It is difficult to generalize about non-lethal weapons; there is so much diversity in the objectives, current status, and future prospects of the various systems. Proponents sometimes refer casually to the “family” of NLW programs, but that vocabulary overstates their commonality – the different breeds of NLWs are not really closely related, and each must be evaluated on a careful, case-by-case basis for its individual feasibility, legality, and wisdom. Some NLW devices are familiar, having been successfully operated for years; others are just now on the cusp of deployment; still others appear only dimly on the horizon – and a few have already been discarded.

By the same token, perhaps it would be intellectually cleaner not to speak of a category of “non-lethal weapons” at all – if the entrants in this category have so little in common, and if each must be assessed separately, perhaps they should simply be labeled “weapons,” and not generically distinguished from any others under that overarching heading. That notion has some appeal; in the abstract, NLWs are no more and no less than “weapons,” and the same rules ought to apply to them as to all others.

But there is much to be gained by exploring the field, or subfield, of non-lethal arms, apart from all the other types of weapons, and by conceptualizing NLWs as a distinct genre.