New Handguns

[gardclan]

Originally posted by Prometheus:
Mr. Murphy Laws of Combat here are a few:

friendly fire isn't.
your weapon is made by the lowest bidder.
if the the enemy is range so are you!

Don't forget:

4. Recoiless weapons aren't
5. never share a foxhole with anyone braver than you.
6. A sucking chest wound is nature's way of telling you that its time to slow down.
7. Incoming fire has the right of way.
8. six second fuses go off in three seconds.
9. Don't draw fire, it irritates your friends.
and
10. Anything you do, including nothing, can and will get you shot... so BE CAREFUL!

 

[PapaGolfWhiskey]

Sorry for the hiatus.
Nope never been to war college.
Does being a Private in the Militia for a couple of years count?

I -am- a bit of a Gun Nut and history buff. And I believe in self defence. Not sure where I picked up the idea that a weapon is defined as a tool for enforcing your will but... it works for me when discussing such issues.

some other rules I've heard and read.

During my stint in the Reserves:

1) Sweat saves blood.
2) Brains saves both.
3) Don't be sorry, Raise your standards.
4) Never use a door when you can use a window, Never use a window when you can make your own entry point.
5) a Quote from the Warrant in charge of my infantry training. "Effective fire means somone get's it in the pumpkin, probably me."
6) Contact! Double tap, dash, down, crawl, observe, Comunicate.

from various sources online:

1) 'Helicopter' and 'Armour' are mutually exclusive terms.

From a movie I like:

1) Don't wait for it to happen, don't even want it to happen. Just watch and see what DOES happen.

er... wait a sec this was a guns forum...hmm.

I think you hit the nail on the head. It all depends on the usage, and the supplier and the perceived market.

 

[CharmQuark]

Another interesting advance will be rounds that use proximity fuses and internal computers. The army is currently working on a round that will use an imbedded chip and an RF proximity transponder to actually have a delayed detonation after it passes so close to a target. The round will be used against enemy's hiding behind cover. The grenade round senses the "corner" and then actuates a delay fuse so the round detonates behind the cover. Hooah.

 

[tim_manley]

The real funny thing here is that adding all the techno gadgets really don't mean that much. Sure, you laser ID your distance to target, dial up your range, fire your 20mm anti-personnel burst round, swich modes, rise to a crouch to rush forward, etc.....

The best advance is the one that means you don't have to actually look at your damn gun or twist a nob to do it. Select fire is great if all you have to do is twitch your thumb from SA to full.

The best tech advance will integrate your visor with a hud to automatically do all this for you so all you have to worry about is pointing the damn thing and pulling the trigger while never taking your eyes off the target area.

and the funny part is when a guy covered all in mud runs up behind you and wacks you with a sword..... beware the barbarian planets

 

[RabidVargr]

I agree about seeing a much larger market in the future for less than lethal weapons. Remember, lots of our games are *NOT* military in style. I'd much rather be put on trial for assault rather than murder one cause I used a stun gun rather than a micro-uzi. In the future, I can see a lot of the planets (in which life IS valueable) outlawing (lethal) weapons except to law enforcement or military. The others are defensive items on par with the can-o-mace in the lady's purse you just too... picked up for her.

30 years or 6 months? (depending on if you get caught of course) Not all missions go smooth and it would go a lot better if you tried not to kill anyone doing the job...

RV

 

[Uncle Bob]

There is a saying here in Texas. "I would rather be tried by twelve good men then carried by six."

Lethal weapons are not a certain defense but non-lethals are even less reliable. Maybe, some day, we will have phasers, but if I have only a Taser or capiscum spray I want my back-up to have a gun. Better yet, I'll take the gun and back him up.

On the psycological side, lethals raise the ante. If the other guy knows that some one (and maybe him) will die if a deal goes bad he is likely to be carefull. If all that is at stake is a headache he has more incentive to play cowboy.

 

[PapaGolfWhiskey]

Which is EXACTLY why i see the market expanding in less than lethals.

the counter argument with 'stun' weopans is that you CAN shoot first and ask questions later.

and if you make a mistake you CAN say sorry.

I don't see the tech increase makeing guns much more effective than they are now. They kill now, how much more dead than dead do you need to get?

but there is plenty of room to increase the reliability, predictability, Range and a whole number of other factors on 'less than lethal' options. Having BOTH options is good. Cow the cowards AND if someone still comes for you he must think he's a real cowboy. But you still have the option of NOT killing him.

 

[Uncle Bob]

"Stun everyone, we'll sort it out later" is only really an option in a military environment or for an authoritarian police. Six weeks for assault is easier to take than thirty years for murder, but either will screw up an adventure, and stunning leaves witnesses.

Besides the buzz-word changed from non-lethal to les-than-lethal because any reasonably effective technology will sometimes kill. Rubber bullets have killed dozens in Israel and Ireland, Tasers can disrupt bioelectronics (prosthetics or pacemakers), and incapacitents can cause respiratory problems.

If you use the weapon as a threat to prevent combat, a bad guy with a lethal weapon is less likely to be intimidated by a less-than-lethal weapon.

I do think that a truly effective, truly non-lethal weapon will change everything, but I don't see anything that looks like a plausable avenue of research. The best futuristic stun tech is about as reasonable as light sabres when you look closely.

 

[Liam Devlin]

Originally posted by Uncle Bob:
"Stun everyone, we'll sort it out later" is only really an option in a military environment or for an authoritarian police. Six weeks for assault is easier to take than thirty years for murder, but either will screw up an adventure, and stunning leaves witnesses.

Besides the buzz-word changed from non-lethal to les-than-lethal because any reasonably effective technology will sometimes kill. Rubber bullets have killed dozens in Israel and Ireland, Tasers can disrupt bioelectronics (prosthetics or pacemakers), and incapacitents can cause respiratory problems.

If you use the weapon as a threat to prevent combat, a bad guy with a lethal weapon is less likely to be intimidated by a less-than-lethal weapon.

I do think that a truly effective, truly non-lethal weapon will change everything, but I don't see anything that looks like a plausable avenue of research. The best futuristic stun tech is about as reasonable as light sabres when you look closely.

__________________________
Yer Excellency has the right of it. Non Lethal means to dispense with baddies are best used as Police weapons.

I have used imtu upgraded taser like "Shock batons", sonic grenades (make reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaal loud noise that stuns/ deafens/ disorients victims), and Net guns (from a MTJ issue & a Hard Times illustration.
These are in most authoritarian planet's Riot Police arsenals.

A Bad Guy with a lethal weapon, agreed, isn't deterred by a stunning weapon though. Put the mad dog down, I say, if he yields not.

My.02cr. worth

 

[justacaveman]

There is no such thing as a non-lethal weapon. "Anything" that incapacitates you, allows for a follow-up lethal attack. If your opponent is helpless, you can do whatever you want.

 

[JulianXSJ]

"Stun everyone, we'll sort it out later" is only really an option in a military environment or for an authoritarian police. Six weeks for assault is easier to take than thirty years for murder, but either will screw up an adventure, and stunning leaves witnesses.

[What if you don't care that you leave witnesses? That and the local constabulary tend to ease off a bit on you if you have a non-lethal weapon. Also, I know lots of police who'd love to have a phaser from Star Trek. The stunning option lets you bring in the perp with very little mess and harm done to the surrounding environs, whereas flying lead causes collateral damage.]

Besides the buzz-word changed from non-lethal to les-than-lethal because any reasonably effective technology will sometimes kill. Rubber bullets have killed dozens in Israel and Ireland, Tasers can disrupt bioelectronics (prosthetics or pacemakers), and incapacitents can cause respiratory problems.

[All too true.]

If you use the weapon as a threat to prevent combat, a bad guy with a lethal weapon is less likely to be intimidated by a less-than-lethal weapon.

[I dunno man. let me run a large jolt of electricity through you and let's see how you think about it when the stunner comes out again.]

I do think that a truly effective, truly non-lethal weapon will change everything, but I don't see anything that looks like a plausable avenue of research. The best futuristic stun tech is about as reasonable as light sabres when you look closely.

 

[themink]

I have to post a reply here.

Of the various non lethal weapons currently being tested, my favourite is at http://www.hsvt.org/

It's a RL device that can make the major sekeletal muscles lock up with theoretical ranges of a couple of hundred meters. They are looking for VC funding to turn the product from a lab demonstration to something saleable. They expect to have a briefcase sized version fairly soon.

Of course reflec would baffle it, but that's not what this thread was talking about. It's a plausable "less than lethal" weapon that can be used against targets almost all the time.

Of course if you stun someone and they get hit by a truck, that sounds lethal, but it's hardly the stun guns fault

 

[Uncle Bob]

Originally posted by The Mink:
I have to post a reply here.

Of the various non lethal weapons currently being tested, my favourite is at http://www.hsvt.org/

I have suggested a toy like this before as the least unlikely of the less-than-lethal technologies. Nice to see someone is developing it.

A couple of problems, though. I doubt the lasers are eyesafe: the UV may be absorbed by the cornea, but if you scar the cornea he is just as blind as if you burn out the retina. You can sort of fix the cornea with an expensive operation in a TL 8+ hospital.

It works better indoors as any breeze will disupt the ionized air. And heavy clothing may block it's usefullness. And it has the same limitationsd as other Tasers and stun-guns.

 

[justacaveman]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by The Mink:
I have to post a reply here.

Of the various non lethal weapons currently being tested, my favourite is at http://www.hsvt.org/http://www.hsvt.org/[/b] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cool! Let's hope it works out commercially.


I

 

[trader jim]

i am partial to the newest handgun on the market,
its strictly non-lethel......its the Tickle Gun....just point, aim, fire....target drops all weapons and starts to laugh uncontrolably.....works great on Vorpal Bunnies...they start laughing AND there right foot starts THUMPING.....thats how they got their nick name of....Thumpers!!!! heheheheheh...funny to watch!!!!!

thump,thump,thump,thump,thump,thump,thump,thump, get it????

 

[Nearside]

While I'm reluctant to draw TJ further regarding this subject, I did start thinking about Neural Weapons, and how someone with a sense of humor and the appropriate psychological skills could alter a weapon to produce the effects TJ described... a non-lethal weapon that would have a terrible effect on the enemies morale... kinda...

 

[trader jim]

go ahead SH.....you can say it!!!!..... Its The New THUMPER GUN!!!!!!YYYYYYaaaaaaa

 

[JulianXSJ]

Originally posted by trader jim:
go ahead SH.....you can say it!!!!..... Its The New THUMPER GUN!!!!!!YYYYYYaaaaaaa

Oh My Gawd. The Independant Lapine Republic rears it's ugly head. Aiiiie!

 

[chaos mike]

Hey kids, first post so here goes... The problem with more complicated weaponry is a simple one. People are not smart enough to use and properly maintain such an advanced weapon. That is why classics such as the BAR were fantastic. Weapons that are just as deadly empty as they are loaded.

Chaos

 

[Uncle Bob]

Welcome, Chaos Mike!

That is an old opinion with enough truth to be dangerous. It is the main reason American troops went to Cuba in 1898 with M1873 trapdoor Springfield rifles against Spanish troops with M1893 Mauser rifles.