Wow. That would be an extremely useful/safe way to prevent riots from happening and dispersing riots. It could prevent many deaths, if used correctly. If one of those fell into the wrong hands...that would be bad. Imagine a dictator, say Hitler, with one of those. That is practically body control. He could nonlethally force people to their deaths.{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank wrote:
I think if they can get this weapon deployed and actively used, it will be beneficial in many scenarios.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0, … page_prev2
What do you all think?
Last edited by MorbiD.ShoT (2006-12-05 18:53:50)
i saw that too that is incredible sick as well you saw it on discovery channelspecxops wrote:
i think i saw something like that on tv but it shoots sound waves or seomthing
how do you nonlethally force one to his death? ....MorbiD.ShoT wrote:
Wow. That would be an extremely useful/safe way to prevent riots from happening and dispersing riots. It could prevent many deaths, if used correctly. If one of those fell into the wrong hands...that would be bad. Imagine a dictator, say Hitler, with one of those. That is practically body control. He could nonlethally force people to their deaths.{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank wrote:
I think if they can get this weapon deployed and actively used, it will be beneficial in many scenarios.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0, … page_prev2
What do you all think?
Good sides and bad sides to everything.
What happens if it's not used properly?If used properly, ADS will produce no lasting adverse affects, the military argues.
Last edited by haffeysucks (2006-12-05 18:57:37)
radation? or worse im guessinghaffeysucks wrote:
What happens if it's not used properly?If used properly, ADS will produce no lasting adverse affects, the military argues.
Easy. Force them into battle. Put guns in their hands, give them uniforms, boots on their feet, and keep that gun pointed on them until they are behind the point of no return; forcing them to fight.Ender2309 wrote:
how do you nonlethally force one to his death? ....MorbiD.ShoT wrote:
Wow. That would be an extremely useful/safe way to prevent riots from happening and dispersing riots. It could prevent many deaths, if used correctly. If one of those fell into the wrong hands...that would be bad. Imagine a dictator, say Hitler, with one of those. That is practically body control. He could nonlethally force people to their deaths.{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank wrote:
I think if they can get this weapon deployed and actively used, it will be beneficial in many scenarios.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0, … page_prev2
What do you all think?
Good sides and bad sides to everything.
Non-lethal.MorbiD.ShoT wrote:
Easy. Force them into battle. Put guns in their hands, give them uniforms, boots on their feet, and keep that gun pointed on them until they are behind the point of no return; forcing them to fight.Ender2309 wrote:
how do you nonlethally force one to his death? ....MorbiD.ShoT wrote:
Wow. That would be an extremely useful/safe way to prevent riots from happening and dispersing riots. It could prevent many deaths, if used correctly. If one of those fell into the wrong hands...that would be bad. Imagine a dictator, say Hitler, with one of those. That is practically body control. He could nonlethally force people to their deaths.
Good sides and bad sides to everything.
Or if you wanted mass murder, force a group of people off a cliff, into a fire, under water.......Endless ways, I'm surprised you couldn't come up with one yourself.
le·thal (lthl)
adj.
1. Capable of causing death.
2. Of, relating to, or causing death.
Last edited by haffeysucks (2006-12-05 19:12:27)
Alright. I'll use a different term. I like to speak paradoxically by the way.haffeysucks wrote:
Non-lethal.MorbiD.ShoT wrote:
Easy. Force them into battle. Put guns in their hands, give them uniforms, boots on their feet, and keep that gun pointed on them until they are behind the point of no return; forcing them to fight.Ender2309 wrote:
how do you nonlethally force one to his death? ....
Or if you wanted mass murder, force a group of people off a cliff, into a fire, under water.......Endless ways, I'm surprised you couldn't come up with one yourself.le·thal (lthl)
adj.
1. Capable of causing death.
2. Of, relating to, or causing death.
Much better. I just felt like making fun of you, since I talk to you frequently and all.MorbiD.ShoT wrote:
Alright. I'll use a different term. I like to speak paradoxically by the way.haffeysucks wrote:
Non-lethal.MorbiD.ShoT wrote:
Easy. Force them into battle. Put guns in their hands, give them uniforms, boots on their feet, and keep that gun pointed on them until they are behind the point of no return; forcing them to fight.
Or if you wanted mass murder, force a group of people off a cliff, into a fire, under water.......Endless ways, I'm surprised you couldn't come up with one yourself.le·thal (lthl)
adj.
1. Capable of causing death.
2. Of, relating to, or causing death.
How about, Indirectly forcing people to their deaths? Better?
Then you put locator beacons in the unit, and if it gets stolen, you retrieve it or blow it to smoked shit with a laser guided bomb from a flyboy 40,000 feet in the air.RedTwizzler wrote:
I didn't think about the possibility of forced fighting... That's a good idea. (And by that, I don't mean I support it, I mean it was good that he thought of it prior to it actually happening...)
Also, what if one of these falls into the wrong hands? Say there's a group on patrol in Iraq (for example) and their humvee gets hit win an RPG, but the ADS is salvagable. The insurgents now have a way of effectively warding off all military personel from a certain area. If you consider the mobility of this, when put on a truck, it could be devastating to our infantry. This same tactic could prove true in a riot, although protesters tend to be lightly armed at best.
Last edited by eagles1106 (2006-12-05 19:39:47)
Frikin sharks.Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:
Laz0rz?
