• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

"This Clip-on Handgun Attachment Makes Bullets Non-Lethal" - Gizmodo

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NotTheGuyYouKill

Member
http://gizmodo.com/this-clip-on-handgun-attachment-makes-bullets-non-letha-1730039256

1425939525269456527.gif


1425939525150051727.jpg


California company called Alternative Ballistics has developed an easy-to-install accessory for hand guns that promises to make bullets non-lethal allowing law enforcement to incapacitate a suspect without causing life-threatening injuries.

The most important feature of the accessory, called The Alternative, is that it doesn’t interfere with the operation of a handgun in any way once it’s clipped onto the muzzle. The weapon’s sights still work, and other accessories like flashlights can still be attached.

So how do you make a speeding bullet less lethal? That’s easy, you simply reduce its speed. The Alternative holds a hollow metal sphere on the end of a gun’s barrel that’s designed to catch a bullet as it leaves the weapon and hitch a ride, in a manner of speaking.

The metal sphere, made from a proprietary metal alloy, will reduce the speed of a bullet by up to 80 percent while spreading out the point of impact on a target. So when it makes impact there’s less chance of it piercing flesh and causing serious internal injuries. Still, it hits the target with enough force to knock a person down, just like a non-lethal bean-bag round would, but with far more accuracy.

Designed as a single-use accessory, The Alternative’s orange plastic support is automatically ejected from a handgun after a shot has been fired, allowing law enforcement to immediately continue firing with regular rounds as needed. Because it’s so easy to install, teaching officers to use the accessory can be incorporated into regular firearms training with minimal additional time or cost. And because it can be carried on their person at all times, it’s a non-lethal alternative that’s always within quick reach so there’s a better chance it will be used more frequently.
Click to expand...
 
This thing is stupid as hell. I get the idea behind it, but if you're pulling a damn gun, it should be the last resort. Training is the problem.
 
Yeh seems like a one shot deal, what was the story the other day? Something like over 53 shots.

If police were that concerned, they'd be using rubber bullets (though even these are potentially lethal themselves).

Really don't see police going for this or at least they'll just find the first shot 'inconvenient'
 
Might be useful for UK armed response units. They're trained extensively to not fire their guns unless absolutely necessary already, so the single shot thing would be less of an issue.

Still, isn't this what tasers and the like are for already? Seems to just be over complicating things to me.
 
you know your culture has an absurd, dangerous obsession with guns when instead of just having less, using them less, you have to invent murder free guns instead
 
Reality is human beings are too emotional to be trusted to make calm decisions where there are guns at play. They may get angry, scared for their lives, see something that didn't exist, have personal viewpoints and stereotypes affect their decision making, etc etc.

This thing will protect the victims against the first shot, but not the next 5 when they think they missed the first, that the suspect didn't go down, that they are still at risk, etc
 
Yeah, I'm not looking forward to all of the "I forgot to clip on my non-lethal accessory, oops" defenses. We've got enough "I thought it was my taser" ones already.

Just stop shooting at everything.
 
Stilton Disco said:
Might be useful for UK armed response units. They're trained extensively to not fire their guns unless absolutely necessary already, so the single shot thing would be less of an issue.
Click to expand...
They're trained so much that they'd only use their guns when they need it, making sure those are situations where you'd want them to fire live rounds.
 
It just seems like a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. I mean, it is a problem that police shoot too easily, I think. But the police force, I assume, would be the ones to be buying these things, and if they wanted their officers to shoot people less, then they could already be doing that without having to buy this. It's like trying to sell an insulator for a toaster to put between the heat and the bread so that the bread doesn't get toasted. If people were interested in not toasting bread, they simply wouldn't put bread in the toaster. They wouldn't need to buy another device. Same kind of principle here, I think.
 
I'm still baffled by a lack of an effective nonlethal alternatives to bullets. What's the drawback of rubber bullets?
 
Kettch said:
Yeah, I'm not looking forward to all of the "I forgot to clip on my non-lethal accessory, oops" defenses. We've got enough "I thought it was my taser" ones already.

Just stop shooting at everything.
Click to expand...

Either that or,

"He kept coming at me after the first shot!"

The only way the issue is going to be solved is through better training and actual accountability being held toward misconduct.
 
Why don't you just use rubber bullets? This seems like one of those products that already has a simpler alternative, like that strap device that you attach to the backseat of your car to hold your purse while you're driving.
 
guek said:
I'm still baffled by a lack of an effective nonlethal alternatives to bullets. What's the drawback of rubber bullets?
Click to expand...

This is what I was going to say. We just can't invent something new? It's beyond our technology to create a weapon that only incapacitates people?

Tasers seem to work, why do they also need guns, just use the tasers. Need something long range? Long range taser shooter. It can't be that hard.
 
Rather: Makes one bullet potentially non-lethal.

Leave lethal lethal. I don't want a device making LEOs more comfortable upholstering their service weapon in the first place.

Razorback PT said:
This is what I was going to say. We just can't invent something new? It's beyond our technology to create a weapon that only incapacitates people?
Click to expand...

I am saddened by the lack of development on net guns or goo/glue guns from cartoons.
 
HariKari said:
Cops don't use the single shot tasers they have now. Why would they use this?
Click to expand...

Well at least they don't have to switch weapons. They can deliver a non-lethal blow, then if the assailant attacks the police they can immediately move to lethal force. You will always need superior training, but I think this is just meant to be an extra tool to help. Better than not having it at all.
 
BumRush said:
But what if they shot you in the head?
Click to expand...

That's why calling this stuff "non-lethal" is never accurate.

Appropriate nomenclature is "less than lethal". A rubber bullet or bean bag to the right spot can still kill someone, assume this is the same.
 
I wouldn't mind if this was something everyone, citizens and police alike, had to have. It could cut down on accidental shooting deaths.

Not sure what else this is supposed to do though.
 
This would be a great tool for a police force that didnt want to kill the people it was supposed to protect.

Now all we need is a solution for a police force that does.
 
Empty said:
you know your culture has an absurd, dangerous obsession with guns when instead of just having less, using them less, you have to invent murder free guns instead
Click to expand...

This thing seems stupid since you only have the first pull of the trigger to use non lethal force and of course the ballistics/accuracy can't be great with what is basically a very slow musket ball being shot.

But there is a need for a simple non lethal device that can be shot repeatedly from a distance.
 
injurai said:
Well at least they don't have to switch weapons. They can deliver a non-lethal blow, then if the assailant attacks the police they can immediately move to lethal force. You will always need superior training, but I think this is just meant to be an extra tool to help. Better than not having it at all.
Click to expand...

The argument against this 'tool' is really simple; it will get in the way of lethal force if an officer needs it. They won't adopt this. Also, having the gun be non lethal on the first shot and then lethal is a recipe for disaster. You said it yourself; you need lots of training for this to be realistic and effective.

I don't agree that it's better than not having it all. Guns need to come out of holsters less, not more. You can't even trust a cop to keep their god damn finger off the trigger in a proper way when they've got someone on the ground now. Why would you trust them with this?
 
Would prefer an invention that allows officers to do their jobs while keeping their guns on their belts; as opposed to one that allows them to put the gun in their hands in situations that don't require lethal force.
 
Seems stupid - single use, cumbersome, and it could still easily kill. Calling that non-lethal is simply untrue.
 
The 6-shot version of this would probably revitalize the toy gun market.

Kids who had the pump-action ball shooter would be vindicated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Mandalorian and Grogu first clip
4 5 6 7 8
361
2K
belmarduk replied
Anthropic: "No Claude for lethal weapons and surveillance". Pentagon: "That's a deal breaker"
24
702
DeepEnigma replied
Claude Cowork, agentic AI for non-technical workers
1
324
Artistic replied
Target pushes AI shopping assistant, blames you if it makes mistakes
News 
22
640
Trilobit replied
  • Poll
Grocery Delivery Absolutely Makes You a Cuck
2 3
128
2K
poodaddy replied
Top Bottom