Muerte bajo custodia causada por armas “no letales” en Uruguay: Primera comunicación nacional de dos casos

Malbina Revetria; Fidel Lagos; Hugo Rodríguez Almada

doi:10.29193/RMU.36.4.16

Authors

Malbina Revetria Universidad de la República, Facultad de Medicina, Departamento de Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses, Asistente. Médica forense del Poder Judicial
Fidel Lagos Universidad de la República, Facultad de Medicina, Departamento de Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses, Asistente. Médico forense del Poder Judicial
Hugo Rodríguez Almada Universidad de la República, Facultad de Medicina, Departamento de Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses, Profesor director

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29193/RMU.36.4.16

Keywords:

GUN VIOLENCE, WOUNDS, GUNSHOT, WEAPONS

Abstract

The so-called non-lethal weapons are part of the weapon arsenal available to the police forces, and they were designed to control prison riots and massive protests in public spaces. The false idea they have low chances of causing severe lesions or death has contributed to their being more widely used.
The study presents two cases of violent deaths caused by the impact of the so called non-lethal projectiles used by policemen in charge of security in the prisons of our country.
Safety of this kind of weapons under stressful situations is questioned, since there is no guarantee for them to be used properly (minimum distance and impact body area). A recommendation is made to eradicate using the label “non-lethal weapons” and substitute it for a more modern and appropriate one, such as “less lethal weapons”.

References

(1) Lewer N. Non-lethal weapons: operational and policy developments. Lancet 2003; 362(Suppl):s20-1. doi: 10.1016/ s0140-6736(03)15061-1.
(2) United Nations Human Rights. Guidance on less-lethal weapons in law enforcement. New York, Geneva: United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2000:58 p.
(3) Haar RJ, Iacopino V, Ranadive N, Dandu M, Weiser SD. Death, injury and disability from kinetic impact projectiles in crowd-control settings: a systematic review. BMJ Open 2017; 7(12):e018154.
(4) Wahl P, Schreyer N, Yersin B. Injury pattern of the Flash-Ball, a less lethal weapon used for law enforcement: report of two cases and review of the literature. J Emerg Med 2006; 31:325-30.
(5) David S. Use of pellet guns for crowd control in Kashmir: How lethal is “non-lethal”?. Indian J Med Ethics 2017; 2(2):124-7.
(6) Cordner S, Tidball-Binz M. Humanitarian forensic action - Its origins and future. Forensic Sci Int 2017; 279:65-71.
(7) Rodríguez Almada H. HFA-Uruguay. Disponible en: https://medicinalegal.edu.uy/hfa-uruguay [Consulta: 3 setiembre 2020].
(8) Sahoo D, Robbe C, Deck C, Meyer F, Papy A, Willinger R. Head injury assessment of non-lethal projectile impacts: a combined experimental/computational method. Injury 2016; 47(11):2424-41. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2016.09.004.
(9) Dhar SA, Dar TA, Wani SA, Maajid S, Bhat JA, Mir NA, et al. Pattern of rubber bullet injuries in the lower limbs: a report from Kashmir. Chin J Traumatol 2016; 19(3):129-33.
(10) Mahajna A, Aboud N, Harbaji I, Agbaria A, Lankovsky Z, Michaelson M, et al. Blunt and penetrating injuries caused by rubber bullets during the Israeli-Arab conflict in October, 2000: a retrospective study. Lancet 2002; 359(9320):1795-800. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08708-1. Erratum in: Lancet 2002; 960(9337):954.