Protesters should make a parabolic reflector with the focus about 50ft out. Pretty sure cops would stop using these things instantly
Focusing the energy of an instrument that is designed to approach dangerous sound-intensity levels is certain to make the situation more dangerous. Non-violent action is predicated on the idea that hurting anyone, including an aggressor, is counterproductive. A corner-cube reflector won't hurt an LRAD operator any more than the LRAD operator is hurting others. A parabolic reflector could.
If the golden rule isn't sufficient motivation to avoid a focal instrument, perhaps friendly-fire will be: A parabolic reflector will always bring parallel waves/rays to a focus at the focus. If the reflector is more than a focal-length inside a crowd, it is going to destroy the ears of a protestor.
Like glass bottles that start fires in the Australian Outback by concentrating sunlight, anything that concentrates sound energy in an environment with an LRAD is a recipe for unintended consequence.
When and where violence should be resisted with violence is a question for the ages, perhaps with an answer that varies with time and circumstance.
I suspect that for the protests in America today to succeed, taking the highest-possible road of non-violence will yield the greatest dividend. The real battle is playing out in the minds of a multitude of quiet observers. The city streets are just one stage.
If I had armor that ricocheted bullets back at the shooter, I wouldn't consider myself culpable if someone who tried to shoot me shot themselves.
It is difficult to find an analogy -- it is as if the LRAD operator has thrown a punch and the reflector turns that punch into the stab of a rapier. If and only if the reflector is properly aligned will the redirected-and-concentrated beam have the reflector-bearer's desired effect. If not, someone else may get harmed. The reflector-bearer must accept responsibility for the change in consequence between the punch and the rapier.
There is a third option -- one can readily design reflectors that disperse the energy or generically attempt to reflect it upward. Those are the tools of true pacifists.
Yes, violent retaliation is still violence.
Violence only in retaliation and/or self-defense may be a valid approach to protest in some circumstances, but it's not non-violent protest.
I will agree that the proposed device might (if targeted appropriately) be more defensive than retaliatory, though the fact that it only causes harm to the focussed-on target if someone attacks it doesn't make it purely defensive or non-retaliatory, in fact, if not carefully targeted it makes it quite indiscriminate retaliation.
It is not. The idea is not to provide political cover for violent escalation by the establishment. Now, if that escalation nevertheless occurs, one response is to make lemonade out of those lemons, but it's not the goal of nonviolent protest.
“Nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon, which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it. It is a sword that heals.”
“Nonviolence is absolute commitment to the way of love. Love is not emotional bash; it is not empty sentimentalism. It is the active outpouring of one’s whole being into the being of another.”
The point is to sway the very opponent who is harming you, to convince them that hurting you is wrong. It takes great strategy, tactics, and courage. The point is not to be a martyr, it is to create change that makes a difference.
prepared to get shot and/or charged with "assaulting a police officer"