Australian police forces are increasingly deploying “less lethal” crowd control weapons—including 40mm launchers, chemical irritants, and distraction devices—with minimal national regulation or public transparency. Experts and legal advocates warn that these tools, which include devices designed by military manufacturers, carry significant risks of serious injury or death, yet their use remains obscured by police claims of operational safety and the widespread use of confidential legal settlements.
According to Dr. Rohini Haar, a medical adviser at Physicians for Human Rights, there is “almost zero” global regulation of the industry producing these weapons. In Australia, no nationally enforced standards exist, and individual state forces have consistently declined to disclose specific makes and models of their equipment. This lack of oversight extends to coronial inquests, where Victoria Police have sought suppression orders to limit public information regarding the weaponry involved in deaths.
The Impact of Projectiles and Chemical Irritants
Police in Australia frequently utilize 40mm launchers to fire foam baton or bean bag rounds. Three experts identified these launchers as appearing to be products of the US-based Combined Systems Inc., a company that also supplies the US military and the FBI. While described as “less lethal,” these projectiles deliver a “blunt trauma effect” that can cause serious bodily injury or death. In 2021, Victoria Police utilized foam baton rounds at protests, though the force did not keep distinct records of firing frequency at the time.
Chemical irritants, such as oleoresin capsicum (OC) spray, are also deployed for crowd dispersal. Data from the Police Accountability Project shows that OC spray was discharged 9,188 times in Victoria between mid-2018 and 2023. While intended as an alternative to lethal force, criminologist Emma Ryan of Deakin University notes that these sprays are increasingly used for crowd control rather than as a last resort. Research indicates that chemical irritants can cause severe injury, permanent disability, and, in rare instances, death.
Did You Know? Between 2018 and 2023, Victoria Police discharged OC spray in various forms a total of 9,188 times, according to data obtained by the Police Accountability Project.
Distraction Devices and Taser Deployment
Distraction devices, including stinger grenades and flashbangs, have also seen increased use. Victoria Police spent at least $1.2m on such devices between 2018 and 2026. Experts like Helen Close of the Omega Research Foundation argue these tools should not be used in protest settings because they are inaccurate and can cause severe eye injuries. Internal investigations by Victoria Police have generally found the use of these devices to be in accordance with policy.
Taser use has also risen, with NSW Police data showing that deployments more than doubled from 569 instances in 2020-21 to 1,403 in 2024-25. These conducted energy devices, designed by Axon, have been linked to multiple deaths, including the 2023 death of 95-year-old Clare Nowland. In 2024-25, NSW Police data indicated that 57% of Taser deployments were against people who identified as Indigenous.
Expert Insight: The transition of these tools from specialized police equipment to standard crowd-control options represents a significant shift in the use-of-force continuum. When weapons designed for high-stakes military or hostage situations are deployed against civilian protesters, the lack of transparency creates an accountability gap that legal settlements and suppression orders only widen, effectively shielding police practice from public scrutiny.
What May Happen Next
Legal challenges regarding the use of these weapons are likely to continue as civil claims against police forces rise. Because data collection remains fragmented and inconsistent, analysts expect that public pressure for standardized reporting will increase. Furthermore, as the use of these tools becomes more common, it is possible that further inquests into deaths involving these weapons will force a broader national conversation on whether they remain appropriate for policing public demonstrations.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are there national standards for the use of less lethal weapons in Australia?
No. According to the reported findings, there are no nationally enforced standards for the use of these crowd-control weapons in Australia.
Why do police forces refuse to disclose the models of weapons they use?
Police forces, including those in Victoria and NSW, have declined to provide lists of their weaponry, typically citing “operational and community safety considerations.”
What are the health risks associated with the weapons described?
Experts note that these weapons can cause serious injury or death. Specific risks include traumatic brain injury from projectiles, permanent eye damage from chemical irritants or distraction devices, and severe respiratory effects.
Given the ongoing reliance on these tools for crowd management, how should authorities balance the need for police safety with the public’s right to transparent oversight?
