It is a strange world where international agreements are made, signifying that there are certain elements, such as chemicals and gases, that are not permitted to be used any longer in warfare, but yet, warfare, itself, still continues all the same. So too, tear gas, is a misnomer, for it really is not a gas, but rather better defined as a mist. Additionally, the word “tear” does not come close to describing or defining how painful, dangerous, and toxic this chemical agent really is. In the modern age, what is known as tear gas, is primarily made up of 2-chlorobenzalmalonitrile, or dibenzoazepine, or chloroacetophenone, or something similar or a combination of these dangerous chemical agents. In addition to the extreme discomfort, and occasional lethality of these chemicals when used on human targets; it must also be taken into account that when these chemical agents are deployed, they then disperse themselves over the area without there being any effective control upon such dispersion, which therefore makes this chemical so being used on people, indiscriminate. Additionally, when law enforcement engages citizens with these chemical agents, they have, almost without exception, not taken into account, whether those in the crowd, or ill, infirmed, babies, or people with compromised immune systems, but simply just shoot and let it fly.
While there isn’t any doubt that these chemicals as utilized on people, is effective, in causing a great deal of extensive pain, as well as being harmful and extremely discomforting to the body, while also being bad for the environment, it must be said that it does appear to do its job, though, in an inhumane way, by neutralizing those human beings, so targeted. Whether or not these chemicals should ever be utilized upon people should be subject to a robust debate, but the bottom line is that law enforcement utilizes chemicals on citizens primarily because they have the legal right to do so in those situations ascertained as being riotous, of which, as it currently sits, there seems to be no superior governmental agency that ever really holds law enforcement to account for whether these actions so employed were done in a situation that clearly and unequivocally met the terms of a riot. Therefore, in absence of reprimands and analysis of how, why, and the comprehensive study of the actual aftereffects of chemical agents being utilized against human beings, being objectively analyzed, there probably isn’t going to be a change in this uncivil law enforcement policy anytime soon.
However, the thing that can be changed is the narrative so propagated by media of all stripes, in which in lieu of using tear gas as the operative word, it would be far more accurate to call out the chemical agents so having been deployed, and to make it a point to state that citizens were fired upon with chemical agents in order to control them, and of which these chemical agents are inimical to the human body, as compared to something that just creates “tears”. While there probably are times when law enforcement needs to avail themselves of something in order to restore order or quell a riot, there isn’t any good reason, why their first choice is to basically enact chemical warfare against their own citizens that they are, after all, sworn to protect and to serve.