[justapassenger]

There’s a “slight” difference between tear gas and chemical weapons. Ones cause temporary (but very strong) inconvenience (of course there maybe some one off complications), others are designed to kill you, as efficiently as possible.

[tenpies]

The biggest difference is political: when someone the media doesn't like does it, it's a chemical weapon. When someone the media likes does it, it's nothing.

See: https://www.salon.com/2020/06/02/trump-may-have-broken-inter...

vs

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/21/us/protests-portland-seat...

[justapassenger]

Please don’t confuse stupid political fights in media with real chemical weapons.

It’s insulting to people who were killed/disabled as a result of chemical weapons.

[FpUser]

>"It’s insulting to people who were killed/disabled as a result of chemical weapons."

While those killed by conventional weapons rejoice in heavens. Hypocrisy has no bounds.

[justapassenger]

Please don’t bring bad faith whatabouthism to equal people who got sprayed with tear gas to people killed by sarin.

[eesmith]

According to the Chemical Weaponss Convention, tear gas is a "Riot Control Agent", not a "Chemical Weapon".

See https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/articles/ar... .

[mattbaker]

As far as I’m aware the verdict is still out on the long term effects so I’m not sure “temporary” is accurate.

The fact that it seemed to be impacting women’s menstrual cycles in my city makes me concerned about long term issues related to exposure (fertility among them): https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/01/us/period-tear-gas-study-...

Clearly this needs some study.

It’s certainly true that the people exposed to this gas are not currently dead, I’ll give you that.