Tools designed to manage crowds became instruments of injury
Tear gas and chemical irritants caused 119,113 injuries, with 4% requiring hospitalization; rubber projectiles wounded 2,190 people, 65% sustaining eye injuries. The analysis covered major protest movements including Yellow Vests in France, Black Lives Matter, Hong Kong democracy protests, and demonstrations in Chile and Colombia.
- 119,113 people injured by tear gas and chemical irritants since 2015; 4% required hospitalization
- 2,190 people wounded by rubber projectiles; 65% sustained eye injuries
- At least 26 deaths recorded (14 from gas inhalation, 12 from projectile impact)
- 945 people sustained permanent disabilities from rubber projectiles
- Study examined protests in France, Hong Kong, Myanmar, Chile, Colombia, and Black Lives Matter demonstrations
A comprehensive study by human rights organizations found over 120,000 people were injured by tear gas and rubber bullets during protests worldwide since 2015, with at least 26 deaths recorded.
A study released on Wednesday documented a stark toll: more than 120,000 people wounded by tear gas or bullets fired by police during protests across the globe since 2015. The research, conducted by Physicians for Human Rights, the International Civil Liberties Network, and the British Omega Foundation, examined medical records from some of the decade's largest demonstrations—the Yellow Vest movement in France, Black Lives Matter marches, pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong and Myanmar, and major uprisings in Chile and Colombia, among others.
The findings paint a picture of what the organizations call "Lethal in Disguise"—the hidden health consequences of weapons officially classified as non-lethal. Tear gas and other chemical irritants accounted for 119,113 of the injuries documented. While most people exposed to these agents recovered, four percent required hospitalization or surgery. At least fourteen people died after inhaling the gases. The numbers suggest a pattern: these tools, deployed ostensibly to manage crowds exercising what should be a democratic right, have instead produced widespread and sometimes permanent harm.
Rubber projectiles—marketed as defensive ammunition—wounded 2,190 people, with nearly two-thirds of those injuries concentrated in the eyes. The consequences here were often more severe. Nine hundred forty-five people sustained lifelong disabilities from these impacts. Twelve people died. The organizations also documented injuries from concussion grenades, water cannons, and batons, though the scale of harm from these weapons was smaller.
What emerges from the data is a troubling pattern even in established democracies. Police forces, the study suggests, tend to escalate their use of force when confronted with protest movements—a phenomenon that has accelerated since the turn of the century as demonstrations have become more frequent and diverse. The organizations note that rather than dispersing crowds effectively, this approach often triggers new tensions and deeper conflict.
The researchers stopped short of calling for an outright ban on crowd-control weapons. Instead, they recommended stricter regulation, non-discriminatory application of these tools, and substantially better training for officers in their use. The implication is clear: the problem is not necessarily the weapons themselves, but how they are deployed and by whom. Without oversight and accountability, tools designed to manage crowds become instruments of injury against people exercising fundamental rights. The study leaves an open question: whether governments will act on these findings or whether the next major protest movement will produce another chapter in this same story.
Citações Notáveis
Rather than dispersing crowds, the use of force often leads to new tensions and escalation of conflict— Physicians for Human Rights, International Civil Liberties Network, and Omega Foundation
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why focus on the period since 2015? What changed then?
That's when protest movements really began to accelerate globally—the Arab Spring had already happened, but by 2015 you had sustained, recurring demonstrations across continents. It became possible to see patterns.
The study distinguishes between tear gas and rubber bullets. Why does that matter?
Because the injuries tell different stories. Tear gas affects many people but usually isn't permanent. Rubber bullets are rarer but devastating—945 people with lifelong disabilities from 2,190 injuries. That's a different kind of harm.
The organizations recommend better training rather than banning these weapons. Does that seem realistic?
It's pragmatic. A complete ban would never pass politically. But the implication is damning—if these weapons were used correctly, with restraint, the injury count would be a fraction of what it is.
What about the deaths? Twenty-six people seems like a small number compared to 120,000 injuries.
Small in percentage terms, yes. But each one represents a person who went to a protest and didn't come home. That changes how you read the entire study.
Do you think governments will actually change their practices based on this?
The organizations clearly hope so. But they're documenting what's already happened. Whether that becomes pressure for change depends on whether people read it and care.