This article is within the scope of WikiProject Invention, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Invention on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InventionWikipedia:WikiProject InventionTemplate:WikiProject InventionInvention articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Isn't the "legality" of using a pepper spray against insurgents a non-issue? As unlawful combatants they surely don't have protection of privilege and can be targeted with chemical agents as freely as a common criminal... 31.185.130.185 (talk) 21:12, 1 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
The first section talks about"strong evidence that it is not, in fact, functional," but the references linked to are just articles promoting the armor. While the lack of major sales is suggestive that such evidence exists, I can't seem to find it. If a source cannot be found, I suggest we remove this line.
184.63.79.136 (talk) 19:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)Reply