/ 25 March 2007

Rush for anti-youth squealer

A black box emitting a high-pitched pulsing sound designed to deter loitering teenagers is being used in thousands of sites around Britain just a year after its launch, prompting warnings from civil liberties campaigners that it is a ”sonic weapon” that could be illegal.

The Mosquito device, whose high-frequency shriek is audible only to those under 25, has been bought by police, local councils, shops and even private home owners to tackle concerns over groups of young people congregating and causing disruption.

Less than 18 months after the device, produced by Wales-based firm Compound Security, went into production, 3 300 have been sold — 70% of them in the United Kingdom.

So great has been demand that the company is now working on a more powerful, 50m-range model designed to be used in larger areas such as cemeteries and hazardous building sites, and is drawing up plans for a higher volume hand grenade version requested by the United States prison service to help tackle riots.

However, while some local authorities and police forces are highly enthusiastic about the Mosquito, civil liberties campaigners Liberty are raising concerns about the machine’s legality and its effectiveness in addressing antisocial behaviour.

A survey by the organisation has identified the device being used in every region of England except the northeast. In the northwest of England, police have mounted it on a car to drive to trouble spots.

Liberty director Shami Chakrabarti said: ”At worst, the Mosquito is a low-level sonic weapon; at best, a dog-whistle for kids. Either way, it has no place in a civilised society that values its children and young people and seeks to imbue them with values of dignity and respect.

”Degrading young people instead of providing opportunities for them is a tragic option whose long-term effect is frightening to imagine.”

Liberty argues that the device is inappropriate, partly because it is indiscriminate, causing discomfort to and potentially driving away all teenagers in an area rather than targeting those who may be causing trouble.

Alex Gask, one of the campaign group’s lawyers, said: ”Our objection is that this device is clearly designed as a way of getting rid of young people as a problem and about seeing them as a problem rather than identifying specific behaviour and getting rid of that.”

Liberty suggests the device may fall foul of Article 8 of the European convention on human rights, conferring the right to a private life, or Article 14 because it is discriminatory on grounds of age. The organisation also believes it may contravene environmental health legislation — a suggestion dismissed by inventor Howard Stapleton, who says many devices, including cars, are louder.

However, Liberty cannot attempt to bring a legal case itself, and must wait until a young person seeks to pursue the issue through the courts.

Stapleton said he had sought the advice of a senior audiologist, who had judged that even prolonged exposure to the device would not damage hearing.

The Mosquito worked, he said, as an irritant, whose four-times-a second high-pitched sounds began to affect young people only after 10 to 15 minutes.

The inventor, whose website advertises the system as an ”ultrasonic youth deterrent” accompanied by a picture of a youth with hands over his ears, argued that he sold the devices, which retail at £495, in responsible fashion. While he would sell to private individuals, they had to prove with police backing that they were suffering as a result of antisocial behaviour.

Stapleton said his company was bringing out a version that could be turned on only when needed. — Â