>
>
> I have always been a pro-handgun supporter, but I have always said that if
> someone comes up with a suitable non-lethal way (like a stun gun) to
> incapacitate a perpetrator from a distance that I would support the
> disarming of the public (like anyone would really care about my position!)
I have doubts about "non lethal." Everything touted as "non lethal" hws
wound up being blamed (justifiably or not) for killing somebody. Taser
guns, choke holds (cops and PCP user typically), you name it. Can you
really be sure that out of zillions of people some one wouldn't be
hypersensitive and get a fatal overdose of stun rays, or whatever?
> > Anyway, it looks like the military has taken the first step to
developing > that weapon. It has quite a way to go before it will replace
handguns, but > it is a start. > > Set your phasers on stun..... >
\ dWhy
set? THe only use for a phaser would be a stun gun. They use them to
vaporize people on Star Trek, but why not just bullets? Well Babylon 5 did
a better job of explaining why rayguns - bullets ricocheting around might
poke holls in the space station walls....and act nasty in lower gravity...
Kristin
