Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Egan_BW]

A gun is not a protective device, for preventing yourself or others from getting shot. A gun is a tool for killing another human being. There really aren't many things that can guarantee your own safety while someone who doesn't like you is holding a gun, including preemptive murder.
Trying to use a gun like a shield is a good way to hurt someone innocent.

[Playergamer]

A gun is not a protective device, for preventing yourself or others from getting shot. A gun is a tool for killing another human being. There really aren't many things that can guarantee your own safety while someone who doesn't like you is holding a gun, including preemptive murder.
Trying to use a gun like a shield is a good way to hurt someone innocent.

yes. guns are generally rather small and built horizontally, so it's incredibly hard to block bullets with one.

except in CSGO.

[Egan_BW]

If the gun successfully blocks the bullet, you're probably about to get hit by bits of your own gun flying fast enough to kill you.

[Strife26]

I'll just skip to the only appropriate conclusion. Roads should all be widened sufficiently to allow comfortable travel of armored vehicles.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Now I'm wondering how much more quickly we will/would have used the oil supply if everybody was traveling in armored vehicles instead of normal cars.

Also, you can totally just buy a bulletproofed car. Apparently people do this as a semi-regular thing once they have the money for it.

[smjjames]

I'll just skip to the only appropriate conclusion. Roads should all be widened sufficiently to allow comfortable travel of armored vehicles.

You just want everybody to ride tanks don't you? lol.

Still, armored vehicles won't solve the problem being discussed here.

[Egan_BW]

All police need to wear frikkin power armor so they're not afraid of getting shot.

[Descan]

Nah, man. Unarmed drones with net* launchers. Can't get hurt, can't hurt people, can subdue suspects. Only issue is if they DO have a gun, unless you put in a tazer or knock-out gas kind of thing, they can either shoot whoever comes to pick them up or shoot themselves or any bystanders that they got netted by or with.

*We're assuming this is a net made of that un-cuttable stuff.

[Frumple]

... nooo, those totally can hurt people. Netting someone to the ground is a good way to break something, particularly on hard terrain. Uncuttable net is how people strangle themselves and whatnot. Not sure if it's more dangerous than a taser, and it's almost certainly not more dangerous than a gun, but there's definitely risks involved with their use.

[Egan_BW]

So long as we're discussing impossible solutions, why not just take away everyone's guns?

[BorkBorkGoesTheCode]

So long as we're discussing impossible solutions, why not just take away everyone's guns?

Even the armies' guns?

[martinuzz]

So long as we're discussing impossible solutions, why not just take away everyone's guns?

I think it would be easier to amputate everyone's trigger fingers. You can't hide a stash of those in the woods.

[Descan]

... nooo, those totally can hurt people. Netting someone to the ground is a good way to break something, particularly on hard terrain. Uncuttable net is how people strangle themselves and whatnot. Not sure if it's more dangerous than a taser, and it's almost certainly not more dangerous than a gun, but there's definitely risks involved with their use.

What, you took issue with the nets, and not with giving every police department drones which they'll inevitably arm? :V Like that part goes without saying, they *would* arm them.

[Egan_BW]

So long as we're discussing impossible solutions, why not just take away everyone's guns?

Even the armies' guns?

Yes, feed them all to the ravenous gun-eating mechanical god beyond our world.

[Frumple]

What, you took issue with the nets, and not with giving every police department drones which they'll inevitably arm? :V Like that part goes without saying, they *would* arm them.

Well sure. I doubt stopping the drone swarm is even possible -- and may even not be desired in another 30 or 40 years, depending on how target recognition and response software develops -- but keeping some kind of control over what's on the things is more viable.

We've mostly kept cops from arming helicopters, after all, so far as I can recall. More or less stopped them from actually sticking/keeping (much) mounted heavy weaponry on military surplus vehicles. Same principle.

If we can keep the drones as hard locked as possible to least lethal, instead of less, it'd be a better results than anything else that involves armed drones, which'll be hell and a half to outright squelch.