A device used by the New York City Police Department in 2014 essentially as a “sound cannon” to curb protesters was a use of force on par with potentially harmful weapons like stun grenades, a federal judge ruled.
In what is believed to be the first written judicial decision on the use of a long-range acoustic device (LRAD), Southern District Judge Robert Sweet rejected New York City’s argument that sound “is not a substance but a phenomenon” and said the use of the device as a projector of powerfully amplified sounds is “no different” from distraction devices like flash-bang and concussion grenades.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
