Narrator: Much of the coverage of the 2020 protests
against police misconduct in the United States
has looked a lot like this,
shrouded in a thick cloud of tear gas.
[people shouting]
Some of the sounds in this video may be shocking.
[explosion]
And some of the footage may be disturbing.
[explosion]
- Back up!
Reporter: Police on the roof
are firing volley after volley of tear gas.
Nobody was doing anything.
Reporter: Step back, get back, get back, get back!
You're ahead, you're ahead.
Reporter: There is so much gas that has been launched again
that you can barely even see that line of officers.
[explosion]
Narrator: The use of tear gas has almost
become synonymous with the protests,
and it's nothing new.
[people screaming] [explosion]
On June 1, law-enforcement officers used a variety
of less-lethal weapons on peaceful protesters
outside the White House,
creating a scene eerily similar to one
from nearly a century ago.
In 1930, police used tear gas to disperse a group
of unemployed demonstrators in front of the White House.
Announcer: Washington became a battleground.
Narrator: Two years later,
President Herbert Hoover authorized the use of tear gas
on American veterans gathered in Washington
to demand their promised, yet unpaid bonuses.
Announcer: Using tear gas,
the troops methodically set about dispersing the marchers
in as bloodless a manner as possible.
Narrator: In the decades that followed,
law-enforcement agencies around the world
commonly dispersed large assemblies
of protesters with tear gas.
But tear gas was initially developed as a weapon of war.
So how did it become the weapon of choice
against protests?
Today, the business behind tear gas
is worth billions.
Announcer: Reliability and high performance
are our binding guarantee.
Narrator: Less-lethal weapons, as they're called,
are weapons intended to limit the escalation of conflict
without lethal force.
This industry was worth about $6.3 billion in 2016
and is projected to grow to $11.3 billion by 2023.
Tear gas represents about 25% of the industry,
meaning by 2023, it could be worth about $3 billion a year.
Anna Feigenbaum: This is completely a for-profit industry.
Narrator: This is Anna Feigenbaum,
the author of a book about the history of tear gas.
Feigenbaum: There is constantly
new innovation in this industry.
We're seeing pushes to put more and more
equipment into police hands.
[explosion]
Narrator: And the industry's rise is tied
to why it was originally developed.
The first known use of tear gas was in World War I,
when French soldiers fired tear gas grenades
into German trenches.
It was one of many chemical weapons used in the war,
during which over 90,000 soldiers died
from exposure to poisonous gases.
Announcer: A meeting of European foreign ministers
in Locarno, Switzerland.
Narrator: A 1925 treaty known as the Geneva Protocol
banned the use of "asphyxiating, poisonous
or other gases" in combat.
But the United States would not ratify the agreement
until 1975 and held the stance
that the protocol did not apply to nontoxic gases
or chemicals that could be used for riot control.
Other countries disagreed.
Jamil Dakwar: The idea was that if you allow tear gas
to be used in armed conflict situations,
there could be escalation of other chemical weapons
that would be increasingly dangerous
and would cause mass casualties.
Narrator: And the protocol also did not limit production
of those weapons, so production of tear gas grew.
[gas spraying]
Feigenbaum: The Chemical Warfare Service,
which had been doing a lot of this R&D,
wanted to continue.
And there was a big push to try
and validate its continued existence.
And one of the main drivers of that push
was a guy named Gen. Amos Fries.
He decided that tear gas could have a lot of uses
for security and for law enforcement.
And so he worked to create this kind of commercial
or domestic market in tear gas.
Announcer: The jumper repeater grenade
discharges three large blasts
of tear gas in rapid succession.
Narrator: Categorized as a less-lethal weapon,
tear gas is defined by the CDC as any chemical agents
that "temporarily make people unable to function
by causing irritation to the eyes, mouth,
throat, lungs, and skin."
Announcer: Six smoke-filled jumper repeater grenades
make an impressive display of saturation.
Narrator: Tear gas manufacturers
aggressively marketed their products
to law-enforcement agencies.
- How are you, Mr. Matthews? - Stick 'em up!
Narrator: Like in this promotional film from 1930
that illustrates how tear gas can be used
to thwart bank robbers.
- That's my last job.
Narrator: The marketing worked.
- Well, it's better than being shot.
Narrator: Tear gas became a weapon of choice
for police tasked with dispersing large crowds.
Announcer: With the army on the way,
the strike scene is hectic.
Narrator: In the early 20th century,
police often used tear gas during labor strikes.
Announcer: Then comes trouble, and police tear gas.
[explosion] [people shouting]
After the pin is pulled,
the grip on the strap handle controls the firing mechanism.
Narrator: Manufacturers weren't just selling
tear gas itself.
Announcer: When the handle is released in throwing,
the grenade is activated.
Narrator: They were also hawking must-have accessories.
Announcer: In a special kit available for immediate use
is a complete assortment of gas munitions,
including projectiles and grenades.
Narrator: And throughout the 20th century,
tear gas was used more frequently
on protesters around the world.
In Japan,
Germany,
Malaysia,
Vietnam.
Announcer: South to Saigon,
tear gas has been used to crush recent street rioting.
[explosion]
Narrator: Northern Ireland.
Announcer: Washington police used tear gas
to drive them away.
Narrator: Back in the US,
police continued to wield it on protesters.
Along with labor strikes, police used tear gas
at political and human rights protests,
like the 1965 Civil Rights protests in Selma, Alabama.
And in 1969, when police used tear gas
to disperse groups protesting the Vietnam War.
Feigenbaum: There was resistance and people saying,
"Well, how can you ban this in war but then allow it here?
How could we have said that these chemicals
have no place as part of military strategy,
and then you're using it on civilians?"
And so that strangeness or almost what seems
like an absurdity of that exceptional clause
has long been pointed out.
Narrator: But the United States always had exceptions
when it came to tear gas.
The country used tear gas and other chemicals
during the Vietnam War, both abroad and at home.
[explosion] [people shouting]
More limitations were put in place in 1993
with the Chemical Weapons Convention,
a treaty that explicitly banned agents
like tear gas "as a method of warfare."
[explosion]
But it still did not ban its usage in law enforcement,
including riot-control instances.
And so the tear gas industry continued to grow.
Announcer: Combined Systems delivers safety,
reliability, and effective solutions.
Narrator: Today, at least three
of the world's top less-lethal weapons manufacturers
are based in the US.
Feigenbaum: We have Combined Systems, Inc.
We have Safariland Group, NonLethal Technologies.
Announcer: NonLethal Technologies,
with over 50 years' experience in the tear gas industry.
Narrator: This 2016 video from Combined Systems'
YouTube channel provides a look at how less-lethal weapons
are marketed to potential buyers.
The video features drone footage
of less-lethal weapons being demoed,
set to the song "Back in Black" by AC/DC.
♪ Back ♪
Members of the demo team
playfully point the weapons at the camera.
Companies like Combined Systems share their inventories
on their website, where you can browse
their tear gas products, like this aerosol grenade.
Prices are available upon request.
But according to this price sheet
from the company Amtec Less-Lethal Systems
released by the state of Connecticut,
a tear gas grenade can sell for between $30 and $40.
[siren wailing] [weapons popping]
These American companies don't just supply
American law-enforcement agencies.
[explosion]
According to the Omega Research Foundation,
law-enforcement agencies in Hong Kong
used products made by NonLethal Technologies
during the 2019 extradition protests in Hong Kong.
[explosion]
Officer: Disperse the area now.
CS gas is being used.
Narrator: While tear gas is seen
as a less-lethal alternative to bullets,
[explosion]
the impact of tear gas can be far worse
than temporary discomfort.
Tear gas projectiles have caused serious injuries.
Protester: F---, y'all.
Come on, now!
Narrator: And the gas impacts people
with preexisting health conditions like asthma
more severely.
All of this during a respiratory disease pandemic
has re-sparked questions about the weapons' legality.
Dakwar: Tear gas doesn't distinguish
between the people who are violent
or not violent, obeying the law.
Narrator: This is Jamil Dakwar,
director of the ACLU's Human Rights Program.
And he's been working on a campaign
to ban the use of tear gas on assemblies.
[coughing]
Dakwar: In 2014, the protest in Ferguson, Missouri,
there was a massive use of tear gas, in fact,
in a very irresponsible and dangerous way.
[siren wailing]
We felt that there needed
to be also an international assessment
of the impact of those weapons.
Why are they being deployed very quickly and easily
without taking into account the impact on people,
on the rights of people, particularly the right to protest?
So, that was 2014,
and fast-forward, we are now in 2020.
Officer: Tear gas and other crowd-control munitions
may be deployed. Leave the area now.
Feigenbaum: We have seen a widespread use of it
not only in the United States,
but coming off the back of the uprisings in Hong Kong.
We are seeing lots and lots of cameras out,
lots and lots of video footage being caught
of a kind of indiscriminate
and excessive use of these weapons,
often against unarmed and nonviolent protesters.
Again, this kind of absurdity on this one level,
once people find out this is banned in warfare
but allowed for police use,
and then to think you're using a toxin
that affects the respiratory system
during a respiratory pandemic.
You know, there's kind of a double absurdity to this moment.
Narrator: Although tear gas remains illegal
for use in combat,
US military members are exposed
to its effects during basic training.
And today, tear gas remains legal for use
by domestic law enforcement.
The United Nations released official guidance
on the use of less-lethal weapons by law enforcement,
which says they "should be considered
a measure of last resort."
[explosion]
Feigenbaum: We have the United Nations'
Basic Principles on the Use of Force,
but these don't really have legislative weight behind them,
and so it's not necessarily mandated
that police departments need to follow these.
If police departments needed to follow these,
we would still have tear gas,
but the way in which it could be used
would look very different
to the kind of use that we see today.
Major restrictions on the kinds of conditions
that would allow police to use it.
Narrator: Some have advocated for alternative
less-lethal weapons, like the Active Denial System,
a relatively new technology
that emits highly targeted electromagnetic rays
that heat skin on contact
but reportedly do not leave any lasting effects.
But questions remain around the purpose of these weapons
and law enforcement in protest situations.
Dakwar: This is the moment to reexamine
and revisit the tolerance towards the easy use
of such weapons in the context
of mass assemblies and protests,
even if it's a temporary ban to examine ramifications
and to come out with clear guidance for law enforcement
and what their responsibilities are
when it comes to these mass assemblies and protests.
Narrator: In June, Oregon passed a bill
limiting the use of tear gas
with a loophole that allows officers to deploy tear gas
in a loosely defined context of riot control.
[explosion]
Hours after the governor signed the bill,
law-enforcement officers in Portland
used tear gas on a group of protesters
after declaring the scene a riot.
Business Insider reached out
to the National Association of Police Organizations,
but it did not return our request for comment.
Feigenbaum: Whether or not tear gas would be
banned outright,
that debate is instantly, and rightly so,
going to enter into a broader debate
around, what is a justified use of force by police?
Is it even the police who should be on the street
when we are seeing mass protest?
Is policing actually the right response?
Narrator: As federal officers continue
to be deployed around the country to confront protesters,
the cloud of tear gas continues to grow.
NonLethal Technologies, along with Combined Systems
and the Safariland Group, did not respond
to Business Insider's requests for comment.