title: A question of ethics, not nationalism: author's response.
abstract: The aim of the comment "Use of pellet guns for crowd control in Kashmir: How lethal is 'non-lethal'?" was neither to disparage the armed forces, nor recommend counterinsurgency strategies, nor support any particular community or group. It sought to raise discussions around the question pointed out by the responder himself, namely, "the ethical point of view" on the use of pellet guns in controlling violent mobs. The author also feels that the question is not so much about "favouring" the protestors or the security forces, but whether an instrument that causes significant fatalities and morbidities among bystanders should continue to be used as a method of crowd control.
authors.affiliation: Senior Research Officer, Environmental Health Resource Hub, School of Habitat Studies, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Deonar, Mumbai, MH, 400 088, India,. siddarthdavid@yahoo.co.in.
authors.forename: Siddarth
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: David
mesh_terms: D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005389:Firearms; D006801:Humans; D007194:India; D012305:Riots; D012637:Security Measures / Q000941:ethics* / Q000592:standards*