14 ms·
E-Shotgun
- pull_my_finger 5y agoFrom the QA page[1] > 4. Who is the target user of e-shotgun? > 1. Players: lovers who like to play with guns. Am I reading this right? The number 1 target user is BDSM kink players? [1]: https://e-shotgun.com/qa/ https://e-shotgun.com/qa/
- ObscureScience 5y agoWhat is this tagline supposed to mean? "Fully electrified new energy near defense equipment, more a black technology fever product."
- uap 5y agoElectric coil, non-lethal, defense weapon. DemolitionRanch video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izW1X2555Wg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izW1X2555Wg
- LegitShady 5y agoBased on some of the damage that weapon did in the video, I don't expect that is non lethal by any means. That looks like deadly force to me.
- rpmisms 5y agoLegally, deadly force. Practically, hell no. Not trusting my life to a metal disc with the same velocity as a BB pellet.
- genewitch 5y agoHow about 4 discs and 15 BBs? PDX 12ga rounds have like 25cm spread at 15 meters...
- ShrigmaMale 5y agoIf I am in the rare scenario where I have to shoot I will use the lethal option. Even if the chance is only 1% where the non-lethal does not kill. Because if I have to shoot than my life is in imminent danger.
- rpmisms 5y agoNo. If my life is on the line, I'm not going to use anything that gives my attacker a fair chance. The e-shotgun looks stupid fun, though, and I'll probably get one for shits and giggles.
- gillesjacobs 5y agoWouldn't want to use it for self-defense. Would just mildly irrate any attacker most likely. Nevertheless, still a very cool concept and slick implementation.
- zeroflow 5y agoI would not consider this a self defense weapon. This will probably just irritate the attacker for a second. Advertising this for self-defense is rather reckless, considering that people may rely on that.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Synaesthesia 5y agoIt's pretty powerful and fires darn rapidly, those pellets are gonna hurt a lot. They penetrated a 2l plastic bottle, probably take your eye out ...
- meheleventyone 5y ago16J is pretty high, around air rifle levels of power so you could probably kill someone depending on how those discs damage people and how close you were.
- CodeGlitch 5y agoDid you see what it did to a water melon? I think any intruder would be wise not to confront one of these.
- sharklazer 5y agoI suppose you’re safe if your attackers are watermelons. But a watermelon is not a good substitute to understand what it’d do to a person. It only give an indication of damage.
- mbg721 5y agoWhat about a point-ed stick?
- fortysixdegrees 5y ago
- GauntletWizard 5y agonote that in their demonstration video, they're very careful not to show you the butt of the gun - I will bet that it's plugged in. I seriously doubt they've got sufficient power supply in that profile.
- yadaeno 5y agoIt does not need to be plugged in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izW1X2555Wg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izW1X2555Wg
- Ancapistani 5y agoConsider me unimpressed. First, there just isn’t a ton of energy in that “round”. They’re claiming <16J - a .22LR, the smallest common caliber, comes in at around 275J. This thing is substantially less powerful than many BB guns. Second, the disk shape of the projectile means that it’s going to be impossible to aim effectively. That thing is going to have significant vertical dispersion even at very short ranges. It’s a toy.
- defterGoose 5y ago| It's a toy. An extremely dangerous toy.
- Ancapistani 5y agoI suppose that’s fair. I’d argue it’s less dangerous than, for instance, a 5” racing quadcopter.
- dsomers 5y agoI’d say 5” racing quadcopter might not be a bad home defensive weapon either. I’d probably go down if you ran it into my head at full speed.
- tlamponi 5y ago> I’d argue it’s less dangerous than, for instance, a 5” racing quadcopter. Semi-related, as I looked into drones here again a bit (my last adventure was a self-build from 2011, different times): The EU thought so too, it defines the difference between toys (that you do not need to register nor have any license for) are those which develop no more than 79 joules of impact energy when dropping, which couples it automatically to the weight of the drone and the ceiling height you can/want to fly with it. The law assumes that you need to calculate at minimum 30 m of ceiling height, to avoid shops being able to sell 2.5 kg drones when you ensure while winking that you fly it at 1 m at max. So the most common variants are 250 gr. which works out at 30 m allowed ceiling height you can fly with it, at least if you're not in a restricted flight zone, like some cities and naturally airports are. https://www.easa.europa.eu/domains/civil-drones/drones-regulatory-framework-background/open-category-civil-drones https://www.easa.europa.eu/domains/civil-drones/drones-regul...
- faebi 5y agoHow would a cordless nail gun do in comparison?
- crate_barre 5y agoGreat for filling up the vacants on the Westside.
- hitekker 5y agoNice reference. I was just watching the wire
- IAmGraydon 5y agoYeah…sorry. If someone breaks into my house, they’re getting a bit more than 16J pointed their way.
- kristopolous 5y agoHonestly if someone breaks into my house they'll be getting a cup of tea and a blanket. Robbery must be an awful way to make a living. They're probably in a life of abuse and addiction. Yes, I'm a total psycho, I already know this.
- trabant00 5y agoNo, you are a clueless idealist who never spent time with actual home robbers.
- Majestic121 5y agoThat sounds like the stance of someone that never had to go through a robbery on the wrong side of the weapon
- kristopolous 5y agoI have many times. About 20 years ago someone who had previously robbed me at knifepoint ran into me, recognized me as someone he knew and I was able to convince him that we played on a sports team together as children. I bought him lunch and we stayed in touch. At the time I had aphorisms on my bathroom mirror. My favorite one was "I need not convince that humanity is necessary, only that it's possible"
- zeroflow 5y agoI REALLY doubt the "Good stopping effect". That's the same as the flashlights with "intruder stopping" strobe. They claim 16J. Well, a typical - Germany Legal - Airsoft gun has 7.5J, so we're talking about toy-level of energy. Now, looking at some 9mm ammo, you have around 500-570J depending on type - Ball vs. Hollow Point. Yeah, it's very clear to me, what I want to use if I have to defend myself.
- semi-extrinsic 5y agoComparing impact energy between a flat and a pointed object is meaningless. A five-year-old in a pillow fight will put substantially more than 16J into your body.
- glenstein 5y agoI agree, and I feel like this is a critical point being overlooked. A pillow and a point of a stick can apply the same amount of force, with completely different effects.
- robbedpeter 5y agoA 50-100k lumen flashlight would be a better defense, cost less, and possibly be more fun (for night fishing, too!)
- Blammar 5y agoLED flashlights don't go up to 100k lumens to my knowledge. If you need extreme intensity, you'll have to use a solid state laser. A 10w handheld laser would be an effective defense, but you should wear bandstop glasses at the laser frequency. A beam spreader would also make it easier to aim and still nearly as effective.
- jaggederest 5y agoThis little fella here: https://www.imalentlight.com/imalent-ms18-led-flashlight-cree-xhp70-2-led-max100000-lumens-intelligent-charging-for-outdoor-search-light.html https://www.imalentlight.com/imalent-ms18-led-flashlight-cre...
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- causi 5y ago16 joules, or roughly four times the energy of a Nerf dart. The local meth-heads are still shaking in their boots but it isn't in fear of this toy.
- donkarma 5y agoWhen I googled the energy of a Nerf dart I saw 4 joules, but this is from a 200g Nerf dart in a hypothetical question. When I calculate it for a 1g Nerf dart at around 21m/s it comes out to 0.2205 joules
- olliej 5y agowhy is a gun on HN?
- junon 5y ago> 3. Internet: it is combined with big data and it can be tracked during the whole process The site feels like satire. Some of the Q&A answers just make little sense. Also, they claim it's non-lethal. After the example videos, I cannot see how that is the case. It looks like it could easily shred through some stomach lining or nick an artery or completely blind someone.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- slowmotiony 5y agoNon-lethal means it is not going to cause death. Being blind in one eye is not going to make you stop living.
- LegitShady 5y agoIf you used this on any person it would be lethal force. The company declaring it not lethal is a joke and liability for them.
- junon 5y agoYes sure, if you breeze past the shredded intestines and nicked arteries...
- cwkoss 5y agoThat looks like a lot of fun
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- eternityforest 5y agoIt's cool, but aren't pepper ball pistols a lot cheaper?
- glenstein 5y agoI don't have a lot to say about the functionality or specifications here, but I feel like there's a new conceptual issue raised by non-lethal, or notionally non-lethal weapons. Constitutional arguments are about the right to self-defense. That's not necessarily the same as killing someone, and you don't necessarily have a right to killing in and of itself, but only as a means to an end for self-defense. I suppose it depends on what flavor of defense of the second amendment you favor, but it seems like self-defense can be associated with incapacitation, need not necessarily depend on the capability of killing. If that's true, access to weapons for the purpose of self-defense that aren't capable of killing would seem to open up a lot of possibilities for regulating traditional firearms. If (I said if!) there are equally effective alternatives for the purpose of self-defense, then that constitutional right can be satisfied without the need for traditional firearms that are capable of killing. Insofar as they can replace traditional firearms, I find that promising, but obviously this brings a fair amount of unintended complexity; for instance non-lethal self defense may open up entirely new dimensions of cruel maiming and non-lethal suffering, it's may create complexities relating to whether something's actually non-lethal, it may have an effect of increasing the sum total of use of force by introducing non-lethal force into lower and lower stakes situations leading to a net increase of physical coercion, and there may be cultural resistance to the idea ever becoming mainstream because it would be too reformist and therefore liberal. I think these all have to be navigated, but I think the trade-off is worth considering. I also think that strong gun regulation is worth considering, and personally just don't endorse wide distribution of guns in any form whatsoever, so I consider this a workaround peculiar to the culture of America.
- johncolanduoni 5y agoMy understanding is the US constitution’s second amendment has also been interpreted somewhat literally when it refers to a “well regulated militia”. From that perspective being able to have lethal weapons is still important, though given the fact that we don’t allow private citizens to have the gear to go toe to toe with a modern military I’m not sure exactly where that ends and more mundane self-defense begins.
- inkblotuniverse 5y ago
- nanna 5y ago[flagged]
- dang 5y agoPlease don't call names in HN comments or take HN threads into nationalistic flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for. I haven't looked closely at the post but since the article is claiming some sort of technical innovation it's not hard to see why some readers would find it interesting. If you don't find it interesting, that's fine—nothing interests everybody, and there are plenty of other things to read here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- nanna 5y agoFair enough Dang. Apologies.
- oriori 5y agoFirst thought that came to mind after watching the video, imagine attaching it to a drone, mob suppression will never be the same again.
- claviska 5y agoEverything else aside, am I the only one who thinks putting two function keys right below the muzzle is a poor design?
- zomg 5y agoi couldn't agree more. seeing those function keys below the muzzle made me cringe.
- JoeyBananas 5y agojust buy an Austrian black pistol
- kissgyorgy 5y agoWhy is a fucking gun on the front page? Moderators also gave up on the site I guess.
- ralusek 5y agoTech
- mantaraygun 5y agoWhy is it called a shotgun? It shoots little discs, not shot.
- datameta 5y agoLooks like at 3000rpm, the 50 round mag will impact the target within human reaction time, in a spread similar to a shotgun's.
- authed 5y agoI'd rather get a PCP Air riffle... something like this one in .50 cal: https://www.airgundepot.com/airforce-texan-air-rifle-carbon-fiber-tank.html https://www.airgundepot.com/airforce-texan-air-rifle-carbon-...
- bradgranath 5y agoMmmm, yas. More wierd ESL gun-humper copy.
- hellisothers 5y agoI was once in a session with a concealed carry license instructor and at the end of his session he made a couple surprising points. 1) if you’re going to shoot somebody, shoot to kill or prepare for a lawsuit. 2) There is a gun lobby, a taser lobby, a knife lobby, but no baseball bat lobby so don’t keep a baseball bat under your bed because when you injure somebody you’ll be sued and nobody will help defend you. 3) Buy pepper spray. I took his advise and bought pepper spray instead. My point here is there is also no rail gun lobby, so if you injure somebody, prepare to be sued.