Big Guy Posted January 31, 2015 Report Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) It appears that the Americans have invented yet a more efficient way to kill people - smart bullets; http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/01/29/smart-bullet-change-direction-mid-air-orig-nws.cnn/video/playlists/most-popular-domestic/ Probably a real boon to near sighted hunters and assassins. The problem with these killing technologies is that too often they come back to bite you right in your assets. Edited January 31, 2015 by Big Guy Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
eyeball Posted January 31, 2015 Report Posted January 31, 2015 I suggested smart bullets years ago as an alternative to gun controls. They rolled their eyes and laughed and laughed....smart bullets...lol. Probably should have called it a stupid bullet. In any case I also suggested smart guns that refuse to shoot a bullet at a human. But what would be the point of that? To prevent the loss of life...why? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
GostHacked Posted January 31, 2015 Report Posted January 31, 2015 In any case I also suggested smart guns that refuse to shoot a bullet at a human. But what would be the point of that? To prevent the loss of life...why? But then we have robots that can shoot guns. Smart bullets/guns are not a sollution. Quote
PrimeNumber Posted January 31, 2015 Report Posted January 31, 2015 Bullets that won't shoot at a human would be genius! Gun nuts go crazy, stockpile as many weapons as you want, oh and you can only have smart bullets. Of course police and military personnel would have normal bullets. Quote “Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”― Bruce Lee
Guest Posted January 31, 2015 Report Posted January 31, 2015 And the criminals. Don't forget the criminals. They would have to have normal bullets too, or they wouldn't be able to commit crimes properly. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted January 31, 2015 Report Posted January 31, 2015 I wouldn’t get my knickers in a knot until the price of .50 caliber anti material rifles ($10000-20000 per), long range optics ($1500+) and laser designators ($250000+) comes down……..I can’t imagine what the price of ammo will be though, currently a standard .50 BMG round is about $8 a shot……… Quote
jbg Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 It appears that the Americans have invented yet a more efficient way to kill people - smart bullets; http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/01/29/smart-bullet-change-direction-mid-air-orig-nws.cnn/video/playlists/most-popular-domestic/ Probably a real boon to near sighted hunters and assassins. The problem with these killing technologies is that too often they come back to bite you right in your assets. Sounds almost comedic. It also sounds like someone's wet dream of a place to spend unlimited sums of money. Then again, maybe it will have serious uses. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
poochy Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) Bullets that won't shoot at a human would be genius! Gun nuts go crazy, stockpile as many weapons as you want, oh and you can only have smart bullets. Of course police and military personnel would have normal bullets. Yea, that sounds like a really feasible and great idea! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sbFhOeqTzY Edited February 1, 2015 by poochy Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 Yea, that sounds like a really feasible and great idea! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sbFhOeqTzY Lollypop lane indeed………… Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 Sounds almost comedic. It also sounds like someone's wet dream of a place to spend unlimited sums of money. Then again, maybe it will have serious uses. It’s just a furtherance of other smart munitions…….with that, the size of the required firearm (.50 calibre) and the laser range finder/designator will make it a near two person platform….despite the CNN video showing current personal small arms……….. It will give a two man Special Forces teams (like the ones currently in Iraq) the ability to use a far less “explosive” option then is currently available i.e. Smart bombs or smart artillery/mortar rounds…. Quote
PrimeNumber Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) And the criminals. Don't forget the criminals. They would have to have normal bullets too, or they wouldn't be able to commit crimes properly. Is that kind of like how terrorists aren't going to stop just because of anti-terrorism laws? Guess we should overturn them too. It's going to happen anyways. Law abiding citizens are having their privacy invaded all because of a few bad eggs. Edited February 1, 2015 by PrimeNumber Quote “Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”― Bruce Lee
PrimeNumber Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 Well that's convenient for you. Quote “Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”― Bruce Lee
Guest Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 I never thought about it in terms of convenience, but I suppose it is, yes. That's always nice. Quote
PrimeNumber Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 Yeah I suppose using your opinion to try to prove a point would be convenient for you. And of course it is always nice, for you. Glad you agree. But it's obviously not convenient for everyone. Quote “Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”― Bruce Lee
-1=e^ipi Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 Seems ridiculously expensive and unfeasible. You want to put some optics and a computer on a bullet so it can veer slightly as it is traveling hundreds of metres per second? If you want a bullet to veer slightly, why not tell it when and how much to veer in advance before it is fired, rather than put all this expensive stuff on it? Why can't the sniper be the one measuring wind speed, distance, etc.? Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 Seems ridiculously expensive and unfeasible. You want to put some optics and a computer on a bullet so it can veer slightly as it is traveling hundreds of metres per second? If you want a bullet to veer slightly, why not tell it when and how much to veer in advance before it is fired, rather than put all this expensive stuff on it? Why can't the sniper be the one measuring wind speed, distance, etc.? Your question could be asked of all other smart munitions.......simply put, it will increase accuracy at longer distances and allow for compensation of a moving target. Quote
-1=e^ipi Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 Your question could be asked of all other smart munitions.......simply put, it will increase accuracy at longer distances and allow for compensation of a moving target. A bullet is small, a rocket is large and travels a larger distance. The bigger the thing is you are firing, the more it makes sense to put all these fancy cameras and computers on it. Putting this fancy equipment on a bullet makes no sense. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 A bullet is small, a rocket is large and travels a larger distance. The bigger the thing is you are firing, the more it makes sense to put all these fancy cameras and computers on it. Putting this fancy equipment on a bullet makes no sense. Why? Making a smart bullet for a large anti material rifle smoothbore makes perfect sense, and equates to a less destructive option if required..... Quote
-1=e^ipi Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 Why? Making a smart bullet for a large anti material rifle smoothbore makes perfect sense, and equates to a less destructive option if required..... Why not just buy more bullets or use the money for something that has a better return? Quote
Bonam Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 Why not just buy more bullets or use the money for something that has a better return? Because one of the most problematic things you can do in modern warfare is accidentally hit something other than your target. Spending more money? No problem. Accidentally killing an enemy civilian? PR nightmare. Quote
eyeball Posted February 1, 2015 Report Posted February 1, 2015 What about the PR nightmare when our dictator/allies detain, rape, murder, torture, behead etc etc their civilians? Maybe we should spend a few bucks on inventing a smarter dictator. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Derek 2.0 Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 Why not just buy more bullets or use the money for something that has a better return? Why not buy more conventional bombs, artillery shells and mortar rounds and use the money for something with a better return? Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 Because one of the most problematic things you can do in modern warfare is accidentally hit something other than your target. Spending more money? No problem. Accidentally killing an enemy civilian? PR nightmare. Exactly, currently a Special Forces team that wants to demobilize a group of terrorists in a moving Toyota pick-up would utilize a smart bomb, guided missile or smart artillery…….now they can use a .50 calibre smart round to put through the engine block of a moving truck from a mile+ away… Quote
Big Guy Posted February 2, 2015 Author Report Posted February 2, 2015 I think it is a great idea. Program a bullet that can identify a moose or a deer. That may save the lives of a number of cows that are blasted by hunters every year. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.