I don't have a lot to say about the functionality or specifications here, but I feel like there's a new conceptual issue raised by non-lethal, or notionally non-lethal weapons.<p>Constitutional arguments are about the right to self-defense. That's not necessarily the same as killing someone, and you don't necessarily have a right to killing in and of itself, but only as a means to an end for self-defense. I suppose it depends on what flavor of defense of the second amendment you favor, but it seems like self-defense can be associated with incapacitation, need not necessarily depend on the capability of killing.<p>If that's true, access to weapons for the purpose of self-defense that aren't capable of killing would seem to open up a lot of possibilities for regulating traditional firearms. If (I said if!) there are equally effective alternatives for the purpose of self-defense, then that constitutional right can be satisfied without the need for traditional firearms that are capable of killing.<p>Insofar as they can replace traditional firearms, I find that promising, but obviously this brings a fair amount of unintended complexity; for instance non-lethal self defense may open up entirely new dimensions of cruel maiming and non-lethal suffering, it's may create complexities relating to whether something's actually non-lethal, it may have an effect of increasing the sum total of use of force by introducing non-lethal force into lower and lower stakes situations leading to a net increase of physical coercion, and there may be cultural resistance to the idea ever becoming mainstream because it would be too reformist and therefore liberal.<p>I think these all have to be navigated, but I think the trade-off is worth considering. I also think that strong gun regulation is worth considering, and personally just don't endorse wide distribution of guns in any form whatsoever, so I consider this a workaround peculiar to the culture of America.
Consider me unimpressed.<p>First, there just isn’t a ton of energy in that “round”. They’re claiming <16J - a .22LR, the smallest common caliber, comes in at around 275J. This thing is substantially less powerful than many BB guns.<p>Second, the disk shape of the projectile means that it’s going to be impossible to aim effectively. That thing is going to have significant vertical dispersion even at very short ranges.<p>It’s a toy.
I was once in a session with a concealed carry license instructor and at the end of his session he made a couple surprising points. 1) if you’re going to shoot somebody, shoot to kill or prepare for a lawsuit. 2) There is a gun lobby, a taser lobby, a knife lobby, but no baseball bat lobby so don’t keep a baseball bat under your bed because when you injure somebody you’ll be sued and nobody will help defend you. 3) Buy pepper spray. I took his advise and bought pepper spray instead.
My point here is there is also no rail gun lobby, so if you injure somebody, prepare to be sued.
I'd rather get a PCP Air riffle... something like this one in .50 cal: <a href="https://www.airgundepot.com/airforce-texan-air-rifle-carbon-fiber-tank.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.airgundepot.com/airforce-texan-air-rifle-carbon-...</a>
16 joules, or roughly four times the energy of a Nerf dart. The local meth-heads are still shaking in their boots but it isn't in fear of this toy.
I REALLY doubt the "Good stopping effect". That's the same as the flashlights with "intruder stopping" strobe.<p>They claim 16J. Well, a typical - Germany Legal - Airsoft gun has 7.5J, so we're talking about toy-level of energy.<p>Now, looking at some 9mm ammo, you have around 500-570J depending on type - Ball vs. Hollow Point.<p>Yeah, it's very clear to me, what I want to use if I have to defend myself.
note that in their demonstration video, they're very careful not to show you the butt of the gun - I will bet that it's plugged in. I seriously doubt they've got sufficient power supply in that profile.
From the QA page[1]<p>> 4. Who is the target user of e-shotgun?<p>> 1. Players: lovers who like to play with guns.<p>Am I reading this right? The number 1 target user is BDSM kink players?<p>[1]: <a href="https://e-shotgun.com/qa/" rel="nofollow">https://e-shotgun.com/qa/</a>
> 3. Internet: it is combined with big data and it can be tracked during the whole process<p>The site feels like satire. Some of the Q&A answers just make little sense.<p>Also, they claim it's non-lethal. After the example videos, I cannot see how that is the case. It looks like it could easily shred through some stomach lining or nick an artery or completely blind someone.