Eyes relax movies |
Non-Lethal Weapons Suggested to Incapacitate Terrorists in AirlinersAir Safety Week , Oct 15, 2001The U.S. military is suggesting the use of non-lethal weapons as a means of combating terrorist attacks in the air by disabling the assailants. Not killing them outright, but effecting any assailant`s motivational behavior. The concept, articulated to airline industry officials in a briefing prepared by the U.S. Department of Defense Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Program, may represent a hypothetical "bridge too far." It envisions the use of multiple devices in a simultaneous assault on the senses that would disable everyone in the cabin, to include cabin attendants and any sky marshals that might be aboard. In the face of blinding lights and piercing shrills from sirens, any would-be hijackers might not be the only ones curled on the floor in the fetal position, their eyes squeezed shut and hands clasped over their ears. However, a less aggressive use of non-lethal devices in the immediate area just outside the cockpit, in what might be called a "security zone" extending a few feet back from the cockpit door, may be worth considering. "We offer some technologies that the airlines could leverage," said Colonel George Fenton, a Marine Corps officer at the joint non-lethal weapons program office at the Marines` base in Quantico, Virginia. With non-lethal weapons, he suggested, "It becomes too hard to take over an aircraft. Pilots would not have to carry guns." And for these reasons, a U.S. Senate aviation security bill unanimously passed last week calls for a feasibility study of non- lethal weapons to disable would-be hijackers. Not lethal, but not harmless One point needs to be stressed at the outset. Non-lethal weapons are not harmless. The operative term "to incapacitate while minimizing fatalities" (emphasis added) is significant. As Fenton cautioned, "There is no guarantee" that fatalities will not result when non-lethal weapons are used. However, unlike handguns, non-lethal weapons are not designed to kill. Rather, they are intended to change an assailant`s behavior - from one of an offensive mindset to a defensive, self-protective mentality. In terms of the classic "fight or flight" syndrome, non-lethal weapons are intended to induce a strong desire for "flight." This can take the form of so incapacitating an assailant that he flees, or is reduced to curling into a defensive ball on the floor. As Col. Fenton explained, non-lethal weapons are designed to deny use of the body`s five basic senses, of the ability to think (cognition), and the ability to move (motor skills). These are the seven areas, if you will, against which non-lethal weapons can be targeted to alter behavior. As Fenton said, "If we can deny two or three of these, the terrorist moves from the offensive to the defensive." While admittedly initial concepts, a variety of non-lethal technologies may have applicability to the defense of airliners against terrorist actions: Near term, and predominantly available off-the-shelf: * Riot control agents; pepper spray. * Slippery agents (liquid films of such low friction that an assailant cannot maintain his footing). * Stun guns; Tasers. These do not necessarily have to be in the hands of a pilot or flight attendant (see ASW, Oct. 8). Rather, they can be installed in a bulkhead, on the floor, and so forth. * Obscurants; malodorants. The former includes smoke, the latter includes strong odors sprayed into the area, such as the smell of fecal matter or decaying flesh. "You start to gag, try to resist breathing" when exposed to these strong odors, Fenton explained. * Entanglement. This approach involves the use of a net that would suddenly deploy, entangling assailant(s). * Dazzlers. High-powered strobe lights would dazzle the assailant, creating a strong instinctive desire to shut the eyes. * Audible acoustics, sirens. These devices would emit a random, high- pitched piercing noise. Mid Term (considered 3 years +): Calmative/sleep agents. A calmative agent, similar to the medications to relax patients before surgery, could be sprayed, nullifying the assailant`s aggressive behavior. Fenton explained that more than one technology might be applied. For example, smoke could be used to deny the sense of sight. Currently available smoke generators "can fill the entire cabin of a 747 within seconds," he said. The random high-pitched shrieks of sirens, he said, would deny the sense of hearing. In the presence of this piercing noise, terrorists would be unable to communicate. Should a terrorist in the smoke and shrieking noise stumble on a stun gun now activated and ready to fire, the jolt of electricity would drop him to the floor. In this scenario, the sense of smell and hearing would be denied, motor skills would become spastic, and probably in the face of all this one`s ability to think, the all-important cognitive skills, would be reduced to a jumble of instinctive protective reactions. Everybody goes down The thought-provoking concept suggests that non-lethal weapons would affect everybody in the cabin - passengers from 5 months to 85 years old, as well as the terrorists. That may well be too aggressive an approach. In this whole-cabin concept, any sky marshals aboard would be incapacitated as well. So would the flight attendants. On this score, one should remind of the flight safety role played by flight attendants. If people have been wounded or the aircraft damaged in any melee subjugating terrorists, the captain doubtless would divert to the nearest airfield. In this case, flight attendants incapacitated by non-lethal gas, for instance, may be in no condition to perform their vital role in providing first aid and/or preparing for an emergency evacuation upon landing. Interpersonal psi: exploring the role of the sender in ganzfeld GESP tasksJournal of Parapsychology, The , Fall, 2004 by Chris A. Roe, Simon J. Sherwood, Nicola J. Holt << Page 1Continued from page 6.Previous|
With the assistance of the sender, the experimenter prepared the receiver for the ganzfeld and wished him/her success. Receivers were seated in a reclining chair and encouraged to relax. They were invited to remove their shoes and cover themselves with a blanket if desired. Receivers wore headphones with a microphone attached through which they could communicate with the experimenter and be heard by the sender. Halved ping-pong balls were placed over their eyes and held secure with micropore tape. A red light was shone on the receiver`s face, positioned immediately in front of him/her at a comfortable distance (typically 1 m). Receivers were then locked in the room (unless they were uncomfortable with this) and senders were guided back to their room. At this point senders were informed of the possibility that the experimenter and receiver may be misinformed as to the true nature of the trial (e.g., be told that it was a no-sender trial whe n in fact there would be a sender) to enable us to look at the effects of expectancy. Once the experimenter had returned to the experimenter`s room and established contact with the receiver, the trial commenced. Receivers began by listening to and following a series of progressive relaxation instructions. At the end of the relaxation period, the computer program determined whether the session would be a sender or no-sender trial and whether the experimenter and receiver would be accurately or falsely briefed. The receiver and experimenter heard a prerecorded message indicating whether or not the trial would involve a sender. At this stage receivers were not aware that the computer briefing might be false. For no-sender trials senders received an on-screen message asking them to remove their headphones and move over to the other computer in the sender`s room to complete an alternative task. The monitor in the sender`s room did not show the target clip during no-sender trials. For sender trials, senders watched a randomly selected video clip that was played 15 times with min intervals bet ween plays. Drawing materials were provided for them should they have wished to sketch elements of the target clip during these "quiet" periods. During this 30-min mentation period receivers listened to white noise being played through their headphones and reported on any impressions or sensations that they experienced. The experimenter listened to the receiver`s mentation via headphones from the experimenter`s room and took notes. In the sender condition, senders could also hear any comments made by the receiver during the mentation period. Following the mentation period, the experimenter read the receiver`s mentation back to him/her and asked if there was anything further that he/she would like to add or elaborate upon. Receivers were then asked a series of questions regarding their experiences in the ganzfeld. Simultaneously, senders completed a questionnaire concerning their interaction with the target and sending strategies employed. At the judging stage receivers were asked to remove their eye-shields but were encouraged to remain in a relaxed state as they watched four video clips, giving each one a percentage similarity rating. After viewing all four clips, they were able to view any or all of them as many times as they wished and to alter their ratings if necessary. Senders were able to listen to the clip soundtracks and the interaction between the receiver and experimenter during the judging stage, but did not view the dummy clips. (4) Once receivers were satisfied with their ratings, these were confirmed and saved as a permanent r ecord. Only after the data were saved was the target clip revealed and replayed. The sender, experimenter, and receiver then convened for a discussion and debriefing session in the receiver`s room. Receivers were only made aware of the possibility that they had been misinformed concerning the experimental condition during debrief, at which stage they were free to withdraw their data from the study. None chose to do so. A copy of the trial data record was printed and signed by all parties to confirm the details of the session. Previous- 1- 7- 8- 9- 10- 11- 1 1 1 1Eyes relaxation index
| Free Online Music games | Speed reading free lessons| Mnemonic games | fun online games | Kids games (painting, action, games for girls) | Billiards online games | Chip games and flash design | Speed typing free online lessons | |
||