| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science |
| A gun that can regulate bullet speed |
| 2008-07-24 |
| CHICAGO: A US company is developing a gun that can fire bullets with variable speed and can be set to kill, wound or just cause a bruise. Lund and Company Invention, a Chicago-based toy design studio, which makes toy rockets that are powered by burning hydrogen, is receiving funding from the US army to adapt the same technology for firing bullets as the army is interested in weapons that can be switched between lethal and non-lethal modes. The new weapon, called the Variable Velocity Weapon System, lets the soldier use the same rifle for crowd control and combat, by altering the muzzle velocity. It could be loaded with "rubber bullets" to deliver blunt impact, full-speed lethal rounds or projectiles somewhere between the two. The gun works by mixing a liquid or gaseous fuel with air in a combustion chamber behind the bullet. This determines the explosive capability of the propellant and consequently the velocity of the bullet, as it leaves the gun. |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #14 Wrongful death lawsuits, in the case of a perp, are very likely to be dismissed or beaten by a decent attorney. Much more so than the ones where the jurors see some bastard sitting there in a wheelchair or using a walker. It's the same psychology at work that had all the fools concerned about OJ rather than the two people he murdered. |
| Posted by: Jomock Platypus9662 2008-07-24 18:48 |
| #13 I can hear it now. A cop says "STOP!" The perp doesn't stop and keeps coming. "Damn, I meant to set it on bruise." Such bullets will only be good for lawyers. I was part of some research some years ago that evaluated a tungsten-tin bullet that was formed under pressure. it did not work as well as conventional bullets because it tended to powder on impact. The intent was to develop an "environmentally friendly" but people unfriendly bullet. It didn't work so well. I always had to kind of chuckle about these conflicting concepts. Still hard to beat lead. Shoot for the center of mass with an "adequate conventional" bullet to kill if you are going to shoot. What "adequate conventional" means is open to interpretation. I like 40 or 45 cal. Hydra-Shok or Speer Lawman. These rounds will bruise, wound, and kill all at the same time. You don't have to take the time to sort out which you want to do. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2008-07-24 17:56 |
| #12 Kinda defeats the purpose of handloading. |
| Posted by: no mo uro 2008-07-24 17:11 |
| #11 I wonder if it'll be ready for the night of November 4th. |
| Posted by: Bob 2008-07-24 15:39 |
| #10 Future Weapons had a variable speed beanbag shotgun. It was calibrated for fireing at a human being, you used a slider set the hight of the person and the gun calibrated how much force to use to stun it. It worked by venting off the burning gasses from the shotgun "shell" in variable amounts. |
| Posted by: DLR 2008-07-24 15:26 |
| #9 I'm beginning to think the term is over-used. So's your rhetoric, but you're still allowed to post. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2008-07-24 14:30 |
| #8 Years ago in Brazil, bus companies made the interesting discovery that they paid much less for wrongful death than for injury. This was soon followed with bus drivers chasing people they had bumped, to finish the job. But seriously, folks. I figured that an easier way to get a variable bullet would be to have a casing with punch holes in it. You would have a selector switch on the gun that would determine how many holes were punched in the casing before firing; zero, one or two. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2008-07-24 14:17 |
| #7 You could carry a hell of a lot more rounds with a system like this. Might be good for urban warfare on the low setting. Different bullet weights would make it even more flexible. And I don't know, wounding the enemy seems like it just makes more problems than it prevents. They capture some of those Taliban guys several times, I don't know who keeps letting them out, but they go right back to work when they do. |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2008-07-24 14:13 |
| #6 I prefer nukes. That way, you don't have witnesses. Kinda rough on the "innocents", but I'm beginning to think the term is over-used. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2008-07-24 14:10 |
| #5 A better option is to mount another weapon beneath a normal assault rifle barrel. That way you don't screw with an existing, successful weapon. I can imagine a shotgun would be useful, loaded with rocksalt or even bean-bags would slow people down. You could even load up a stun gun or super-soaker filled with pepper spray. Any of the above would be better than screwing with the primary weapon. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2008-07-24 14:00 |
| #4 Spoken like a man who has never experienced a "wrongful death" lawsuit. Also spoken like someone who slept through the 'use of deadly force' lecture. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2008-07-24 13:51 |
| #3 sounds like an olde fashion Phaser.. |
| Posted by: Red Dawg 2008-07-24 13:28 |
| #2 "That way you don't get sued" Spoken like a man who has never experienced a "wrongful death" lawsuit. |
| Posted by: crosspatch 2008-07-24 13:11 |
| #1 Why wound or bruise?????? If you point.....KILL....That way you don't get sued |
| Posted by: ARMYGUY 2008-07-24 13:06 |