I've been standing by my believe should have no reason to use lethal force. Weapons need a overhaul. My understanding is majority wants weapons for any governmental take over of civil rights. Here is the truth it wont matter the amount of arms inside residential homes could not hold off special force trained tactical insertion units.We need to level the playing field. Gun stashes in bigger cities, just no way to take arms off the streets. What we can do is change ammunition to a immobilize cartridge which can lodge into the skin discharge a sleeping agent for any weight and size. This weapons would be used by all civilians and city, state agency. No permit to carry, no ammunition restriction. Would this work?
I have no idea what you are trying to say lol. Are you saying that regular citizens shouldn't be allowed to have guns because the idea is that we only have guns to fight off a bad government but we would lose anyway so why fight? Or are you saying no one not even the police should have guns just these "sleeping agent" things? I just don't get what you are saying.
Gun Control is the subject of this thread. Concept of owning a weapon is for personal protection and some see it as a defense from government also. I'm introducing a method to save lives by change of ammunition to a saver approach and to have a universal weapon make and model from top to bottom. Hunting could be under park and recreation "Knowledge is a responsibility, not a choice"
No, because it's science fiction. There are no such things as immobilization cartridges which discharge a sleeping agent, and that can adjust for any weight and size.
You'll stand by this belief right up to the point where you discover you need it. Sometimes, people need to kill other people; for this reason, the right to keep and bear arms is protected by the constitution.
Spock: set phasers on stun!! until that is available I am keeping my 9mm SIG loaded with Federal Hydrashocks and my SW AR 15 loaded with 62Grain sierra hollow points
Exactly. There are times when killing people is needed--i.e. in the defense of innocent people. There is no more efficient means of self defense than a modern semi-automatic pistol in a major caliber (9mm up).
Stunt phasers on stunt? No, it wouldn't work. "Something under the skin" is inherently a deadly weapon and no such instant-sleep agent exists except in movies. Other than hunting and sport shooting, people have firearms for self defense, not war with the government. That is just a BIG LIE the anti-gunners tell.
First and foremost, the following grammatical structure is atrocious, and presents a great deal of difficulty in deciphering just what has been said. Such a belief is incorrect. From what source or sources do you gather your information? The insurgents of the middle east, despite having a significant technological disadvantage, have been proving this to be factually incorrect. Despite superior training and technology, the united states military, and its various divisions of special forces, have been absolutely incapable of eliminating the insurgent threat. First and foremost, how would this proposal in any way even begin to address the hundreds of billions of rounds of lethal ammunition already in circulation? If the firearms themselves cannot be removed from the equation, why would the ammunition be any different? Secondly, there is no chemical agent that can render immediate unconsciousness, nor can it be adjusted for the size and weight of a given individual when it is already in capsule form such as a bullet. Even if it was possible, there is always the risk of an allergic reaction occurring, which will lead to the individual who is shot, potentially dying as a result, rather than being rendered unconscious.
That must be why we are soooo successful in the Middle East, right? Fighting an enemy hiding among friendlies is not even a challenge any more. Maybe a weapon that would deliver a non-lethal slap upside the head for those making the above claims is needed!!!!
No it wouldn't. The technology doesn't exist. Are you a pacifist or afraid to defend yourself? Outside of imaginary safe spaces, some people will try to take advantage of you. Grow a spine, pay or beg somebody to protect you, or plan on not having anything that anybody will want. I've heard that peeing or soiling yourself may prevent you from being raped. The police will be there in a few minutes if your attacker will wait.
No, your ideas are misguided and unworkable. A sleeping agent inside a bullet would not work fast enough to stop any threat that needs stopping right away. Yes, small arms like AK and AR rifles in the hands of citizens are not going to have much of a chance against jets and helicopters and smart bombs and tanks and masses of troops. But how would a cop best be able to stop a large truck driven by Muslims headed for a crowd of Christians??? ---peppy spray? ---a baton? ---a taser? ---rubber, or sleeping agent bullets? ---or their gun with lots of rounds?
OP, maybe if you had some magic stun gun that zapped someone in an instant. But it only takes a second for them to shiv you.
We will no longer need shivs. They will be replaced with rubber hammers and fuzzy dice. Gangs will work on the honor system and will nicely ask you to hand over your money. Home invasions will be by appointment only!
The police could hand out puppies and teddy bears instead of carrying guns. Then everybody will like the police.
Stopping a physical attack by another person requires some use of effect against their body. Everything we have today or can imagine has some physical effect that can inflict permanent harm or death depending on the health of the attacker or how the restraint is delivered. Add in the need for a quick effect and the available methods becomes more limited and the possibility of injury or death climbs.The bottom line here is that the best method of eliminating risk to the attacker is for the attacker not to have attacked.
I see no use for lethal force. If a person is disarmed and immobilized why should they die without proper judgment. Wars can be won without one casualty. The ability to lay down greater amounts of fire still doesn't mean people has to die. I'm just saying in this day in age we have methods of deterring aggression by other means. War alone based on this type of method would prove very useful due to information obtain and not having to kill a whole family tree. If I could make an intruder paralyzed for hours till any form of law would show that's good enough for me. This is just my opinion and I know that money and the production of arms is more profitable than death.
Then you have simply not yet found yourself in a situation where the use of lethal force in order to prevent the loss of your own life, or the life of another, has been not only warranted, but also necessary. Until such time that you have learned how your ideals are less than realistic or applicable in the real world, your opinion for how others should have to live are of little or no relevance. What proper judgement was the victim of a violent crime shown by the criminal in question, that would suggest that they should die? What you are failing to comprehend, is that when a private individual is deploying deadly force for the purpose of protecting either their lives, or the lives of another, they are not deliberately trying to kill their attacker. However if the attacker should die as a result, rather than simply being wounded, that is not the fault of anyone except for the individual that chose to commit the crime in the first place. Self defense is not the same thing as war. Wars follow defined rules of engagement. None of which changes the fact that the greatest method of deterring a threat, is said threat facing the risk of drying as a consequence of their actions. This has been the case for a significantly long period of human history, making it conventional wisdom at this point in time. Not every life is worth saving at any cost. Some lives are fit to be ended, and it is as simple as that.
Sorry for late response. Anyway. Sounds great. How long will it take you to invent it? If you havnt already then you should probably get to work. Gona take you awhile. Also was kiddin about the sounds great part. Sounds terrible. Would never work.
And how exactly to you plan to disarm and immobilize them first? Except in the real world you can't do that. What the (*)(*)(*)(*) are you talking about?
