- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Better Less than Lethal Options
Posted on 11/6/17 at 2:45 pm
Posted on 11/6/17 at 2:45 pm
I think about this after every mass shooting. If some form of less than lethal option was as common place as a fire extinguisher in business or public spaces then maybe the victims would have a fighting chance. Instead of developing better firearms what if gun makers temporarily put their resources towards something like a tazer but can be fired repeatedly and is fairly easy to use.
Many people myself included dont feel comfortable carrying firearms for various reasons. I quit carrying because of fear one of my children may accidentally get hurt but I would like another option. I've considered a tazer but they are so unreliable it does not seem worth it. Although in mass shooting situation it would be better than nothing.
Many people myself included dont feel comfortable carrying firearms for various reasons. I quit carrying because of fear one of my children may accidentally get hurt but I would like another option. I've considered a tazer but they are so unreliable it does not seem worth it. Although in mass shooting situation it would be better than nothing.
13
Posted on 11/6/17 at 2:47 pm to ThuperThumpin
quote:
Although in mass shooting situation it would be better than nothing.
Nothing might be better. You start wielding that tazer, you'll get shot before someone that's running or ducking for cover.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 2:48 pm to ThuperThumpin
Why do you think LEOs still carry firearms along with tasers, pepper spray, and batons? If this was a rational idea it would have been developed years ago. No, a firearm is and always will be the best last-line-of-defense tool.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 2:48 pm to ThuperThumpin
If you're in an active shooter scenario, anything can be a weapon of last resort. You shouldn't EDC a tazer for a multitude of reasons.
Your best bet in surviving one of these is to be carrying and be proficient in the use of a firearm.
Your best bet in surviving one of these is to be carrying and be proficient in the use of a firearm.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 2:51 pm to ThuperThumpin
There is a big market for less than lethal options.
Firearms are where the real self defense comes in, though. Pepper spray and tazers can be ineffective in many scenarios.
Firearms are where the real self defense comes in, though. Pepper spray and tazers can be ineffective in many scenarios.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 2:51 pm to ThuperThumpin
If you're a conceal carry holder, you shouldn't be going Rambo anyways. You get yourself out of the situation, and/or bunker down behind cover at a defensible choke point.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 2:51 pm to ThuperThumpin
So,you want to bring a pea-shooter to a gun fight?
Posted on 11/6/17 at 2:52 pm to Clames
quote:
No, a firearm is and always will be the best last-line-of-defense tool.
You miss my point. Im not suggesting that a tazer is better option but it might be a an option that more people would feel more comfortable with having say at a school or a church office. I wish something more reliable than a tazer could be developed. In time I'm sure something better will come along.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 2:55 pm to ThuperThumpin
A shot gun filled with bean bag rounds is a pretty damn effective less than lethal weapon.
That being said, I'm hot sure what your point is. Should the Church have a guy holding a bean bag shotgun at the back door just in case?
The sad fact is, NOTHING can prevent these situations where some moron is intent on causing harm.
For eaxmple, let's assume every church installed a double door system where the gunman walked in one door of the vestibule and a sensor detected that he had a gun so he was locked in between the door. Unable to get in the church, but unable to get back outside either. Hey , you just saved everyone in the church, great.
Until these morons figure that out and just wait until church lets out and mow everyone dow in the parking lot.
That being said, I'm hot sure what your point is. Should the Church have a guy holding a bean bag shotgun at the back door just in case?
The sad fact is, NOTHING can prevent these situations where some moron is intent on causing harm.
For eaxmple, let's assume every church installed a double door system where the gunman walked in one door of the vestibule and a sensor detected that he had a gun so he was locked in between the door. Unable to get in the church, but unable to get back outside either. Hey , you just saved everyone in the church, great.
Until these morons figure that out and just wait until church lets out and mow everyone dow in the parking lot.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 2:55 pm to Clames
quote:
No, a firearm is and always will be the best last-line-of-defense tool
This is false. Light Sabers and Blasters will be better.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 2:59 pm to auggie
You guys are totally missing my point. I'm not saying firearms are not a good option for defense but they should not be the only option. I'm saying that another form of weapon needs to be developed that is simple to use, reliable, and would actually attract people who may other wise be uncomfortable with a firearm.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 3:00 pm to jacob4bama
quote:
This is false. Light Sabers and Blasters will be better.
Force fields man..force fields.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 3:03 pm to ThuperThumpin
A blow gun with poison darts...and flash bang grenades...strobe lights if the perp is an epi-spaz like that Eichmann guy. Just a few ideas off the top of my head..
Posted on 11/6/17 at 3:04 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
The sad fact is, NOTHING can prevent these situations where some moron is intent on causing harm.
True but the more people armed and the quicker the perp is disabled the lower the body count.
quote:
That being said, I'm hot sure what your point is. Should the Church have a guy holding a bean bag shotgun at the back door just in case?
Some form of less than lethal or hell lethal if the business owner is comfortable should be available.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 3:05 pm to ThuperThumpin
Imagine if every responsible, law abiding citizen carried and was proficient with a hand gun. Every criminal knowing that his intended victim is armed and prepared to put him down. Every would be mass shooter knowing he will be shot within seconds of attempting a mass shooting. Our problem is not the lethality or availability of guns, it’s that citizens are shirking their personal responsibility of self defense. We don’t have enough guns in the hands of responsible citizens.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 3:05 pm to ThuperThumpin
quote:
You guys are totally missing my point. I'm not saying firearms are not a good option for defense but they should not be the only option. I'm saying that another form of weapon needs to be developed that is simple to use, reliable, and would actually attract people who may other wise be uncomfortable with a firearm.
No, we get what you're saying but it's not a valid point. In EDC situations a firearm is the weapon of last resort meaning by the time you pull it you've made the decision to fire if need be. If more people carried less lethal weapons tons of people would be getting tazed/pepper balled/etc... for looking at people wrong.
This doesn't even take into account the "cannon fodder" issue of arming people with less than lethal weapons going up against long guns.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 3:06 pm to Dale51
quote:
A blow gun with poison darts...and flash bang grenades...strobe lights if the perp is an epi-spaz like that Eichmann guy. Just a few ideas off the top of my head..
At least you are thinking out of the box... The NRA's solution is a good guy with a gun. Well if a lot of people dont feel comfortable handling guns what next?
Posted on 11/6/17 at 3:15 pm to ThuperThumpin
the solution to solving mass shootings and crazy idiots shooting people is simply to allow open carry for all citizens in all 50 states. it will, overnight, cut the murders in half in all liberal controlled cities with tight gun restrictions, by simply allowing law abiding citizens to the right to be able to protect themselves and their families 
Posted on 11/6/17 at 3:16 pm to Jack Bauers HnK
quote:
Every criminal knowing that his intended victim is armed and prepared to put him down. Every would be mass shooter knowing he will be shot within seconds of attempting a mass shooting. Our problem is not the lethality or availability of guns, it’s that citizens are shirking their personal responsibility of self defense. We don’t have enough guns in the hands of responsible citizens.
I agree but I dont blame those that dont feel comfortable carrying fire arms. Design them another option.
Posted on 11/6/17 at 3:17 pm to keakar
quote:
simply to allow open carry for all citizens in all 50 states.
That is another option
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News