US Law Enforcement's "Less Lethal" Crowd Control Measures Spark Controversy Over Deadly Consequences
A recent wave of violence by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has brought the use of force by law enforcement under renewed scrutiny. While the focus has been on lethal force, a lesser-known aspect of law enforcement tactics - crowd control measures labeled as "less lethal" - are also drawing criticism for their potential to cause serious injury or death.
These less-lethal munitions include stun guns, pepper spray, concussion projectiles, and other devices designed to be used instead of live ammunition. Proponents claim they provide an option that stops short of lethal force, but critics argue that even these measures can still be deadly if misused by law enforcement.
The case of Kaden Rummler, a 21-year-old protester shot in the face with a less-lethal round while demonstrating against the killing of Renee Good, highlights the risks associated with these devices. In the video footage of the incident, an officer points his weapon directly at Rummler's face, fracturing his skull and leaving shrapnel in his face, ultimately rendering him blind for life in one eye.
Other incidents have also surfaced, such as a woman who fell to the ground writhing in pain after being shot with another less-lethal round. These examples demonstrate that even when used according to guidelines, these devices can still result in serious injury or death.
Experts point out that law enforcement often fails to follow best practices when using these weapons, leading to unnecessary harm. In some instances, officers are seen aiming directly at the head or other sensitive areas of the body, which increases the risk of severe injury.
The medical director at Physicians for Human Rights, Dr. Michele Heisler, warns that even when used correctly, less-lethal weapons will still result in injury. "Increasingly, there's a consensus that kinetic impact projectiles can never really be used safely to disperse crowds," she says.
In response to growing concerns, some states have proposed regulations to restrict the use of certain less-lethal devices or ban problematic models altogether. California, for example, has passed laws requiring police to attempt de-escalation before resorting to these measures and banning indiscriminate firing into crowds.
However, advocates note that for these regulations to be effective, they need buy-in from members of law enforcement. The use of less-lethal munitions by ICE agents, in particular, remains unaddressed, with the agency declining to comment on the matter.
A recent wave of violence by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has brought the use of force by law enforcement under renewed scrutiny. While the focus has been on lethal force, a lesser-known aspect of law enforcement tactics - crowd control measures labeled as "less lethal" - are also drawing criticism for their potential to cause serious injury or death.
These less-lethal munitions include stun guns, pepper spray, concussion projectiles, and other devices designed to be used instead of live ammunition. Proponents claim they provide an option that stops short of lethal force, but critics argue that even these measures can still be deadly if misused by law enforcement.
The case of Kaden Rummler, a 21-year-old protester shot in the face with a less-lethal round while demonstrating against the killing of Renee Good, highlights the risks associated with these devices. In the video footage of the incident, an officer points his weapon directly at Rummler's face, fracturing his skull and leaving shrapnel in his face, ultimately rendering him blind for life in one eye.
Other incidents have also surfaced, such as a woman who fell to the ground writhing in pain after being shot with another less-lethal round. These examples demonstrate that even when used according to guidelines, these devices can still result in serious injury or death.
Experts point out that law enforcement often fails to follow best practices when using these weapons, leading to unnecessary harm. In some instances, officers are seen aiming directly at the head or other sensitive areas of the body, which increases the risk of severe injury.
The medical director at Physicians for Human Rights, Dr. Michele Heisler, warns that even when used correctly, less-lethal weapons will still result in injury. "Increasingly, there's a consensus that kinetic impact projectiles can never really be used safely to disperse crowds," she says.
In response to growing concerns, some states have proposed regulations to restrict the use of certain less-lethal devices or ban problematic models altogether. California, for example, has passed laws requiring police to attempt de-escalation before resorting to these measures and banning indiscriminate firing into crowds.
However, advocates note that for these regulations to be effective, they need buy-in from members of law enforcement. The use of less-lethal munitions by ICE agents, in particular, remains unaddressed, with the agency declining to comment on the matter.
- it's crazy how some "less lethal" crowd control measures can actually lead to serious injuries and even death... like that Kaden Rummler guy who got shot right in the face 
! Can't believe they point that gun directly at someone's face and expect everything to be okay. Even when used according to guidelines, it's still super sketchy. And what about those cases where officers aim for sensitive areas? 
The medical director is right, even when used correctly, these devices can still cause harm. California's trying to do something good by banning some problematic models, but it's not gonna work if law enforcement doesn't get on board 
. I mean, we've got videos like Kaden Rummler's incident where it's clear that officers were NOT following best practices - aiming directly at people's faces and heads? That's just crazy talk! 
I need some concrete info before I start buying into all this. This whole thing just feels like it's being swept under the rug...
stuff is still going on! So, like, these "less lethal" crowd control measures are just a fancy way of saying they're still gonna hurt people if used wrongfully 
. I mean, who wants to have to live with the consequences of being shot with one of these things? Not me, that's for sure 
. Like, yeah I get that they wanna keep everyone safe, but these "less lethal" guns and stuff can be super deadly if not used right 
. Kaden Rummler's case is a real eye-opener - fracturing someone's skull like that? Unacceptable 
. And what's up with ICE not commenting on this whole thing? 
. I mean, come on! If they can't even be bothered to follow best practices when using these devices, then maybe they shouldn't be allowed to use them in the first place? It's just common sense... well, maybe not to them 
.
. It's like, I get where law enforcement is trying to minimize harm, but can't we find a better way to defuse situations without resorting to these potentially hazardous tools? 
. I do think it's good that some states are proposing regulations to restrict the use of certain devices, but we need law enforcement and these agencies to be on board with that 
. And yeah, the fact that ICE isn't commenting on this is not helping the situation...
I'm telling ya, back in my day we didn't have all these fancy "less lethal" guns and stuff. We just used good old-fashioned common sense and de-escalation techniques 
.
It's just not that hard to figure out how to handle situations peacefully. These officers need to learn some basic tactics, like trying to stay calm under pressure and communicating with the people they're dealing with.
. I'm sure it's all well and good, but at the end of the day, we want our cops to be able to do their jobs without having to worry about getting sued every time they use one of these gadgets 
.
. Otherwise, it's just gonna keep happening, and we're all gonna end up paying the price 
.
? I get that they wanna keep people in line, but do they really need to use stuff that can totally freak someone out and leave 'em permanently blind, fam? 
. Let's get this conversation started and make sure our law enforcement is actually looking out for us, not just themselves 
. Like, what's the point of havin' a device that's supposed to be non-lethal if it can still blind someone for life? 
It's like they're playin' a game of Russian roulette with someone's life. 
And don't even get me started on the lack of regulation 
. The fact that ICE won't comment on this issue is super concerning - we need transparency and accountability from law enforcement agencies 
.
. We need to make sure our law enforcement agencies are trained to use these tools safely and responsibly before we give 'em more power to carry around 
.
. It's not just about following guidelines, it's about using common sense and respecting human life 
. The fact that some states are proposing regulations is a good start, but we need to see real change from law enforcement agencies 