well arent they clever

so how well do these weapons work against people armed with sniper rifles and such?

how many guns are in America?

Where is the 5th?

I mean the 6th?

What is it 5 or 6?

Me

I forgot where it was posted, but the amounts of guns that were purchased in America last year surpassed the ENTIRE top 5 military's of the world like 3 times over or something.

It was a pretty interesting read.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
well arent they clever

so how well do these weapons work against people armed with sniper rifles and such?

how many guns are in America?

i somehow don't think they would bother using non-lethal weapons against someone armed with a lethal one.

Wow, that is a very badly researched article indeed. Maybe they weren't too interested in facts?

I think one of those beanbag gun lite weapons would make me wish they had shot me instead, just imagine the bruising you'd have after that especially if they hit you more then once.

With all of the talk recently about civil unrest and protests and the like I thought this article would be be good information, because in the event of mass protests, some of these weapons would most likely be deployed.

Well, PHaSR is not a particularly bad dazzler - it's very safe compared to the ones currently used in Iraq which have caused serious eye injuries. And they missed out the infra-red heat beam that is the second part of it's function.

ADS won't cause serious injuries because of the harware limits. Yes, it can cause blisters and burns, in theory, if you somehow get trapped int he beam, but hardly enough to make you wish you were dead.

The XREP projectile hits with much less impact force than a beanbag round and is much less dangerous. Because it doesn't rely on impact it doesn't need it - it's actually designed for a soft impact.

The PEP nonlethal laser was canceled a while back. They continued development as an anti-aircraft weapon but I suspect they gave up with that.

The vortex ring weapon is not real: they've been working on this concept for decades and there is no actual product out there. It would be handy - a lot safer than rubber bullets, for example - but it's a big, clumsy set up to produce the same effect as a rubber bullet.

They keep (deliberately?) missing the point that nonlethals, if used correctly, can be very useful and save lives. Obviously there need to be controls in place to prevent misuse, but that applies equally to lethal weapons.

And no, they are not intended to be used against people with firearms.

No one can live up against the microwave weapons these madmen have.

Non lethel weapons are lethel but not in high stats.

More evil than any guns or what have you.

"No one can live up against the microwave weapons these madmen have"

Er, they've tested the ADS several thousand times and the worst ill effects have been blisters in two cases. What makes you think it could kill?

If they wanted to kill people, they'd use proper lethal weapons. The current ADS weighs nine tons and has a range of less than half a mile - a .50 cal machine gun has longer range and is a lot more portable!

Originally posted by andy1033

Non lethel weapons are lethel but not in high stats.

More evil than any guns or what have you.

What utter, utter tripe.

Yes there have been cases of fatalities due to less lethal weapon systems being used, but in real terms they are hardly a drop in the ocean compared with the number of non-lethal uses. For example during the troubles in N Ireland there have been 16 reported deaths from baton rounds despite the many thousands that were actually fired (Approx 26'500, of which around 360 caused actual serious injury). I've been shot with a baton round (training accident) from a range of about 30m. It dropped me on my arse, got me 3 days off work and a bruise the size of a CD on my hip. Hardly the stuff of nightmares.

Amnesty international have documented 330-340 taser related deaths in the US. This sounds like a huge amount, but needs to be placed in context. In the same time period the taser has been used over 1 million times. Of the deaths related to tasers, a large proportion were caused by the victim striking their head after a fall caused by a tasar hit, or by drug intoxication. Only 50 have had the taser documented as the actual cause of death. Of these all were linked to prolonged or multiple exposures to the taser. This strikes me as a training deficit rather than a failure in the system.

Less lethal systems such as these should be used with care and discression. There are too many people using them inappropriately. In the UK a taser or baton round can only be used in the direct protection of life, unlike the US where it can be used as a compliance tool. Hence we have lower death rates in the UK due to these systems.

Simple fact is if I shot you with a firearm you would probably die. If I hit you with any of these other systems you would almost certainly survive with few long-term complications.

Care to relate to me how this is more frightening to you than a firearm which has a substantially greater chance of killing or causing grevious injury?