Ethics #2: SpeechJammer; The Silence Gun

It is time for another discussion in the ethical corner. If you did not read last week's ethics discussion, make sure to check it out here.


The case:
Japanese developers Kazutaka Kurihara and Koji Tsukada have designed and developed the controversial "SpeechJammer". The device enables its user to aim at a specific human target and silence them, whenever they are speaking. It consists of a directional microphone, a directional speaker, a laser, a distance sensor and of course a trigger.
The way it works is that the SpeechJammer picks up the conversation of any subject, processes it and then sends it back to the victim with a delay of about 0.2 seconds.
The delay renders the target unable to focus on what they were saying and as a effect, the target stops talking.


Discussion:
The Japanese developers made it as a means to silence people when they spoke out of turn in debates or at the office, or simply as a means to enforce silence in waiting halls and so on.
Potentially this technology could be used towards more sinister goals, e.g., censoring speakers of different beliefs.

Pros:
The SpeechJammer is a tool to enforce silence towards people, who do not respect regulations on silence in specific areas, (e.g., libraries, hospitals, sleep train cars, etc.) and may be used to shut some people up when speaking out of turn. Some environments would potentially benefit greatly from this invention.

Cons:
Censorship. The liberty of free speech may suffer greatly from a device such as this. The SpeechJammer puts the power of our own words in other people's hands, rendering us powerless when trying to express ourselves. If this technology is further developed, would it find its way to the police weaponry? Would it be used to silence a crowd, a demonstration?