Contrasting statements

From the same CBC item:

One of the most controversial aspects is the decision by police to buy four long range acoustic devices, known to police by the acronym LRAD, but more commonly referred to as sound cannons."Basically it's a warning [device]," said Toronto police Staff Insp. Bill Neadles.

"I think people believe we're going to use that sound notifier as a weapon. We have no intention of doing that," he said.

And...

Lt.-Col. Liam McGarry, who is in charge of ground forces in Toronto, said the soldiers don't intend to put on a display, but the public should know the soldiers will be fully equipped.

"They will be carrying the weapon … the C7A1 rifle," said McGarry.

"Sound notifer", nice Orwellian term.

I don't know the context in which the latter statement was made, but it doesn't read well. It appears as if one group attempts to minimize the presence of their weapons, the other, apparently not so much. Whateve the case making a show of police and military power does not make people feel secure, especially when the most talked about threat to this summit involves large members of the public exercising their rights of assembly and speech.

When the powers that be feel that this kind of security is necessary, something has gone wrong in that society.