Re: Should we be

Chuck Kuecker (
Tue, 05 Oct 1999 08:41:43 -0500

At 08:19 AM 10/5/1999 EDT, Glen Finney wrote:
> Actually, I thought the patent was referring to having a relatively
>quiet weapon that doesn't leave a path to follow back to the defender
>would this weapon do so, or would the ionized pathway give off light?). If
>you needed to deal with multiple bad guys and were still not revealed to
>them, this would be an asset. Let's say you are in your home and you hear
>several intruders in different rooms. You are going to want to take as many
>of them as you can by surprise. And at the very least, if you are firing
>from a concealed position, you don't want your weapon to give away your
>position. There would be similar situations for police, especially with
>multiple bad guys spread out physically. Of course, a stealthy weapon also
>makes it easier for an aggressor to take down a victim from cover.

Ionized current tracks will glow bluish-white to 'electric blue' in air, depending on the current density. Of course, the time the light is given off is only as long as the current flows. In the daylight, the glow may not be noticed, but in total darkness, it could be bright enough to ruin night vision...

For taking out multiple attackers without alerting their compatriots, I think some sort of drugged projectile fired from a slienced airgun (oxymoron?) might be easier to get working. Blowguns?

Chuck Kuecker