Re: Should we be developing nonlethal means of
Sat, 2 Oct 1999 21:12:06 EDT

In a message dated 10/2/1999 7:46:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, writes:

<< No (though those do in fact exist), it's a taser that uses two
UV laser beams instead of metal wires to guide the current to and from the target. I don't think there's a working prototype yet, mainly due to a lack of funding ( wouldn't this be something for something like "idea futures", btw? -- I mean, this thing has *huge* market potential) The device has been mentioned at least twice before on this list, but I can't find the posts in the archives and I didn't have much luck with the web search either so far. Here's the "regular" taser's home page, btw. Has lots of info.>>

Hmmm, I wonder if the UV laser causes some ionization of the air to direct the current? Does anyone know more about this? If you could use a laser instead of wires, it would be a major innovation to my way of thinking, since you would be able to hit your target pretty quickly....I just wonder how much voltage you would need to get through any clothing enough to stun.

<<[dart guns]
Yes, good idea. That should increase the chances of a successful toxin delivery quite a bit (assuming that every dart can knock out the attacker by itself, of course).>>

Or even if only, say, 25% to 50% hit. Still need something potent.

<< I'm pretty sure there's something useful out there. Perhaps
some animal toxin ( has quite a list). "Zombie powder" is made from some kind of fish poison, afaik. It would certainly take someone out, but perhaps there would be some, uh, brain damage (though it is also suggested that the brain damage is a result of oxigen deprivation in the coffin, and not the toxin itself).>>

I keep thinking of curare and its derivatives, or perhaps a powerful benzodiazapine mix (something fast but short acting to put em under and something long acting to keep them there). A benzodiazapine would be less likely to induce respiratory failure than a barbituate (but give me enough of a barbituate, and I Guarantee I'll put you to sleep--ever hear of a phenobarbotal coma<g>?).

<< I think that Mike meant actual attacks by grandmothers etc., but
anyway...Accidents will always happen, I guess, but I'd rather be "accidentally"zapped or shot with some nonlethal than a regular gun.>>

Same here.

<< I think the above applies to the weaker models; a 500,000 v
stun gun should do the job a lot faster (and I suppose you could go even higher, maybe even to 1000,000 v).>>

True, but the tradeoff is increased chance of lethality.

Thanks for the input.

Glen Finney