backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 94 comment(s) - last by pakigang.. on Feb 21 at 2:54 AM


When the Mosquito goes off it causes pain and irritation for teens and children. Adults can't hear it and are unaffected.  (Source: BBC News)

Here's a closeup of an installed mosquito, armored to protect its against its youthful enemies.  (Source: BBC News)
Meanwhile, British politician battles to ban the Mosquito, which is "a weapon against children" according to activists

After his 15-year old daughter was harassed by a gang of youths, British citizen Howard Stapleton resorted to extreme measures.  He invented a device which emitted an ultrasonic pulse, four times a second for up to twenty minutes.  The device's 17-18 kHz high-pitched buzz resembled a mosquito.  While the device was imperceptible to anyone past around the age of 25, to teens and children in caused pain and irritation. 

The device took advantage of the fact that people under 25 have fine hairs in the inner ear, capable of hearing high frequency noise.  Stapleton had realized a time immemorial dream of geezers the world wide -- a young person repellent.

Fast forward fifteen years later and Stapleton, with the help of partner and commercial director Simon Morris, has created an active company Compound Security Systems, which markets the device.  The device, dubbed the Mosquito, has sold very well with over 3,500 locations in the country.  It retails for £500, and thus has made the company approximately £1.75M, or about $3.44M USD in revenue.

The device has sold largely to local officials and law enforcement agencies, who install the device at shops, schools and railway stations to prevent children and teens from congregating at unwanted hours.  Approximately 75 percent of sales, according to Compound Security Systems are to government bodies.  These agencies see the device as a valuable tool to eliminate gang activity.

Now the device is starting to invade the U.S.  In October of 2007 the Richland County Sheriff's Office in South Carolina became the first U.S. organization to deploy the device.  The test deployment included units being placed at the Columbia Mall, a popular youth hangout.  Compound Security Systems provided the test units free of charge to drum up business stateside.  The police Sheriff Leon Lott was ecstatic at the chance to deploy the technology, stating, "We want to be proactive, we want to have this in place before we have problems like New York, and Boston and New Orleans."

But as the device begins to land in the U.S., it is under attack in its homeland -- one English politician took up the fight on the children's behalf, arguing the device infringes on children's rights.  Sir Albert Aynsley-Green, the Children's Commissioner for England appointed to represent the views of the country’s 11 million children, sees the device as a clear infringement on the rights of young people.  He has launched a campaign called "Buzz Off" attacking the use of the device and calling for a nationwide ban on it.

In an interview with the BBC, Sir Aynsley-Green angrily states, "These devices are indiscriminate and target all children and young people, including babies, regardless of whether they are behaving or misbehaving.  The use of measures such as these are simply demonizing children and young people, creating a dangerous and widening divide between the young and the old."

Sir Aynsley-Green's campaign is being applauded by English human rights group Liberty, who lobbied against the device.  Its director, Shami Chakrabarti, strongly opposes the device and calls it a "sonic weapon directed against children and young people".  She raises the thought-provoking point: "What type of society uses a low-level sonic weapon on its children? Imagine the outcry if a device was introduced that caused blanket discomfort to people of one race or gender, rather than to our kids."

Compound Security Systems insists that at 85 decibels the signal is perfectly humane and is no louder than an alarm clock or loud traffic.   They say they are a victim of a smear campaign.

Like any good arms dealer, Compound Security Systems has also found a way to sell weaponry to both sides of the battle.  In an ironic twist, the noise of the Mosquito has also been marketed by Compound Security Systems as a teacher-proof ringtone.  The ringtone, which was the most popular ringtone when it was released in 2006, is extremely popular among youth who can call each other, while their teacher remains completely oblivious to the rings.  Compound Security Systems admits that most of the ringtone sales have been from illegitimate sources. 

Sir Aynsley-Green is also concerned about the ringtones, as he is worried they may pose a disruption to the learning process.

The battle over the Mosquito marks the latest controversy for the British government.  It also marks an interesting new high-tech chapter in Britain's "youth v. adult" mentality, which powerfully influenced rock music and counter-culture movements of the twentieth century. 

And like the rock movement, what starts in Britain quickly invades the U.S., for better or worse.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I would still be able to hear this
By themadmilkman on 2/19/2008 3:03:00 PM , Rating: 1
I'm 28 years old. I recently had my hearing tested, and 17-18 kHz is still VERY audible to me. Any business that I see employing one of these will instantly be placed on my 'never shop here again' list.




By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 2/19/2008 3:07:17 PM , Rating: 5
I cannot hear the 17 kHz range, but I would still avoid businesses that treat the next generation of their clientelle like rodents. Why am I not surprised it was government agencies that picked it up first?


RE: I would still be able to hear this
By JasonMick (blog) on 2/19/2008 3:12:03 PM , Rating: 3
Its all very 1984/V is For Vendetta-ish. I think employing sonic assaults on any of your citizens is akin to turning water hoses, using attack dogs on them or things of that nature. All indicate signs of governments leaning dangerously towards a totalitarian/nationalist regime where citizen rights are trampled in the name of "protecting the public".

I'm all for police and disrupting gang activity, but any device that hurts law abiding citizens should be banned.


RE: I would still be able to hear this
By jadeskye on 2/19/2008 3:38:35 PM , Rating: 3
i agree. i'm a londoner so i have had to put up with these contraptions (i'm only 21 so i'm affected, rather annoying).

but i've been saying for quite a while now that a government like the one portrayed in V for vendetta is a distinct possibility in britain's future. partiuclarly with how they're monioring our internet traffic to the point where they want to stop us using it if we're potentially downloading illegally.


RE: I would still be able to hear this
By ionoxx on 2/19/2008 3:49:35 PM , Rating: 5
I'm more concerned with the health impacts that these deviced will have. I can hear the 17-18kHz range, and if I do, I'm out for the count with a 2 day migrane.

If these were deployed in my area... I can't imagine the what I would have to do, but they better put more than a little metal cage around it.


RE: I would still be able to hear this
By eye smite on 2/19/2008 6:34:30 PM , Rating: 4
There's kind of a trend in innovation and technology breakthroughs that's been the same for a long time. Lets make it and use it and see what happens. Not trying to belittle anyones accomplishments either. Einstein was kept in the dark on what his discovery would be used for, he was told cheap efficient energy, then they dropped it on japan. Ok that's extreme. How bout DDT used to kill mosquitos, that got into fish that eagles ate that weakened their egg shells so that they had no hatchlings. I'm just saying there's a trend like this going back the last 50 yrs or more and when does someone say stop, have you looked at possible side effects. The migraine is a good example. I guarantee you Sir Buzz Alot didn't think of any of those things when he made this device.


By JoshuaBuss on 2/19/2008 9:00:24 PM , Rating: 2
indeed. the worst part is i don't understand how simply dispersing groups of people discourages unlawful behavior.

if anything, irritating groups of people in places where these are installed seems like an incredibly stupid idea.


By Polynikes on 2/20/2008 12:45:49 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, if I saw one of these, I'd find a way to destroy it. I'm 24, so theoretically I might still be able to hear it, but it wouldn't deter me. I'd find a way.


RE: I would still be able to hear this
By headbox on 2/19/08, Rating: -1
RE: I would still be able to hear this
By JasonMick (blog) on 2/19/2008 3:56:10 PM , Rating: 5
I think your comment borders dangerously on racism/religious intolerance.

I mean immigrants may be the cause of crime increase, but they could be from any part of the world. I think it probably has far more to do with these peoples' poverty then their ethnicity/religion.

Sorry to gripe, I just hate comments like that.


RE: I would still be able to hear this
By Rhaido on 2/19/2008 4:40:56 PM , Rating: 5
1) To all: What is wrong with dispersing loiterers? 85db is enough to drive off but not hurt.
http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/loudness.h...

2) To 'headbox': Regarding Sweden's rape increase, link please supporting 300% over 5 years with perps being Muslim.

3) To 'JasonMick': Regarding 'I just hate comments like that.' I know how you feel. Especially when I see someone make a kneejerk reaction statement about poverty as the root of all crime immediately after a poster's rape statistic. So if we add another transfer payment for the have-nots then maybe they can get some and all rape will cease? Am I wrong in my recall that most experts in the field consider sexual assault a crime of power not sex. Perhaps the immigrants' culture/religion creates an attitude that subjugates women and/or promotes violence against women?


By Hydrofirex on 2/19/2008 7:49:27 PM , Rating: 1
1) It's the idea friend. When "loiterers" become those who disagree, or "foreigners", or other undesirables a government might find itself on a slippery slope. Why would you need a measure like this to disperse loiterers anyways? I wasn't aware it was such an uncontrollable problem that we needed such draconian controls to combat it. Is this the new war? The war on anyone anywhere we don't want them to be for any arbitrary reason. But hey, if it theoretically makes you safer who needs to worry about moral/constitutional concerns? Being safe is obviously more important than having rights.

2) Can't argue with you there: I might add I'd like to see any evidence supporting any of those claims. Maybe it's just because I'm in America and used to our history of ignorant reactions to new immigrants. It's always something that those people are doing to our country. They'll destroy the moral fabric, they'll steal our children in the night and tempt our young men to perform unnatural sex acts on each other....

3) Actually you're the only one who said poverty is the root of all crime. It's kind of a statistical and anecdotal fact that less education and less money are positively correlated with higher crime. Remember kiddies: association does not imply causation, but there are some obvious links. Someone who is very poor has little invested interest in society and it's laws (let alone in bettering themselves). This phenomenon can also be seen in liberal college kids who become more conservative as they ascend the economic and social ladder and have more invested in the very status quo they used to balk at. Education in particular tends to lead to less violent crime, less occurrences of STDs, and lower teen pregnancy rates. Not to mention in women tend to have more rights and powers in richer more educated societies.

You can learn about these issues and more in your local community college's entry-level Sociology 101 class! Some thing your hard earned "transfer payments" support.

HfX


RE: I would still be able to hear this
By AGrip on 2/19/08, Rating: 0
RE: I would still be able to hear this
By Ringold on 2/19/2008 6:10:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Since when does being poor act as a catalyst for violent crimes like rape? There are plenty of perfectly law abiding poor people.


I shall provide the following without any political comment on my own part, simple fact:

Parramore is Orlando's least-well off neighborhood.

Parramore has 1% of Orlando's population.

Parramore is the location of 10% of Orlando's violent crime.

Political commentary: You can all whine, moan, and complain about how unfair various things may seem, but some times a frog must simply be called a frog. Some British health minister guy recently told a particular immigrant group in England to stop nailing their cousins because it's leading to birth defects, and people were outraged. Holy cow, sorry for pointing out the obvious! Not to mention, when those babies come out screwed up, is the public that ends up paying their lifetime medical bills. That's just one example.

That said, I wouldn't make such comments myself like the op did without some data to go along with it. It is a fact, however, that Europe has significant problems integrating immigrant groups in to their societies. I cite the riots of France just a couple years ago, for example.


By feraltoad on 2/19/2008 10:48:41 PM , Rating: 2
Nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade. People don't like reality when it seems to fly in the face of political correctness, but pretending a problem isn't a problem or reclassifying it isn't the best way to find a solution. Also, saying that behaviour and socioeconomic status/ethnic traits have correlational behaviors is in no way racist. It's just a set of facts, and then we apply value judgements. Correlational relationship do not imply intrinsic nature, but rather a parallel occurence. Who can deny that everyone in certain situations is capable of anything?

Oh, and about that "nailing their cousins" thing? QFT I'm afraid: "Medical research suggests that while British Pakistanis are responsible for 3% of all births, they account for one in three British children born with genetic illnesses."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/art...

Oh and here's a chart about "kissing cousins": http://consang.net/index.php/Global_prevalence

As another poster pointed out these consanguinous relationships are strategies for keeping wealth concentrated to the core family in countries with historically limited resources. Similar to how royal bloodlines arise from the desire to concentrate power.


By beepandbop on 2/19/2008 8:57:02 PM , Rating: 2
Considering that THE riots in 2006 and late 2007 were caused by MUSLIM youths, no I don't think it's racist at all. Not everyone lives in a bubble and believes that "zomg Muslims are teh p3ace!111!1 <3<3<3<3"

That isn't to say I encourage bigotry, because that is an obvious danger, but comments like yours piss me off just as much as vice versa. ;)