Re: Gun Extropy

Eugene Leitl (
Fri, 24 Jul 1998 14:30:47 +0400 (MSD)

Bradley Felton writes:
> All the "ADVANCED" and "EXTROPIC" people I know defend themselves with
> disintegration rays, or, if they can't afford disintegration rays, they use
> particle beam weapons. Anyone who is truly "ADVANCED" would rather die
> than use a primitive "gun"--that would label them for life as a backward
> hick....

A weapon is not advanced or primitive, it is either functional or not. (Btw, for the record: I would be rather a bruised, but living hillbilly, than a stone dead futurist).

A capsicaine spray or a taser are less effective than even a crude DIY electrically ignited graphite/kevlar muzzle loader [lead azide rocket rounds?] with a laser pointer as aiming aid. If that's too low tech for you, consider using a power NIR laser diode array to blind your opponent (he must face you then with his eyes open, then, and you could easily blind yourself by a reflex if not equipped with selective absorption goggles/LED shutter mirrorshades), or make a one-time pyrodriven few-ml aluminum trialkyle dispenser (_not_ a good thing to fire in a room, or from a close distance). All more-or-less higher tech than a gun, but somewhat difficult to build, unproven, and thus possibly unreliable, and certainly dangerous to operate.

Disintegration rays? What's that? A particle beam weapon? A _wearable_ one? At ambient air pressure? Get serious.

In any case it is difficult to match operation reliability and ergonomical characteristics of a well designed mainstream gun, especially if you're trained in its use. A high-velocity pellet is still the most efficient way to deliver energy to the target, and in terms of energy density and release characteristics, a pyrocharge is still the most convenient energy conserve. Against targets other than soft or armor you could use giant microwave bursts, but these are likely to be hardened against EMP, and the generator is certainly not wearable.