Less lethal bullet

gay

i think its old

So you draw your gun in a life threatening situation, aim, fire and......congrats, you pissed the nigger off.

>>33905861
trying to treat a symptom not the illness

the only reason this exists is because niggas keep getting blasted by cops for typical dindu behavior- reaching into waistbands, running, not doing as ordered- general noggery
this tries to make it so when the cops eventually have to shoot that it doesn't kill the redguard, when the fact is that if you're gonna shoot it should be to shoot to kill

TLDR: its a poor attempt at a non-lethal option in a lethal force situation

File: simmnation.jpg (17KB, 360x261px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 360x261px

>>33905861
Like putting a musket on a handgun.

Could just change the ammunition to be non-lethal or better yet, aim for a non lethal shot with lethal ammunition.

>>33905861
>putting a cock cage on a gun
Shiggy diggy my niggy

>>33905861

The problem with all these officer shootings is not that they dont have a less than lethal option available, it's that they dont use it. They already use tasers and have shotguns with beanbags. The problem is training.

Yeah a lot of these incidents have been nogs doing nog things, but some have been due to jumpy cops shooting people who prob shouldnt have been shot. Imo, more effort needs to be placed on training for deescalation.

The pinball isnt gonna fix shit. If a cop needs his sidearm, he needs a bullet now, not for his second shot.

If some tard is chimping out with a knife, but isnt close enough to hurt someone, like in that one vid where the cops surrounded the guy with the knife and shot the fuck out of him, maybe have your partner go get the beanbag gun out of the squad car.

>>33906033
>Aim for a non-lethal shot
NO YOU FUCKING RETARD HOLY SHIT STOP.

Cops are on average able to hit about 10% of the shots they fire on a good day. Hit, as in anywhere on the target. If cops start using lethal ammo where a taser is more appropriate, you're going to have "non-lethal" holes in your skull, spine, ass, nuts, femoral, and anything in a five yard radius of where the cop actually aimed.

If the situation calls for lethal force, shoot to kill.

If the situation does not call for lethal force, DO NOT USE A FUCKING GUN.

You WILL cause innocent people to "accidently" die. This is why tasers exist. And batons. And pepper spray.

God fucking damn.

>>33906033
>aim for a non lethal shot with lethal ammunition
Well memed.

>>33906033
>Aim for a non lethal shot with lethal ammunition.
You're like a retarded BLM protesting leftist. How fucking stupid are you. I hope to god you don't go around parroting such nonsense.

>>33905861
>get brained with one of these
>die
at least the officer screamed less lethal at me

>>33905861
Makes no sense. The modern police policy is that you carry your taser on the opposite side as your firearm so you dont accidentally draw your weapon and shoot someone you meant to tase. With this product to use the less-lethal option the officer first has to draw the lethal option. This will lead to increased number of improper shootings not decreased.

>>33905861
If the gun leaves the holster it's because the officer may need to shoot someone

If the officer needs to shoot someone it is to kill, not hit with a hard plastic ball.

Less than lethal options already exist and have their time and place.

File: (you).png (3KB, 284x115px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 284x115px

>>33906033

File: 1452637299570.gif (2MB, 250x190px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 250x190px

>>33905861
>one bullet

Cops magdump for 2 reasons.
1) In case they miss the first shot
2) Dead men tell no tales.

>>33905861
Training an officer to grab THE SAME ITEM for both LETHAL AND NONLETHAL RESPONSE is very very very stupid.

>>33905861

It's retarded.
This thread is retarded.
OP is retarded.

So apparently many of you don't know how that thing works. It's launched with live ammo. You shoot, it flies, gun cycles and works like normal after.

File: 1389492683792.jpg (76KB, 396x691px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 396x691px

>>33905861
>Giant projectile being launched from one bullet
>Less accuracy by design
>Creates less time for a firearm to be ready for self defense
>Banks on being accurate with ONE SHOT
>Less effective than any other non-lethal weapon police have in their disposal
>Also assuming that it only works on a single model firearm

It's an idea fabricated in a lab in lab environments that would not pass because people with experience know how fucking retarded it is.
If not for Buzzfeed or NowThis faggotry, you wouldn't even know this existed.

File: IMG_3680.jpg (75KB, 790x474px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 790x474px

Just putting this here

>>33905861
Best LTL option I've seen yet for an individual officer facing an individual suspect.

It allows the officer to maintain distance and doesn't interfere with the regular cycle of the gun so the officer can move IMMEDIATELY to lethal force and be on target if the LTL doesn't have the desired effect and the suspect escalates the situation.

>>33905861
clown nose for everyone!

File: будь как будет.jpg (142KB, 416x418px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 416x418px

>>33906033
>Non-lethal shot with lethal ammunition

>>33908494
>Giant projectile being launched from one bullet
yep, that's the idea
>Less accuracy by design
less accurate than a tazer which has to hit with both prongs to have any effect? Are you fucking serious?
>Creates less time for a firearm to be ready for self defense
The time it takes for the firearm to be ready for self defense if this is used is a single split interval. Potentially as little as a single cycle (60(seconds/min)/900RPM = 0.066 second on most pistols) but in reality closer to 1/5 of a second. Either way it's dramatically faster than transitioning to an entirely different system from a beanbag gun/tazer/etc.
>Banks on being accurate with ONE SHOT
Exactly like a beanbag gun or tazer, what was your point exactly?
>Less effective than any other non-lethal weapon police have in their disposal
Show me the data or quit making assertions without data to back them up
>Also assuming that it only works on a single model firearm
incorrect assumption. It's universal in design and has been demo'd on both glocks and M&Ps. Even so that's a fucking retarded objection to have given the fact that by and large departments have issued pistols.

>>33908563
Came here to post this

>>33906033
A non-lethal shot means that you've missed

>>33905861
>basketball projectile for basketball americans

seems about right

>>33905943
Yes, but now after firing a less-than-lethal device you simply have to pull the trigger again to fire lethal. You don't have to drop your taser and draw your real sidearm, you already had it in your hand.

>>33908563
That's beautiful

File: Tameem Hayashida.jpg (109KB, 1230x690px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1230x690px

>>33905861
>"Proprietary alloy"
I.e. We don't want to tell you what it is because you might test it and prove us wrong

>>33905861
It’s a solution looking for a problem.

If you’re going to shoot someone, you’re trying to kill them.

>>33906089
>maybe have your partner go get the beanbag gun out of the squad car.

I know it's a surprise to the average dooder, but most cops don't have that shit around. Even well funded agencies like the NYPD only have certain personnel carry them.

The local agencies I work with have less lethal projectiles (40mm rubber rounds) with the shift Sgt, but the average cop only has his taser and OC for less lethal options.

I'd love to have a bean bag gun in the back of my rig but my agency has said "no it's too expensive to prepare for the 1 time out of 1000000"

Not the worst idea ever but you would definitely see instances of:

1.officer or LTL fucks up, suspect takes round instead of the LTL b/c officer didnt put it on all the way or the device fucked up

2. LTL cracks subjects sternum or skull killing them

3. LTL doesn't stop subject and doesnt discard properly causing firearms malfunction resulting in serious injury or death of officer

Overall id give it a Meh/10. might have slight occasional usefulness but certainly isnt any wonder solution.

>>33910619
>>33906204
>>33906124
>>33906118
>>33906117

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVe7bx_CaSU&nohtml5=False

Shooting to wound is a MAYMAY that never works, nobody ever does, and should never be employed by anybody regardless of the situation

>>33905861
Most police fire multiple times so this really does nothing

File: 1483747532082.jpg (65KB, 688x521px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 688x521px

>>33906033

>>33911323
What if the other guy has a non-cucked gun?

>>33911621
Then why the fuck did you reach into your less-than-lethal holster and pull out THE BALL and rest it over the barrel of your gun?

It's not even an attachment, it doesn't even screw on, you just put it on the barrel of your gun and fire. The ball goes flying and the 'housing' flies off.

Alternatively, you just double tap and/or mag dump with the added advantage of THE BALL hopefully doing it's job stunning the target while the rest of your shots hopefully kill. But this is the biggest problem with it, how many cops are going to use THE BALL and instinctively continue to fire after discharging the less-than-lethal device?

It's retarded to the maximum level of retard you can possibly get. You're trying to turn a tool that is, by design, lethal, into something that is not. You're defeating the entire point of a firearm with this, which is to kill people.

KSG

1 tube of bean bags and the other tube is 00 buck.

We have tasers, beanbag rounds, mace and teargas
If a gun is drawn then its past the point of no return in terms of nonlethal force.

>>33906033
I came here to this thread just to tell you how stupid you are.

>>33905861
Just when M&P's couldn't get any shittier

>>33905861
The issue is training and jumpy cops. Giving officers more reason to draw their gun is not going to improve the situation.

It's a decent idea, I guess. Gives the officer time to employ this well before the situation calls for lethal force.

If the officer has to go on to use lethal force, the employment of this first will help his case that he did everything in his power to stop the threat.

On the other hand, if the ball ends up killing the suspect... Yeah, you're fucked probably.

"The less lethal round killed the suspect..."
"Yeah, it was less lethal... Still lethal, just... less."

>>33906089
>>33911407
I agree that the beanbag shotgun out of the car is impractical in most scenarios because it takes too long to get, but what about tasers? I think tasers are the solution to a lot of the high-profile shootings of unarmed citizens lately. Would have worked fine in Ferguson for example.

>>33911881
>there is no situation in which it would be more advantageous not to kill a suspect

t. obviously not and never has been popo

>>33912267
>Suspect bigger and with more muscle mass starts beating your face
>Tries to grab your duty weapon, obviously signalling violent intent
>Wrestling with suspect
>Yeah a Taser that only works 60% of the time and must be fired more than 7 feet away is the BEST response

Dude there are plenty of examples where a taser could be a great alternative. Mike Brown isn't one of them.

Also "unarmed = not a threat" is a fucking meme. Yeah I agree cops need better training at de-escalation (that's a cost issue), but the automatic assumption that OH MY GOD HE WAS UNARMED WHY SHOOT HIM is fucking retarded.

Especially when BLM and co keep moving the goalpost of what "armed" means.

>>33905861

Yeah lets pretend like cops "dont have a choice" but to "defend themselves" when they shoot people.

They are trigger happy. Its that simple. We have machete-wielding lunatics here in EU aswell, but they are tazed/overpowered etc.

>>33912111
Well, the whole point of the "less lethal" label is to protect officers from lawsuits. If they use a "nonlethal" weapon and the subject ends up dying, they're in deep shit and probably very vulnerable to lawsuits. But if it's a "less lethal" weapon, it's assumed that there's a margin of error where the subject might die, and the PD's policy for their use will be set accordingly, so they should be a little more lawsuit-proof in a "we knew ahead of time this might happen and it was still justified" kind of way.

>>33912857
Kind of, but the point is that a Taser you can use more lightly than a gun.

Subject is running towards you and looks like he might be angry but is unarmed and you don't know what he'll do? That's not a legal justification to shoot with your gun, so you'll wait until you have more info to decide. But you'll sure as hell use your Taser, because if it turns out it wasn't justified later, oh well, he'll recover and you might get bitched at or written up, but you won't lose your job and it won't turn into a national scandal.

You can use a Taser earlier in the situation, like when the subject is farther away from you, on less information, because the consequences are less severe.

>>33905861
I don't mind this too much, because it doesn't hamper your ability to use the weapon lethally later. If it doesn't work and the subject shrugs it off and keeps attacking you, you just keep pulling the trigger and ventilate him. If it does work, congratulations, you didn't have to kill someone and you have less statements, testimony and bullshit to deal with afterwards, but you didn't get robbed either.

I'm only wary of it for the same reason I'm wary of smart guns and self-driving cars. I don't mind the technology at all, in fact it has some potential I like. I'm just worried that the nosy, intrusive, micromanaging assholes of the nanny-state will try to make them mandatory if the technology catches on at all.

>>33908563
the whole reason i clicked this thread

File: 1449712827604-0.jpg (218KB, 570x845px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 570x845px

>>33905861
Not using .44 magnum

File: 1492904173512.jpg (252KB, 544x960px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 544x960px

>>33905861
>proprietary

I think you guys are missing the obvious usage of this kind of device which enables a user to use one initial shot as a show of force / less lethal impact on the perp but also keep a large amount of firepower on tap if it proves inadequate. Ideally cops would be in pairs one armed less lethal and one with a firearm. It would work if cops weren't high school dropout tier smart in half the jurdisctions in america

>>33912969
If that was the case we'd seen infinitely more people, especially blacks, shot and killed.

Fuck, we wouldn't even bother with surrounding a house and doing a 10 hour negotiated surrender, something you never see on the national news.

There are 765,246 full time LEOs in the US, not including reservists and other volunteers. Say 1000 people are killed a year by police (pretty sure the number is less than that). That's .13% of LEOs shooting and killing people in all cases, both armed and unarmed.

The TRIGGER HAPPY meme is a result of media saturization, much like "criminals with Assault rifles".

>>33913221
Effective range of our tasers is 15 feet.

So a dude running at full tilt from 15 feet away. You fire your taser and miss, or you don't get a good enough connection (which happens 40% of the time) to achieve CNS lock up. What then?

>>33905861
>invented by a retarded sheriff
?

>>33905861
It's a ball gag for a pistol.

File: dont pull my trigger too hard oniichan.jpg (150KB, 800x485px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 800x485px

>>33915353

File: 1490836692712m.jpg (51KB, 272x1024px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 272x1024px

>>33915353

>>33905861
In a panic situation, lots of people, even with extensive training, will keep firing until the slide locks back, making this thing completely useless.

>>33905861
>hasn't been tested on humans yet

Neat.

>>33912969
Did you know those beret wearing poofters in French train stations will shoot you if you yank away one of their weakly gripped rifles? WTF!!!

>>33915266
I'm just saying there are situations where you can use a Taser where you wouldn't have enough info about the situation to justifiably use lethal force--you can use it earlier in the situation and act on less information. My example might not have been the best one but that's the idea.

>>33912969
Let's pretend like like a machete wielding maniac's life matters. Ok. Now that we are done pretending, who gives a flying fuck? Just shoot his ass. There's a difference between cops responding to violence with violence and actual brutality.

>>33917364
if a cop can panic he should quit and let real man do the job.

>>33913472
Why not keep a round of rubber ammo in the chamber then?
Seems less unwieldy.

>>33917729

Ironic statement, considering thats not how the Universal Declaration of Human Rights works.

Pol's ignorance strikes again.

>>33905861
As others have mentioned, the pistol is for lethal force only. If you teach officers to stop and asses their first shot, which you should with non-lethal before going lethal, then they will also pause for a moment after the first shot in a lethal situation. This 1 or 2 second pause will cause harm to the policeofficer.

This is one of those Anti Gun "compromises

If this gets any drag then they going for the next Compromise and eventually uhhh no no guns

>>33906089
> Imo, more effort needs to be placed on training for deescalation.
Problem is laws not training. Cops have on insensitive to deescalate and not to choose lethal force very time.

>>33906117
>>33906118
>>33906124
>>33910619

Different guy/newfriend here.

Call me a retard, but why couldn't a cop just shoot a guy in the kneecap and blow him the fuck out?

A lot of these videos you see on line of niggs getting shot they're like 20 feet away. Is it hard to really hard to hit a knee from 20 feet?

[spoiler] I literally only own a 1964 .22 rifle so excuse my lack of pistol knowledge.

File: 1492312420907.png (119KB, 491x139px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 491x139px

>>33918333
>in a life or death situation
>why cant you aim at a tiny 4 inch target (kneecap) understress
>also this tiny target is very close to femoral artery so dont miss
>all because you have to shoot someone who is immediately threatening your life
>but you dont want to hurt their feelings by killing them
>so risk your life to try to hit the kneecap
>they either never walk again or die when u hit the femoral artery instead
>WHY DONT PPL DO THIS

Go back to school retard

>>33918418
Makes sense, thanks I guess.

Just seems like "Hey don't be lethal if you don't have to be lethal" isn't a bad way to go about things.

>>33917926

>Running around trying to murder people
>Doesn't deserve death

Pick 1

>>33918559

>he thinks that "deserve" has anything to do with how justice works

Oh you...