There is no such thing as a nonlethal kinetic energy weapon.

(Via AoSHQ) Bearing Arms is aghast over this latest attempt to make a firearm somehow ‘safe,’ and who can blame them?

The device itself consists of a clear plastic “docking station” that slides on to the end of the gun, and the projectile, which looks roughly like a clown’s nose.

When the officer feels the need to discharge the projectile, he squeezes the trigger on the live round in the chamber, which travels down the barrel, smashes into the back of the projectile, and then continues downrange embedded in the projectile, which is supposed to strike the threat with enough force to put him on the ground, but won’t (hopefully) kill him.

In other words, this device takes a reasonably efficient kinetic energy weapon and converts it into a distinctly less efficient kinetic energy weapon. By blocking the muzzle.  Now, I’m no gunsmith, but that doesn’t sound like a very smart idea… especially since you can’t make a firearm ‘safe’ to use on other people.  Physics has the final vote; and it is the consensus of physics that when you throw a physical object at another object at very high speeds, there’s going to be a reaction at the point of impact. In other words: if you’re knocking somebody down, you’re running a real risk that you’re also going to mess that person up.

I understand that people don’t always want to face this, but a gun is a thing that kills. Don’t carry one outside of a target range if you can’t make your peace with that.  And for the love of God, don’t make a cop wear a clown nose on his gun, either.

Moe Lane

14 thoughts on “There is no such thing as a nonlethal kinetic energy weapon.”

  1. I would expect the “makes the weapon look like a toy” problem to manifest itself early on.

  2. Don’t they already have bean bag projectiles that do essentially what this is trying to do in a Rube Goldberg sort of way?

    1. This…thing…is for a pistol. Beanbag projectiles are typically for shotguns. And they can kill you, too.

  3. Moe, in order for a kinetic energy weapon to deliver enough force to knock someone unconscious, it probably also is capable of killing someone.

    The other factor is that anything to spread out the force of impact would reduce the effective range of the firearm (which could be a problem for police), and there may be an issue with portability (cops generally use handguns instead of rifles due to portability among other reasons).

    In all honesty I think people are grasping at straws instead of thinking things through.

    1. Note that the quoted part says “knock down”, not “knock out” – bit of a difference there.
      I have no particular problem with this technology; it’s amusing, it makes denying having fired a shot moot, and – for the cases you highlighted – the cops are likely to increase training emphasis on the desirability of the double-tap. (firing two shots)
      In other words, it’s stupid and it has no possible way of working, but if it makes the libtards happy *and they’ll trade something useful for it*, take the deal.

      1. hey acat, again, good to speak with you again, been a long, long time.

        I say don’t take the deal. In fact, if police thought their guns were no longer lethal, I say they would pull them much MORE often. Not good.

  4. And what if they miss? What if the target is hit but he’s still combative? What if the officer is facing more than one suspect?
    I think that someone wanted to make a device that shows that they were doing something to address a non-issue and this was the result.

  5. Okay, let’s say this clown nose thing works [as in, the bullet/nose proceeds downrange more-or-less intact AND it doesn’t blow up the pistol in the Officer’s hand] for the FIRST ROUND. What of all consecutive rounds fired?
    I hazard a guess that if the first round won’t bring him/her down, ROUND TWO certainly will. Either that or Officers will be burdened with, what is in essence nothing more than a high-powered, single-shot Nerf Gun.
    Merry Christmas!

  6. The average round fired by police in a life and death encounter misses the target.1 I link to the NY slimes because, well, they certainly would not be pro cop on this issue. If memory serves, at least 2 in 3 rounds fired fail to hit the target in police shooting encounters. Also, police are only to shoot to stop the threat, and most shots that hit the target, do NOT stop the threat. If they start using clown noses, that percentage will rise greatly.

    So, say a cop starts firing clown noses at an assailant, we already know most of the clown noses will miss, many will hit extremities and not stop the threat, a percentage will hit center mass, but will that stop the threat? Will the assailant’s be required to use clown noses too?

    Here is the thing, the people who know nothing about firearms, the use of firearms in combat, or the challenges faced by police are the ones who make the gun laws and police rules. What can go wrong?



Comments are closed.