Russian Man Aims To Reinvent "Taser" Technology

Lanxon writes "A Russian man is hoping to overhaul the technology within Taser-type weapons — transforming them from single-shot, short-range devices that stun for a few seconds, into more effective long-range, rapid-fire weapons — by modifying the wires and the type of shock they generate, reports Wired. Non-lethal weapon developer Oleg Nemtyshkin's design uses bare wires, rather than the insulated wires favored by Taser and other stun gun makers. These wires weigh only about one sixteenth as much as insulated wire, providing less drag on the darts and improved accuracy. Nemtyshkin demonstrated his bare wire technology with a prototype – 'Legionary" — in 2001. His latest version is the S5, and a video of the weapon in action shows it firing repeatedly — almost as fast as the trigger can be pulled."

Interesting, but...

[Nichotin]

Although I think the technology is a bit interesting, I shrug every time I hear about these so-called non lethal weapons. In my head that translates into it is not lethal, so there is less of a barrier before it gets used (and from what I can hear these electroshock weapons are pretty dangerous after all anyway). I know culture is different in the USA, where the police carry guns. I live in Norway though, where law enforcement officers generally don't carry guns (!), except when they move out on criminals that are known to be armed. In the rare cases where they do use pepper spray, it sparks up debate in the newspapers. If they shoot someone, that definitily gets some attention. Electroshock weapons are not used here. The net result seems to be a non-violent society, where people feel they can walk amongst law enorcement officers without feeling alienated because they carry weapons of some sort.

Re:Carbon fibre jacket liners.

[Anonymous Coward]

Mobs will be led by people with carbon fibre jacket liners and helmets.

So? They'll just make them illegal.

In Germany for example, it's illegal to protect yourself against police brutality, especially during demonstrations and protests.

This includes leather clothing, protection against tasers, protective googles, etc. These are all classified as weapons - defensive weapons but weapons none the less.

Re:Video?

[grumbel]

Might refer to this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuXR0F6ZQzc [youtube.com]

Re:A few caveats...

[sznupi]

That's their fault for allowing themselves to fall into "excited delirium" [wikipedia.org].

This is going to be very bad for good citizens

[lena_10326]

Of course it will immediately be adopted across police departments because as we all know tasers are perfectly safe [google.com]. It is interesting to note when officers fire their pistols, they continue firing [wikipedia.org] until the ammo is depleted. There is no reason to believe this practice won't continue with semi-automatic taser guns because many taser deaths were due to multiple hits from several officers [jonathanturley.org]. Of course these occurred because the suspect would not stop flailing about on the ground [youtube.com] due to being repeatedly hit with electricity (officers refer to this as resisting). That is merely the unfortunate side effect of electricity causing involuntary muscle contractions [allaboutcircuits.com].

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuXR0F6ZQzc [youtube.com]

Re:Interesting, but...

[Sowelu]

Theoretically (and according to regulations), in most places in the US, tasers are to be considered a direct replacement for standard firearms--that is, you ONLY get to taser someone if the alternative would have been actually shooting them in the shoulder or the leg to drop them. Period. The idea is that tasers are still a potentially lethal weapon...they're just LESS lethal than shooting someone in a non-vital spot.

I'm sure most departments and most officers follow those regs...but from all the news stories and lawsuits you see, clearly not all of them do.

Re:Interesting, but...

[Zumbs]

I live just south of Norway (in Denmark), and here the police carry guns. In the last decade, the Danish police have been shooting and killing a few citizens in questionable circumstances, but police officers have managed to get off the hook every time. A few years back this state of affairs were used to argue that the police should be equipped with pepper spray. The argument were that if the police had something between the nightstick and the gun, they might use that instead of the gun. That, however, did not happen. Police usage of guns have not decreased, but usage of pepper spray has exploded, and we have police officers spraying pepper spray into the faces of citizens who are sitting on their asses. The point here is that giving the police extra tools of this sort, as you guessed, means that the tool will often to be used in place of a less dangerous tool. I urge you (and your fellow countrymen/women) to fight hard to keep the police unarmed. It does not help much in fighting crime, it clears the field for adding more weapons to the police, and it is difficult to disarm the police at a later time. Not to mention that an armed police force breeds distrust among the *police* towards the dangerous citizens - why else would they have guns in the first place?

Re:Interesting, but...

[ascari]

Nice theory dude, but: The list of really cold places where you also have to fear the cops include Russia, most of China, Tibet, North Korea, many of the former Eastern block countries, many mountainous countries of central Asia, many countries in the Andes and so on.

Also, I'd venture that "being stuck with irritating people" is way down there on the list of reasons why people kill each other, behind more common motives such as financial gains, passion/jealousy, drugs, politics and so on.

Re:Interesting, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Officers always shoot for center mass. NEVER for an arm or leg. If they did aim for something other than center mass, they sure as hell wouldn't admit it. You shoot to "stop" and that means center mass. You also keep shooting till they comply (if you put 15 rounds in them and they are still standing and coming towards you, reload and put another 15 rounds into them). The one exception might be a hostage situation where the head was the only available target. If every body follows this policy it works out better when on the defense stand. Probably the best argument IMO against the tazer is that it's a poor and unreliable replacement for a firearm.

Re:The last I heard

[Anonymous Coward]

17a, Abs. 1, Versammlungsgesetz
http://dejure.org/gesetze/VersG/17a.html
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schutzwaffe

Better not run into police if they are in a bad mood and you're out with a few of your biking friends.

Re:Carbon fibre jacket liners.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually it's only illegal DURING demonstrations/protests.

Actually, this also includes any public event or assembly, during the event or on your way there; not only demonstrations/protests.

http://dejure.org/gesetze/VersG/17a.html

Because you don't need protection, except when you are one of those "protesters", who express themselves by throwing stones, burning cars and beat the shit out of bystanders.

Sounds good on paper. Unfortunately, cops more often than not are the ones who turn violent or incite violence, even during peaceful protests.

Finally! It's been 140 years

[Protoslo]

One of the Nautilus men gave me a simple gun, the butt end of which, made of steel, hollow in the centre, was rather large. It served as a reservoir of compressed air, which a valve, worked by a spring, allowed to escape into a metal tube. A box of projectiles in a groove in the thickness of the butt end contained about twenty of these electric balls, which, by means of a spring, were forced into the barrel of the gun. As soon as one shot was fired, another was ready.

We've been waiting for it much longer than flying cars, but Captain Nemo's pulse rifle is finally coming to market (well, probably).

Nemtyshkin's next project, the Leyden Gun, will deliver a short shock with lasting effects. The Leyden Gun is the size of a paintball rifle, with a magazine of thirty rounds. The projectiles are simple needles rather than elaborate barbed darts, as they do not stick to the target but administer a single jolt from a high-voltage capacitor.

On the other hand...

[A]nd finally, it was he who had killed the convicts with the electric balls, of which he possessed the secret, and which he had employed in the chase of submarine creatures.

Admittedly, some of the precedents are a bit ominous.

So, where can I preorder one of these?

Re:Interesting, but...

[Lifyre]

I'm not sure where you're from but on most places I've been to in the USA the TASER is one of the earliest steps in the force continuum because when it works it immediately deescalates a confrontation.

After all of the non-physical options are exhausted (yelling, pointing, etc..) your options are fairly limited. You can hit them with pepper spray which can maim and kill in similar fashion to the TASER but doesn't necessarily stop a suspect and frequently just pisses them off. You can grab, punch, or kick the suspect putting yourself in harms way and escalating the confrontation into a brawl. You can shoot the suspect (and you ONLY shoot to kill, there is no such thing as a shoulder of leg shot) thus invoking lethal force, and if you don't get him on the first shot expect him to respond in kind potentially escalating into a shootout with potential for collateral damage.

Or you can shoot them with a TASER. If it works (TASER claims 99.7% effectiveness with minor injuries) it immediately stops a suspect, puts him on the ground, and effectively ends the confrontation. That said I have seen abuse of the TASER, I've read about the beating deaths, heck I've read about the NYPD shooting an unarmed suspect 47 times... Abuse happens, mistakes happen, that is why there needs to be civilian oversight and proper training of our protective forces but it doesn't mean we should take their tools away.