Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Alternative Ballistics-less lethal option?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • #16
    billofrights
    CGN/CGSSA Contributor
    CGN Contributor
    • Oct 2012
    • 2343

    Sony might have a case for trademark infringement...

    Comment

    • #17
      rugershooter
      Senior Member
      • Nov 2009
      • 1804

      Horrible idea. Only an idiot would put his hand in front of the muzzle of a loaded gun, especially in a stressful situation. Combining a non-lethal and a lethal weapon into one system is a recipe for disaster. If that one shot doesn't work, that doesn't necessarily mean you're justified in using deadly force, so you'd have to holster you gun and deploy another less-lethal option. A lot of people are also trained to shoot multiple times (double or triple tap, etc) and in a stressful situation where the officer falls back on training, it's likely that he'll fire multiple times, even with the device on the gun. It's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. The police don't need more less-lethal options; they need the judgement to use their weapons, both lethal and less-lethal, in the right ways and at the right times.

      Comment

      • #18
        stix213
        AKA: Joe Censored
        CGN Contributor - Lifetime
        • Apr 2009
        • 18998

        Originally posted by gvbsat
        Are you forgetting the part about having to, put the single shot non lethal device on the, loaded firearm?
        That is the "pop on device" step

        Comment

        • #19
          Click Boom
          Calguns Addict
          • Nov 2013
          • 6955

          It will never get implemented, Ferguson PD is just using this guy for pub. And vice versa.

          Comment

          • #20
            deerdeerdeer
            Veteran Member
            • Sep 2014
            • 2696

            Originally posted by billofrights
            Sony might have a case for trademark infringement...
            LOL

            Comment

            • #21
              Jimi Jah
              I need a LIFE!!
              • Jan 2014
              • 17689

              If cops want a less deadly firearm, more trips to the gun range would be a first step. They could learn to shoot better and at less lethal body areas than the center of the chest.

              Cops are not taught to wound, only to kill.

              Comment

              • #22
                gvbsat
                Senior Member
                • Jan 2010
                • 1002

                Originally posted by stix213
                That is the "pop on device" step
                I'm not going to argue semantics, especially on the interwebs. I will say this, have you been in a stressful enviroment using and involving a pistol? Even the most practiced muscle memory tasks like reloading, be it revolver or magazine fed weapon are tasks, that under stress can be very difficult. Let alone placing some sort of muzzle device on your loaded firearm, it just sounds like a huge recipe for disaster using common sense. Coupled with the fact that, one really needs to train train train and have enough time to deploy said "non lethal" devise, and we all know cops train all the time with their primary side arm.

                Comment

                Working...
                UA-8071174-1