The revolutionary bullet attachment that could save lives

It looks like a toy attachment for a gun, but this bullet attachment is intended to give suspects a chance to live if shot.

The story is too old to be commented.
KnowTechie2166d ago

Seems effortless to load too.

SilentNegotiator2166d ago

Just switch to a small caliber or pellets or something.

"Hands up, don't shoot" is an idiotic, ironic chant for the Michael Brown thing. If he had complied and put his hands up and not charged at the cop, attempting to harm and steal his gun, he never would have been shot.

Why do these protests always arise out of the legitimate cases of self-defense instead of the actual illegitimate cases, anyway? Why, when there really are cases of cops making bad decisions and racists discharging weapons, do these protests focus on cases like Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin?

0ut1awed2165d ago (Edited 2165d ago )

This is a reply to your first sentence but because you still need lethal stopping power in situations. Say you come across some criminals that start engaging you with 7.62 rounds from an AK. Will you want a pellet gun then?

That's the whole point of this device, to effortlessly and quickly let you switch from a lethal to non-lethal round. It's debatably faster than even dropping a mag and reloading.

Also the device has spent the last 9 years in development. Hardly a reaction to anything current.

thorstein2165d ago

So, the criminals that are shooting at the cops will use this? No?

Then I don't think the police need to.

RetrospectRealm2165d ago

Wouldn't you prefer criminals have this? Then there would be a chance they'd fire a non-lethal round at you.

360ICE2165d ago

Not sure if you noticed this, but at lot of recent dead criminals have been unarmed.

SilentNegotiator2165d ago (Edited 2165d ago )


And many of the high profile ones lately doing things like, attacking the cop, reaching for their weapon, carrying an object that they rigged to look like a real weapon and pointing it at the cops, etc.

Most of the cases that people are actually talking about have been situations where the use of deadly force was justified regardless.

thorstein2164d ago

Sorry 360, but no they aren't.

You are talking about 3 or 4 depending on your stance of unarmed men killed by police.

It is so weird that this became an indictment of every cop everywhere as if they are of some sort of hive mind.


And, how exactly do you force criminals to follow the law?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2164d ago
360ICE2164d ago

All of the situations you mentioned in your reply sound like situations where you would want to stun.

Another thing. The entire Norwegian police force fired three shots in all of 2013. Two of the shots hit and injured their intended targets. The last one was a warning shot that injured no one.

There are five million people in Norway, but the strange thing is that they aren't particularly exceptional. In fact, the United States is the exception in the developed world when it comes to police deaths:


Now are the people in the United States just inherently much more violent and vicious towards the police? Likely not.

The data you see from countries like Sweden, Australia, Germany and so on – that's how law enforcement acts when officers are well trained and have the people's interests in mind.

SilentNegotiator2163d ago (Edited 2163d ago )

So the officer should just hope that a stun will stop the would be assassin from obtaining the weapon, knocking them unconscious, being close enough to share part of the shock (since they're already close enough that they're striking them), or firing what they have all the reason in the world to think is a gun?

And I'm not interested in stats of civilians being shot when the comparison is with countries where cops don't even regularly carry firearms or civilians aren't or are barely allowed to own firearms (that's simply not going to happen in the US at this point; we can ban/greatly regulate guns on either or both sides but there will still be millions of guns in the hands of criminals).

Also, the article doesn't account for population; the ratio would be about 6 US to 1 Australia when you account for population; still bad for the US, but not the ridiculous 404 to 6 that this article is peddling. 404 is nothing to be proud of, but it's not the massive upset that the liberal owned media is making it out to be.

What's the stats of police BEING killed between the countries (AFTER accounting for population), anyway?

360ICE2163d ago


You should be interested in those stats, because whether they regularly carry firearms at all, if they kill less people and there aren't more police deaths then surely they do something better OR American criminals are more dangerous than in all these countries. That's as simple and logical a conclusion as it gets.

And even so, you're wrong. Not all of these countries are Iceland. In Australia police routinely carry guns, in Germany, in most of them, in fact.

In the United States there were 50 police deaths. In Britain there were none (and 1 in 2013). That's actually the case for a lot of these countries.

And I believe you said it well. The numbers are not per capita, but even if they were, they're still stacked against the US. And if we have the opportunity to improve something, then –

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2163d ago
Gondee2165d ago

I suspect this will have the opposite effect. Cops more willing to use their gun because its now a "non-lethal". Look what happened when you gave them tzars. They shocked them until they were dead in SO many cases

Tzuno2165d ago

The new toy on gay world, you are arrested honey, who me?.....shots gun and the "ball" hits la la la lah.

Show all comments (19)