring the rioters in some way. The best tools are those that don't actually stop the riot--they just effectively persuade the rioters that they'd rather be somewhere else doing something else.

[Zeful]

I once read a piece about some kind of technology they use to bomb ultra high sonic sound waves into crouds that would blast large amounts of people uncounscious without causing them any real harm.

Except for the deafness that may be permanent.

You'd be better trying to design a brown note gun, so that you can make alot of people constipated.

[Rutskarn]

Except for the deafness that may be permanent.

You'd be better trying to design a brown note gun, so that you can make alot of people constipated.

Myth-busted, m'fraid.

[Spiryt]

Our idea is an epoxy spray that is sticky and can be sprayed over a large group, stopping them from rioting. The only problem is that none of us know how to make an epoxy cure more quickly. Is there anything likely to do so?

I'm afraid I must join the "not going to work" votes. Something so sticky to stop the moving agressive people by sticking them to something would have to be dangerously sticking.
In fact I bet it won't really stop anybody, but will rather be dangerous to them.
Not to mention that since it's so sticky, there would be problems with spraying it.

And the mess... Unsticking those people afterwards for example.

[Dallas-Dakota]

I'm afraid I must join the "not going to work" votes. Something so sticky to stop the moving agressive people by sticking them to something would have to be dangerously sticking. Not to mention that since it's so sticky, there would be problems with spraying it.

And the mess... Unsticking those people afterwards for example.
Not to mention, riots are often shouting, you don't want it to stick inside and kill them....

[Bonecrusher Doc]

Unfortunately, looks like you're not the first to come up with the idea:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_foam

[Jack Squat]

Alright, for a school project I have to design a solution to any major problem in the world. My group, ever ambitious, has decided on nonlethal riot control devices. Most nonlethal weapons only work on single targets (tasers) or are inconsistent with effects (tear gas). Our idea is an epoxy spray that is sticky and can be sprayed over a large group, stopping them from rioting. The only problem is that none of us know how to make an epoxy cure more quickly. Is there anything likely to do so?

I believe adding more of a hardening agent will make it cure faster. However, I'll go with the others and say that there's a reason we've stuck to fire hoses for crowd control for so long.

I would think a better solution may be spraying that stuff that's in liquid stink bombs at people...the force determent of high pressure water plus the demoralization of smelling like a dead skunk that bathed in rotten eggs.

[Thiel]

Well, aside from what's been said, there's also the fact that epoxy is outright poisonous all by itself.
Also, imagine the following scenario:
You spray a third of the rioters. Now the rest of the rioters bump into the first part causing them to fall over.
Now, unless the skin-epoxy grip is a good deal weaker than the skin-flesh grip (Which it in my experience isn't), you're going to see some severe skin lesions

[Alteran]

I agree that it's not very practical, epoxy is pretty nasty stuff. Even if people don't tear off all of their skin, they're going to get it in their lungs. I have a feeling that could cause some significant damage, and possibly brain damage from inhaling the fumes.

Usually the safest forms of riot control can't actually stop the riot, just convince the rioters that it's not a good idea.

[Rutskarn]

The best tools are those that don't actually stop the riot--they just effectively persuade the rioters that they'd rather be somewhere else doing something else.




Usually the safest forms of riot control can't actually stop the riot, just convince the rioters that it's not a good idea.

You may want to speak up. I can't hear you over the sound of your plagiarism.

(That was a joke.)

[Thiel]

Hmm, epoxy induced tarmac lungs. There's a horror to behold

[Solaris]

I agree that it's not very practical, epoxy is pretty nasty stuff. Even if people don't tear off all of their skin, they're going to get it in their lungs. I have a feeling that could cause some significant damage, and possibly brain damage from inhaling the fumes.

Usually the safest forms of riot control can't actually stop the riot, just convince the rioters that it's not a good idea.
I'm of the opinion that making an example of some rioters will do a very good job of convincing them that it's not a good idea to riot. I'm assuming, of course, we're using this on a particularly violent riot that water hoses, attack dogs, and tear gas don't work on. Safety in quelling a riot is overrated; it's combat, and many of the rioters (thanks to a mob mentality) would gleefully murder any of the agents of the law trying to quell the riot. They have already chosen to participate in a fight; what happens to them is their own fault. They're just lucky most law enforcement agencies prefer not to massacre 'innocent' civilians.
And frankly, if tear gas doesn't work on someone, they're a freakin' tank and require more extreme methods. I've seen CS gas incapacitate soldiers who've actually had experience with the gas (NBC day is the incarnation of suck). Civilians don't stand a chance of remaining operational in it.

[Val]

And frankly, if tear gas doesn't work on someone, they're a freakin' tank and require more extreme methods.

+1. Sol has a valid point. Yet again.

Speaking as someone who disapproves of governmental control of society, the outrage for me is not police fighting against civilians, it's the failure of civilians to form properly armed insurrections.

I would like to state at this time that I have not, am not now, and do not plan to incite riot or armed insurrection. I'm just saying that if you go into a fight underequipped, your failure is your own problem.

[BizzaroStormy]

Yeah, theres just way too many problems with trying to stick them in place. Plus, non-lethal means arent used as often as you'd think. Less-than-lethal implements are more popular. Things like pepper balls, beanbag guns, stun grenades, ect. are things that can still kill people but have a relatively low chance of doing so.

A bean bag gun, for instance, could it a person in a tender spot like the throat or kidney and cause suffocation or internal bleeding repspectively.

Anywho, the anti-riot epoxy youre thinking of would definately have some major flaws such as not hardening fast enough, suffocating the rioters, blinding them or other such permanent harm.

A pepper ball machine gun with an extremely high rate of fire seems like a good idea, but its likely already been done.


+1. Sol has a valid point. Yet again.

Speaking as someone who disapproves of governmental control of society, the outrage for me is not police fighting against civilians, it's the failure of civilians to form properly armed insurrections.

I would like to state at this time that I have not, am not now, and do not plan to incite riot or armed insurrection. I'm just saying that if you go into a fight underequipped, your failure is your own problem.

Agreed, but there are those who do organize themselves and mix in with the angry mob. The people would the the ones to bring aerosol cans full of solvent to neutralize the epoxy once they figure out what it is. (something that is easily done)

[Setra]

Clearly the answer to riots would be a jeep with a huge speaker system.. that plays Hannah Montana.

In theory everyone will flee in terror.

[chiasaur11]

Clearly the answer to riots would be a jeep with a huge speaker system.. that plays Hannah Montana.

In theory everyone will flee in terror.

Tweenage riots.

Namely, tween girl riots.

That'd just increase their resolve.

[Maelstrom]

Fast curing epoxies also generate a huge amount of heat...you're going to have alot of 2nd degree+ burns...

[Solaris]

Clearly the answer to riots would be a jeep with a huge speaker system.. that plays Hannah Montana.

In theory everyone will flee in terror.
Only in theory? My friend, you've just discovered the method to enforce world peace.
I can neither confirm nor deny the fact that hit men are after you right now.

[Rutskarn]

Fast curing epoxies also generate a huge amount of heat...you're going to have alot of 2nd degree+ burns...

I didn't even think of this, but yeah. When I use epoxy catalysts to create quick bonds while modeling, you can't put your fingers nearby, or you feel extreme heat.

So far, we got:

1.) Rashes

2.) Toxins

3.) Burns

4.) Socially Awkward Bonds

5.) Property Damage

I changed my mind. I totally want to see this.

[BizzaroStormy]

Don't forget suffocation and removal of skin and hair when getting the stuff off. If the expoxy itself doesn't do some damage, the solvent sure as hell will.

[Rutskarn]

Right you are, PJ!

I'm not really sure this would stop a riot, but it could quite plausibly cause the apocalypse.

Anyway, in the interest of not just being an insufferable smarty-pants, let me go ahead and lend some constructive input. A lot of people have suggested stink/sound bombs, and that sounds like a good starting point to me.

Alternately, install stun collars on all citizens and try to stall the class action until the situation's passed. Unless they riot about the collars. Then I guess you're screwed.

[Killersquid]

You know what it would cause as well? More riots.

[BizzaroStormy]

Well...theres always the option of not using non-lethal force at all.

[Setra]

Well...theres always the option of not using non-lethal force at all.
That's always a fun option. People will remember when you do, that's for sure.

Tiananmen Square anyone?

[Narmoth]

the problem with using non-lethal force is that force still can be lethal.
I remember when terrorists took hostages at a theater in Moscow, the police pumped in sleeping gas to take them out quietly and be able to save all the hostages. Still some hostages suffocated because they fell asleep in a position that prevented effective breathing, and were to unconscious to change position and breathe.

And this were sleeping gas, not epoxy.

[Maxymiuk]

Obviously, the superior solution would be a textile solvent. Because nothing quells the fighting spirit faster than realizing that people can see your pasty behind on national television.

EDIT: Addendum.

The core idea is that the safest way to deal with a mob is to disrupt the "mob mentality". Whether inducing overwhelming fear, force, shame, psychological warfare... the idea is to turn a monolithic crowd into a group of individual people.

[Kaelaroth]

Personally, I think "love bombs", and "fear frequencies" are the best way to go, if you and our ever-inventive group could work out way to pull it off. As said, destabilizing the mob is key - forcing lust and panic on them's a great way to shatter their collective, without panic over knocking them out, etc.

Of course, with some kind of fear inducing device/pheromone/chemical-wotsit, you'd end up with riots running in the opposite direction..

[Dallas-Dakota]

I'm of the opinion that making an example of some rioters will do a very good job of convincing them that it's not a good idea to riot. I'm assuming, of course, we're using this on a particularly violent riot that water hoses, attack dogs, and tear gas don't work on. Safety in quelling a riot is overrated; it's combat, and many of the rioters (thanks to a mob mentality) would gleefully murder any of the agents of the law trying to quell the riot. They have already chosen to participate in a fight; what happens to them is their own fault. They're just lucky most law enforcement agencies prefer not to massacre 'innocent' civilians.

YES! That worked wonders in Greece! /sarcasm.

[Rettu Skcollob]

Okay, edited most of this out. After seeing Solaris' post earlier, I kind of got into 'Angry Left-wing Monologue Mode'. Too close to RL politics, I think.

Summary (Without the Political Views): People must have a reason for rioting. Find out why people are rioting and stop, or at least show that you're trying you hardest to stop, whatever it is. Prevention > Cure, and in this case it looks like there really isn't a Cure anyway. What happens when you violently put down a riot? More. Riots.

For the riot control methods themselves, I'd probably say that the fear inducing thing might not be that good of a solution... If it worked, I expect you'd have people trampling over each other, knocking into each other, and generally panicking to get away. Might be better than tear gas, I guess though.



Alternately, install stun collars on all citizens and try to stall the class action until the situation's passed. Unless they riot about the collars. Then I guess you're screwed.


I'm pretty sure that if there's one thing that would get me angry to the point of apoplectic, riotous fury; it's the government making me wear a stun collar...

[Jack Squat]

Summary (Without the Political Views): People must have a reason for rioting. Find out why people are rioting and stop, or at least show that you're trying you hardest to stop, whatever it is. Prevention > Cure, and in this case it looks like there really isn't a Cure anyway. What happens when you violently put down a riot? More. Riots.


Last Riot I was around (Cincinnati 2002), who went off because a white cop shot a black kid. The kid was in a dark alleyway, and true to gangsta fashion, he had pants way to big and no belt. While he was running from the cops (he had 14 outstanding warrants), he reached down to pull up his pants. Cop thought he was reaching for a gun and shot. Not much you can do to stop that riot...I think most people that do riot are just looking for reasons to be violent; there's plenty of other ways to protest that won't get you on the wrong side of the law.

[Renegade Paladin]

Summary (Without the Political Views): People must have a reason for rioting. Find out why people are rioting and stop, or at least show that you're trying you hardest to stop, whatever it is. Prevention > Cure, and in this case it looks like there really isn't a Cure anyway. What happens when you violently put down a riot? More. Riots.
Curing whatever sparked the riot in the first place normally takes longer than it takes the riot to die down, and if it can be done immediately you still have a riot on your hands; the mob mentality is not reasonable. You still need riot control; having a large mob of people rampaging around destroying things and killing people is not acceptable no matter what the cause.

[Surfing HalfOrc]

An epoxy bomb (glueing the rioters together) won't work for the numerous reasons posted above, however your group might want to consider a sticky bomb that holds rioters in place/prevents movement in certian directions.

Hosing down a street in front, to the side, and maybe behind a riot will contain the riot in one place, and away from anyone to vent their mob anger on. Then the police can fall back, and let the anger-pressure dissapate.

Sort of a portable wall/prison...

[Dallas-Dakota]

Maybe they can install such a system into the ground that 1/2th 1 CM can covered in glue..

Though that wouldn't solve the release clogging problem...

[Solaris]

YES! That worked wonders in Greece! /sarcasm.

I thought so.

But in all seriousness, I only advocate use of extreme methods when extreme methods become necessary - in situations like Val suggested, where it's bordering on armed insurrection. If it's just pissed-off civilians, unarmed and cranky about something (like what I've seen in videos of Berkeley... I could dig up the link, but it's definitely RL politics), then tear gas and riot hoses will disperse 'em without undue damage to personnel or property. Escalation of force - shout, show, shove, shoot. Use precisely as much force as is necessary to accomplish the given objective, and with as little unnecessary collateral damage as possible.


Okay, edited most of this out. After seeing Solaris' post earlier, I kind of got into 'Angry Left-wing Monologue Mode'. Too close to RL politics, I think.
Heh. You'll get used to me, 'specially if you're in my game for a long period of time. I'm a rather macabre and morbid person.


Summary (Without the Political Views): People must have a reason for rioting. Find out why people are rioting and stop, or at least show that you're trying you hardest to stop, whatever it is. Prevention > Cure, and in this case it looks like there really isn't a Cure anyway. What happens when you violently put down a riot? More. Riots.
Prevention is ideal, but oftentimes unattainable when the people are busily blowing stuff up/breaking stuff/burning stuff/looting stuff/fighting policemen. You have to strike the balance between putting the fear of the law into them and not killing them all. Only when they respect the law can really set to work on preventing further rioting.


For the riot control methods themselves, I'd probably say that the fear inducing thing might not be that good of a solution... If it worked, I expect you'd have people trampling over each other, knocking into each other, and generally panicking to get away. Might be better than tear gas, I guess though.
You have to find the balance between 'nice' and 'ruthless' when breaking up a riot. I really only know methods for breaking the initial rush - the police department's gotta follow up with quick enforcement of martial law and lock down the area. It's an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things.


I'm pretty sure that if there's one thing that would get me angry to the point of apoplectic, riotous fury; it's the government making me wear a stun collar...
Agreed, vehemently. I may be a little cog in the machine, but there are things which I will not abide. Government making me wear a stun collar is one of them. That way lies madness - and, thank God, not RL politics.
Yet.

I agree with Jack Squat. When they're rioting, they're cranked in general and are looking for an excuse to riot. I suppose your thoughts on this depend primarily on your thoughts about human nature, which is an entirely different can of worms than the ramifications of using toxic, scalding epoxy to discourage/detain rioters.

[Seonor]

Most of the ideas discussed here are not new. Problem is, most of them sound good on paper but do not work in real life. Here (http://blog.wired.com/defense/lesslethal/index.html) are a few examples.

The best tactic is still prevention, but that would need in most cases long term planning, political will and money.

[Jorkens]

Not much you can do to stop that riot...I think most people that do riot are just looking for reasons to be violent; there's plenty of other ways to protest that won't get you on the wrong side of the law.
Hmmmm... a lot of the time it seems like the thing that actually triggers the riot is pretty trivial and people actually just go out and riot 'because they're looking for an excuse to riot.' But a lot of the time there's a further reason behind why people want an excuse to riot - generally that they peceive that they're being treated unfairly by the government, the police or society. Maybe it's actually happening or maybe it isn't, and maybe even if it is then that doesn't justify chucking a brick but there is more to it than just people getting violent because violence is fun and they'll take any excuse to go out and smash stuff.

Also, if people are rioting because they perceive that they're being treated badly by the police then any use of force by the police risks triggering further trouble. Particularly because not everyone who's present while a riot is going on is 'a rioter' - these things often start with a peaceful protest that turns ugly when a small group start making trouble and the police react heavy handedly. So there are probably going to be a lot of people running around who are just scared or confused or trying to get out of the way. Killing peaceful protestors is not generally considered to be a good thing.

[Rettu Skcollob]

I suppose you have to have sympathy for the people who are trying to stem the riot... But of course, this is a variable.

Be too rough, and you'll have a bunch of lawsuits and charges of brutality on your hands, be too lenient and you'll have a bunch of destroyed property and injured people, and will promptly crapped on from upstairs.

In all honesty; you could argue both sides of the argument quite proficiently; they've both got valid points to them. I think the issue is unlikely to be resolved any time soon, and unless there's some radical development, which your group will hopefully produce. :P

And don't worry, I still love you, Sol. My political views seem to swap between 'Unrealistic, angry wish for radical change and too much faith in humanity' to 'Ruthless, Machiavellian, coldly calculating holder of a complete lack of faith in humans to be anything but complete bastards' according to current events that sway me either way. E.G. The Riots in Greece, etc.

[Flame of Anor]

Obviously, the superior solution would be a textile solvent. Because nothing quells the fighting spirit faster than realizing that people can see your pasty behind on national television.

That could work...we'd have to call Dr. Bunbury or whatever his name is from the recent Girl Genius strip, but yeah, that'd be silly and non-harmful and would certainly make them think twice.


Personally, I think "love bombs", and "fear frequencies" are the best way to go, if you and our ever-inventive group could work out way to pull it off. As said, destabilizing the mob is key - forcing lust and panic on them's a great way to shatter their collective, without panic over knocking them out, etc.

Hmm. It would be kind of interesting to see a riot turn into an orgy, but when it wears off, and they realize what they've been doing, I would imagine the erstwhile rioters would be even more irate.

[dralasite]

The problem with crowd control is that you have a wave of angry humans followed by another wave, itself by yet another waves and so on.

- if you stop the front crowd, the back crowd might still advance and crush/trample the front crowd.
- if you force the front crowd to flee, they will collide with those who are still advancing, causing trampling and panic
- if you "treat" the crowd on all sides, then you might get a general panic and much trampling... :smallconfused:

The other problem with crowd is that they are not composed of average adult humans but rather of a composite of adults, elderlies, teenagers and even infants, any of them might have health conditions or other vulnerabilities. Any a special "non lethal" weapon is used on a crowd, you risk killing some people...

I remember an article about a microwave "non lethal" crowd dispersing weapons: if fired microwave in a small arc and was supposed to cause burning pain with no lasting damage and totally harmless. Of course they did test it on adult healthy people and certainly not on older people, people with heart conditions (let's not even speak of pacemakers!), infants or asthamatic people...
Worse of all, if would affect only the front row with burning pain: the front row will howl in pain and try to flee while the rest of the crowd will wonder what's happening. :smalleek:

Well, crowd control has been a pain since thousand of years, I doubt we will get a solution anytime soon (not even Dr Manhattan, technically a god, did not find a really harmless solution!) :smallbiggrin:

[Coidzor]

Hmm, perhaps a combination of that wall of flumph idea and aerial deployment to basically cut a crowd up and isolate them into smaller units. I imagine that having the crowd pushing in more than one direction to avoid getting hit by the deploying crud from the sky would cause minimal casualties when compared to hitting the front of a crowd moving in one coherent direction.

Is a mug's game, of course, dealing with riots. But, y'know, generally necessary.

[Rutskarn]

I'm pretty sure that if there's one thing that would get me angry to the point of apoplectic, riotous fury; it's the government making me wear a stun collar...

What I was saying was not unlike a joke.

Anyway, I'm going to have to side with the break-mob-cohesion camp. That's really the best way to make sure nobody, not even the rioters, gets hurt.

I think it's important to stress that if any rioter gets injured, in any context or situation, and especially if one of them is killed, the chance of future riots increases exponentially. The only people likely to be dissuaded from rioting again would be some of those present, who would be traumatized, and perhaps a small handful of timid on-the-fence rioters. Everyone else would be galvanized to rise up immediately and show no mercy.

[RandomNPC]

i'm all for the "you're to stupid not to riot without proper gear, you deserve it" mindset. but i've had friends go to sports games where a riot happened, and he happened to be trying to go home after the game.

let me tell you he's a tough guy, but a rubber bullet to the shin should at least bruse you, he looked at the cop who shot him, mouthed the words that go with "wth" and kept walking, next day no mark.

so i'm not a fan of this less and non leathal, if you cant even leave a mark on someone i know your law enforcement isn't strong enough. this goes both ways however. Law enforcement should be able to measure the crowd, i've had officers explain riot control to me, it makes sense on paper. usually there are a few people egging others on, if this is the case take out ringleaders, if not, start zip ties and duct tape handcuffs, make as many arrests as safely possible. If a real riot breaks out, back off wait for help, like full riot gear swat team and the like. it's at this point i think extensive measures need to be taken, here they are:

1 mythbusters proved a bullet falling at maximum falling velocity will not kill, this doesn't mean fire shots up, it means airdrop items simmilar to spent rounds over the crowd. rubber balls and the like.
2 melee combat, nightsticks, riot shields, all the good stuf, subdue, bind, arrest.
3 "less" lethal weapons, rubber bullets, all that. live rounds fired low in extreme cases (shin and foot low to stop movement)
4 air drop chuck norris. (seriously, why hasn't anyone said this already?)

[Rutskarn]

1 mythbusters proved a bullet falling at maximum falling velocity will not kill

But that it might cause minor skull fractures. Probably a bad idea.

[Grynning]

i'm all for the "you're to stupid not to riot without proper gear, you deserve it" mindset.


Um, if you "properly gear" for a riot, it's no longer a riot, it's an armed insurrection. In which case you're no longer dealing with police, but with the armed forces of the nation, and all of the "less-lethal" stuff goes out the window.



but i've had friends go to sports games where a riot happened, and he happened to be trying to go home after the game.
let me tell you he's a tough guy, but a rubber bullet to the shin should at least bruse you, he looked at the cop who shot him, mouthed the words that go with "wth" and kept walking, next day no mark.


While this story might be true, it smacks of exaggeration and macho bluster. Screen shot or it didn't happen.



1 mythbusters proved a bullet falling at maximum falling velocity will not kill,

No, they didn't. They were unable to create an experiment that demonstrated it. There were several real life cases of this happening that were presented on that same episode.

[Setra]

NSFW Idea
Maybe a giant theater system one can move that shows homosexual pornogrophy

[Coidzor]

I dunno, that seems like it'd either cause certain types of people to be enraged and others to be nonplussed.

I mean, a few might flee from it, but I think most of those who'd react negatively would tend towards enraged given the environs.

[Setra]

I dunno, that seems like it'd either cause certain types of people to be enraged and others to be nonplussed.

I mean, a few might flee from it, but I think most of those who'd react negatively would tend towards enraged given the environs.
Well then what about plain ol' normal porn then?

I haven't been in a riot before but I'd probably at least stop for a moment. That moment might be enough for me to think "Wait, what the hell am I doing?"

[bosssmiley]

Here's one for you: aerosol release of MDMA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methylenedioxymethamphetamine#Acute_effects) (the active ingredient in Ecstasy). Follow up with stereo trucks playing chill-out music and distributing cushions.

Riot to blissed-out rave in two easy stages (pic related (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/60/163559759_0b5ddf01f8.jpg)). No baton charges, tear gas, or tasers necessary. :smallwink:

[Thiel]

So, instead of having a bunch of angry rioters running around, we have a bunch of angry ravers dancing around?

[Jorkens]

So, instead of having a bunch of angry rioters running around, we have a bunch of angry ravers dancing around?
Erm, people on E are a lot more likely to hug you and offer you their bottle of water than to chuck a half brick or a molotov cocktail at you.

[Zeful]

So from riot to public orgy then?

[Jorkens]

So from riot to public orgy then?
AFAIK it pretty much supresses the libido as well. So more like from riot to group hug.

[dralasite]

[QUOTE=RandomNPC;5553716]

1 mythbusters proved a bullet falling at maximum falling velocity will not kill, this doesn't mean fire shots up, it means airdrop items simmilar to spent rounds over the crowd. rubber balls and the like.
[QUOTE]
In some middle-eastern countries (like Iraq), one of the common ways to celebrate is to fire gunshots in the air. Each year there are people killed or injured from falling bullets.
Not safe at all.

[Rutskarn]

I think RNPC, like me, might be getting it mixed up with the penny-at-terminal-velocity one.

But yeah, dropping-bullet-related fatalities are common all over the world. I think it was somewhere where after a sports victory, the PSA "Don't fire your gun into the air!" flashed onto the screen.

[Jalor]

Here's one for you: aerosol release of MDMA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methylenedioxymethamphetamine#Acute_effects) (the active ingredient in Ecstasy). Follow up with stereo trucks playing chill-out music and distributing cushions.

Riot to blissed-out rave in two easy stages (pic related (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/60/163559759_0b5ddf01f8.jpg)). No baton charges, tear gas, or tasers necessary. :smallwink:

That might work. I'd have to research that more.


NSFW Idea
Maybe a giant theater system one can move that shows homosexual pornogrophy

Giant screens showing Goatse/Tubgirl/whatever actually might work. Unless of course Anonymous incited the riot.

[Phae Nymna]

I suggest many high calibre bullets. A dead riot is a stopped riot.

[Rutskarn]

While that's obviously a joke, I'd just like to reiterate that the bodies from one riot are the fertilizer for the next.

[dralasite]

I suggest many high calibre bullets. A dead riot is a stopped riot.

Or you have also dragon breath rounds:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon's_Breath

I read somewhere that they indeed had been used as crowd control in some eastern Europe dictature. Sure, who would go anywhere near a cop who can set you alight a 20m?

OTOH, killing rioters is also a good to turn a riot into an armed insurrection...

[bosssmiley]

Giant screens showing Goatse/Tubgirl/whatever actually might work. Unless of course Anonymous incited the riot.

Hundreds of V-masked weirdoes quoting stupid memes and making fapping gestures to a 40' high Goatse while the "1812 Oveture" plays in the background. :smallconfused:

Best. Riot. EVER! :smallbiggrin:

[Quincunx]

And here I would have angled for a lower common denominator and gone for selections from the Bloodhound Gang or, where appropriate, the theme song for Team America: World Police.

*trudges back along the rails towards the original topic*
*hours pass*

Is your group devoted to the idea of liquid or semi-liquid crowd control? Why not skip the idea of what to apply to the riot and focus on how to deliver it:

Lobbing shots high and into the center of the crowd vs. perimeter application vs. horizontal high-pressure vs. misting from above?
Delivery methods which can be fitted onto existing apparatus (fire hydrants) vs. easily rigged in the field (e.g. deployed from atop traffic lights) vs. unique but portable equipment (low-payload drones)?