ANGELFIRE1 Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 I think you raise a very valid point.....I think tasers set to kill will not penetrate windows panes or masonary but should be just as effective! Effective range of a taser is - Angel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 I think you raise a very valid point.....I think tasers set to kill will not penetrate windows panes or masonary but should be just as effective! I think you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squiggs Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 I think you raise a very valid point.....I think tasers set to kill will not penetrate windows panes or masonary but should be just as effective! Oh that's REALLY clever! Resolve concerns about the innacurate use of firearms by a weapon set at lethal power that is far less accurate! Amazing...simply amazing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronald Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 As a shoootist, this is the daftest bloody thing I have EVER heard, from any Government we have EVER had. Scenario, looter just about to chuck a petrol bomb into shop, copper fires and misses, (as they have a habit of doing) any one tell me where the round will end up. No, neither can I, and worse still neither can the shooter. Suppose it went through a window 3 or 4 hundred yards away, and hit an innocent in the nut, what then. One of the main rule's of firearms use, NEVER fire unless you know where the round ends up. Common sense - yes. Angel. Common sense to use 5.56mm NATO frangible rounds then:thumbsup: As a shooter you will know that frangible bullets break up into small, less harmful, pieces upon contact with anything harder than they are. This maximizes the round's transfer of energy to the object and minimizes the chances that pieces of the bullet will exit the object at dangerous velocities. Each of the small fragments quickly loses any energy and therefore pose very little danger to any secondary targets. This means that full-power frangible bullets can be shot at target all the way up to muzzle contact without any worries that the bullet or case will ricochet and potentially hurt either the shooter or others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squiggs Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Well going back to the original poster if it's that obvious it's a bottle of whisky & not a petrol bomb.....the police won't be shooting them.....re-read the original post!!!!! Because they'd never shoot a man waving a table leg, would they? Besides, if it is night, set against a backdrop of furniture shops ablaze, with noise and chaos, a wrong decision could never ever be made could it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANGELFIRE1 Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Well going back to the original poster if it's that obvious it's a bottle of whisky & not a petrol bomb.....the police won't be shooting them.....re-read the original post!!!!! "Originally Posted by Squiggs "Oi, I've got that whisky, was delivered today, how's about we get out of this chaos and have a drink" *holds bottle in air to friend across the street also trying to get home in the chaos* BANG Angel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hardie Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Suppose it went through a window 3 or 4 hundred yards away, and hit an innocent in the nut, what then. One of the main rule's of firearms use, NEVER fire unless you know where the round ends up. Common sense - yes. Angel. There won't be any innocents to hit if the Riot Act is read first. Riot act not applicable to INNOCENT sat in his dwelling 400yds away. Please explain your bold above Jim. Angel. Well of course the Riot Act was repealed years ago but under its terms you had an hour to disperse once it was read by a magistrate. Maybe it wants bringing back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lab-rat Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 I think you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. Take you haven't seen Star Trek & don't think the Star Wars project ever took off then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Well of course the Riot Act was repealed years ago but under its terms you had an hour to disperse once it was read by a magistrate. Maybe it wants bringing back. Yeah, like it would really have prevented the chaos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Take you haven't seen Star Trek & don't think the Star Wars project ever took off then? Grow up. Effective range of a taser? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.