• drolex@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Sorry I might not be up-to-date with the fash parlance, but is ‘less lethal’ some sort of official nomenclature?

    “It’s OK you’re not quite dead, it was a less lethal bullet to your head, ahah. OwO”

    I am amazed by the times.

    • scbasteve7@lemm.ee
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think all non-lethal weapons had the name changed to less than lethal about 5-10 years ago.

      Turns out if you shoot a rubber bullet at someone’s head and it kills them, the weapon manufacturer can be open to liability. So now it’s less than lethal.

      • Mirshe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 months ago

        Less lethal, not less than. TASER wound up in a big lawsuit after a guy died from cardiac arrest being hit by one, so most manufacturers changed it to “less than”, but then a couple more people died from being hit with beanbag/baton/rubber rounds, so now they’re marketed as “less lethal” because legally they can’t say “this can’t kill people” in their marketing when it absolutely can.

    • Clepsydrae@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      Princess Bride beat them to the punch decades ago. The suspect was rendered only mostly dead when long-distance kinetic interaction was applied in an officer-involved pacification tool activation.

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      They used to call it “non-lethal” which was a copaganda lie. After being called out they changed their words instead of their behavior.