Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science Technology

Build Your Own Gauss Pistol 648

Posted by michael from the move-over,-paintball-gun dept.
BdosError writes "A Russion software developer has developed a homemade Gauss pistol. It's not very powerful yet, but as a proof of concept, it's interesting. Nice, non-chemical slugthrower that should appeal to fans of Science Fiction and related games, like Traveller and many others."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Build Your Own Gauss Pistol More

Build Your Own Gauss Pistol

Comments Filter:

  • Hrmm (Score:5, Funny)

    by Vokbain ( 657712 ) * on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:02PM (#6475814) Homepage
    Today must be 'dangerous projects' day on slashdot.

    I didn't see any expense information on his site. I wonder how much it costs to build one of those.

    • Re:Hrmm (Score:5, Interesting)

      by SkArcher ( 676201 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:15PM (#6475894) Journal
      I'm wondering how the existing laws of various countries hold up against this weapon. Don't a lot of laws specify the weapon by the method the projectile is accelerated (i.e. in existing cases a chemical reaction)?

      Does this weapon circumvent any laws against firearms?

      • Re:Hrmm (Score:2, Funny)

        by Vokbain ( 657712 ) *
        I don't think they count as firearms unless they have some kind of chemical propellant.

        I could be wrong though, and usually am.

      • Re:Hrmm (Score:5, Informative)

        by pi_rules ( 123171 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:53PM (#6476063)
        There are a myriad of firearm laws. Last I knew it was darned near 22,000 nationwide. It's a mess. Sure has done a heck of a lot to keep illegal guns off the street though. As a law abiding citizen I'm glad to know that I can't buy the same kind of firearms that my coke dealing cousin can illegally. Makes me feel real damn safe at night.

        Ranting aside, laws generally apply to chemically propelled weapons. That leaves BB and pellet guns out of the regulations. The magnetic weapons are still slow enough and bulky enough that they're not under regulation yet. As soon as somebody gets one that works well and starts selling it though you can bet stink will hit the fan though.

        While I'm not a fan of what he did Timothy McVeigh did build a weapon of sorts that was somewhat like a shotgun but fired a modified flare that would explode. It was meant to take down helicopters. The ATF went after him for a bit on this one, or at least confronted him I guess, even though it was prefectly legal to sell. Couldn't sell the explosive flares but empties with instructions on how to make shells were illegal.

        "Shall not infringe" sure has come to mean "shall not entirely infringe" over the years.

        Yes I'm a pro-2nd ammendment person. If you have a problem with that I suggest you post a sign on your front lawn saying that you refuse to own guns if you think that will make the world a safer place.

        • Re:Hrmm (Score:3, Funny)

          by josh crawley ( 537561 )
          Thank you for officially beginning the obligatory Second Amendment flame-war. I will counter by making the obligatory mention of Columbine. "Columbine". Your turn.

          • Re:Hrmm (Score:5, Insightful)

            by pete-classic ( 75983 ) <hutnick@gmail.com> on Friday July 18, 2003 @09:59PM (#6476315) Homepage Journal
            The guns used by those kids were:

            1. Illegally purchased (They were purchased by someone who could purchase them legally, but with the intent to illegally provide them to minors, which makes the act of purchasing them illegal.)

            2. Illegally owned (In the state of Colorado handguns may only be owned by persons 21 and older.)

            3. Illegally possessed (In the state of Colorado it is illegal for a person under 21 to possess a handgun without supervision.)

            4. Illegally carried (Carry of a concealed handgun is only allowed by permit.)

            5. Illegally possessed (It is illegal for non-LEOs to possess a firearm on public school property without a concealed carry permit. Yes, this makes it "doubly" illegal for them to have had them.)

            6. Illegally carried (It is illegal to carry a concealed firearm on school property without a permit . . . ditto above.)

            So, discounting all the petty things (like illegally possessing handgun ammo, etc) the young lady and boys involved broke no fewer than SIX "gun control" laws before a single shot was fired.

            Any insinuation that this situation would have somehow been improved by more "gun control" laws (aka further erosion of the second civil liberty enumerated in the Bill of Rights) amounts to strong evidence of a hopelessly irrational mind.

            -Peter

            • Re:Hrmm (Score:4, Funny)

              by josh crawley ( 537561 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @11:32PM (#6476594)
              People do illegal things. Therefore, laws are ineffective. Therefore, we should get rid of all the laws (except the 2nd Amendment) and just carry a DEagle 5-0. Anyone who thinks differently is a whack-job.

            • Re:Hrmm (Score:4, Insightful)

              by arcanumas ( 646807 ) on Saturday July 19, 2003 @06:05AM (#6477392) Homepage
              In Greece there was a sudden supply of really cheap (i mean 30 Euro cheap) stolen Kalasnikof (or what's it called). This is a combat rifle , not a toy. This supply was braught by the uprising in the neighbouring Albania. So it is really safe to say there are many many "war" weapons in the hands of many citizens (and mostly criminals i may add). Do you know how many die from these weapons every year? No? Well neither do i. I can not recall the last time there was a murder.
              So don't blame the owning of guns or the breaking of gun laws. Blame the society and the rules and values on which it is based that drive these kids to something like that.

          • Re:Hrmm (Score:5, Funny)

            by zulux ( 112259 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @11:36PM (#6476601) Homepage Journal
            "Columbine". Your turn.

            I'll raise your "Columbine" and give you a "Nazi" - and a misspelling - "Loser".

          • Re:Hrmm (Score:3, Insightful)

            by ocelotbob ( 173602 )
            This is of course, only if you ignore the fact that the kids had the fucking propane tanks in the school rigged to explode. Suppose they didn't have a gun, what would have happened? They probably would have just blown up the school, causing many more deaths than happened with their illegally obtained guns. Care to counter?

          • "Crazy Americans" (Score:5, Insightful)

            by fantomas ( 94850 ) on Saturday July 19, 2003 @06:11AM (#6477406)

            "Thank you for officially beginning the obligatory Second Amendment flame-war. I will counter by making the obligatory mention of Columbine. "Columbine". Your turn."


            ... And I in turn will make the obligatory rest-of-the-worldian observation
            "wow, aren't these crazy Americans obsessed by guns?"

        • Re:Hrmm (Score:4, Funny)

          by ljavelin ( 41345 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @09:38PM (#6476224)
          I'm not against guns... I'm pro-gun. I don't have a thing against them. They're nice and usually made of metal and plastic.

          But I am against nuts with guns. Yep, I'm against it.

          If you're for nuts with guns, I suggest you put a sign on your lawn that says "I think all nuts should own guns!"

          • Re:Hrmm (Score:3, Insightful)

            by pi_rules ( 123171 )

            But I am against nuts with guns. Yep, I'm against it.

            If you're for nuts with guns, I suggest you put a sign on your lawn that says "I think all nuts should own guns!"

            I don't think you actually read my post entirely. Please note the opening where I mention my gun-toting drug dealing cousin (with a felony!) has access to weapons easier than I do as a law abiding citizen.

            He shot two men two months ago after a drug deal went bad.

            Nuts do own guns, illegally. There is nothing I can realistically do to sto

        • Re:Hrmm (Score:3, Interesting)

          by pete-classic ( 75983 )

          I suggest you post a sign on your front lawn saying that you refuse to own guns

          I'm not sure if you were inspired by this or if it is coincidence, but . . .

          The JPFO [jpfo.org] used to make just that sign [216.239.57.104]. They seem to have discontinued it. I can't understand why, it seems like a popular position.

          If if is a coincidence I highly recommend you check them out. You don't have to be Jewish, you just have to support all of the Bill of Rights for all citizens.

          Oh, and since I am posting anyway, the guy says the projecti

        • Interestingly enough, the per capita number of guns in Canada is a mere fraction of that in the U.S.. Coincidentally, so are violent crimes and home firearms accidents. Heck, even our military is pretty touchy feely. Half the time we're not sure whether to call it an army or a "peace-keeping force"! The world knows we're F'ing peaceniks, but our biggest fear is the nuclear fallout we're going to get when some pissed off terrorists finally nuke our Southern neighbors.

          There is a fine line between a fun

  • So... what does it do, blur your target out? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Qzukk ( 229616 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:03PM (#6475816) Journal
    Sort of a new meaning to rubbing someone out ;)

  • Found something better in a google search (Score:5, Informative)

    by adzoox ( 615327 ) * on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:03PM (#6475818) Journal
    So I could find out what the heck a gauss gun is .... it's a magnetic propulsion gun icase some of you were wondering like I was.

    This is a do EASY do it yourself I found:

    http://www.scitoys.com/scitoys/scitoys/magnets/g auss.html

  • They don't exist? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cyranoVR ( 518628 ) <cyranoVRNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:04PM (#6475821) Homepage Journal
    Using a series of magnets to accelerate a metal slug - it doesn't seem like it would be that hard to do. Right?

    Also, aren't "Guass Guns" are more widely known via the games (both board- and PC-) BattleTech and Mechwarrior?

    • Re:They don't exist? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by SkArcher ( 676201 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:11PM (#6475873) Journal
      Gauss Rifles are from battletech.

      Interestingly, I don't think the mass of the slug makes all that much difference to the eventual damage - force = mass * acceleration

      So using lighter weights would be advantageous, up until the point where the projectile becomes too light to keep a decent trajectory in a cross wind.

      And of course, there is the Particle Projection Cannon, with a charged particle instead of a magnetic slug...

      • Re:They don't exist? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by leshert ( 40509 )
        So using lighter weights would be advantageous, up until the point where the projectile becomes too light to keep a decent trajectory in a cross wind.

        Not just cross winds, but also deflection due to things like brush or light cover. Same reason my .243 is a poorer 'brush gun' than the .32 I've used on occasion. Smaller slug goes funny when it hits a leaf.
      • I would have said GURPS. The Gauss Battle Rifle rocks.

        Remember (as was mentioned) crosswind and deflection, and what wasn't, air resistance. A heavier ball bearing drops faster in water than a lighter one, even though it's a bit bigger (increasing drag)

      • Re:They don't exist? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by NeoSkandranon ( 515696 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:52PM (#6476060)
        Interestingly, I don't think the mass of the slug makes all that much difference to the eventual damage - force = mass * acceleration

        This does not quite translate into how a round will effect a target. Particularly a soft one. A light projectile travelling extremely fast will penetrate a human (for example, lets take the NATO 5.56x45mm round) and do significant damage, but won't always be lethal, because the high velocity causes it to penetrate and keep going, rather than transfer all its energy to the target. Compare to a 7.62mm round, which is traveling slower, heavier than a 5.56, but it does LOTs more damage

        • Re:They don't exist? (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Tassach ( 137772 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @11:15PM (#6476530)
          The real-world lethality of a round of ammo is highly complex and often counterintuitive; not all of the mechanisms that increase or decrease lethality are well-understood.

          While the kinetic energy (KE = 1/2 M V^2) and momentum (P = MV) have an undeniable relationship to lethality, they are demonstrably not the only factors, as there are real-world comparisons which show rounds with lower KE and momentum which are more lethal than ones with more KE and momentum.

          Personally I shoot 9MM; my preferred ammo is 147gr@980fps, compared a more conventional loading of 125gr@1160fps. Real-world statistics show that the 147gr loadout has a slightly better track record of one-shot kills than the 125gr, even though the 147gr has roughly the same momentum and 20% less KE.

          The M-16, firing the 5.56 nato round, has roughly 70% as much kinetic energy and momentum as the 7.62 Russian round used by the AK-47. Yet, pradoxically, battlefield statistics from show that the survival rate of people shot with 7.62Rus is significantly higher than that of people shot with 5.56NATO.

          • Re:They don't exist? (Score:4, Informative)

            by Cpt_Kirks ( 37296 ) on Saturday July 19, 2003 @12:08AM (#6476675)
            IIRC, the light 5.56mm slug is unstable, and tumbles when it hits an object. It spins in the body like a circular saw.

            The new, heavier round used with the M16A2 is more stable, hits and penetrates better, but is less lethal.

            • Less lethal is a good thing and not from a peace-nic humanitarian view point.
              A dead soldier elemenates one soldier and needs no assistance. This can cause his compatriots to fight harder.
              While a wounded solier needs assistance of two or more soldiers and his screams of agony will dihearten his allies.
              Thus:
              dead lose one soldier
              wounded lose three or more

              Clearly wounding your enemies is more effective than killing
          • Just remember, Guns dont kill people, transfer of momentum kills people.

    • Re:They don't exist? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Mostly a lurker ( 634878 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:12PM (#6475881)
      Evgenij Vasiljev does not claim this is a new concept. What he claims (and I do not know enough to validate this from his data) is that his prototype is the most efficient (by which I think he means velocity relative to power input) yet developed. It is dangerous to judge a book by its cover but, based on his site, it looks like a very interesting project.
    • And Metal Gear Solid.. If you haven't played, the story is...I don't remember but there's a big mech with a slug type of "missile" launcher... that would allow a country to bypass treaties since they're not realy nuclear MISSILES but more like nuclear death rocks..

  • No sound! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Phosphor3k ( 542747 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:04PM (#6475823)
    Niiiiiice. Ramp up the power a bit more and you have the perfect sniper gun. You could shoot someone and people around them would not even know a shot had been fired, let alone what direction it came from.

    • sonic boom... (Score:2, Informative)

      by Thinkit3 ( 671998 ) *
      It'd have to be subsonic, and if it was, it'd be no different than a silencer today.

    • Re:No sound! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by f97tosc ( 578893 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:09PM (#6475864)
      No sound! Niiiiiice. Ramp up the power a bit more and you have the perfect sniper gun

      Except for the fact that the bullet (~1000m/s in most rifles) will break the sound barrier (~340 m/s).

      Tor

      • Re:No sound! (Score:5, Informative)

        by BWJones ( 18351 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:15PM (#6475898) Homepage Journal
        Except for the fact that the bullet (~1000m/s in most rifles) will break the sound barrier (~340 m/s).

        While the parent post is disturbing, I will respond regarding this post. Sub-sonic ammo with silencers take care of most of that problem with traditional guns, while coil guns are tunable with the desired weight and size of the projectile used in them to keep the round sub-sonic.

        There are very active research programs going on in a number of defense groups concerning rail guns at all scales from personal defense to large scale cannons.

        • Re:No sound! (Score:5, Interesting)

          by f97tosc ( 578893 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:25PM (#6475950)
          While the parent post is disturbing, I will respond regarding this post. Sub-sonic ammo with silencers take care of most of that problem with traditional guns, while coil guns are tunable with the desired weight and size of the projectile used in them to keep the round sub-sonic

          Of course it is possible to keep the bullet subsonic, but then your weapon is pretty useless as a sniper rifle.

          There are very active research programs going on in a number of defense groups concerning rail guns at all scales from personal defense to large scale cannons.

          Yes, and of these I think the cannon are promising but the personal not. For example, by putting the this into artillery on an aircraft carrier you can shoot further and more accurately and you get power from the nuclear plant.

          But for a personal weapon, you have just exchanged a small case of gunpowder for a big battery, and you have gained...what? Not range and accuracy; these are limited by the markmanship of the user and not by the speed of the bullet.

          Tor

          • Re:No sound! (Score:3, Insightful)

            by IWannaBeAnAC ( 653701 )
            True. The only long-term danger with handgun technologies (and I use the word 'danger' quite deliberately) is directed energy weapons. They are completely impractical nowdays because there exists no such compact energy source. Now, IAATP (I am a theoretical physicist) and I know of no 'emerging' ideas that would permit such a weapon; but there are no laws of nature that forbit it either; therefore it is probably only a matter of time (if we are very lucky, hundreds of years or so).

            Of course, if the USA

          • Re:No sound! (Score:5, Informative)

            by BenEnglishAtHome ( 449670 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @09:18PM (#6476148)
            Of course it is possible to keep the bullet subsonic, but then your weapon is pretty useless as a sniper rifle.

            Wow. I never ceased to be amused by people who pop off so confidently about things they obviously know so little about. What on earth makes you think that supersonic projectile velocity is necessary for a sniper rifle? The whole family of Whisper cartridges [sskindustries.com] are astonishingly useful while deliberately being designed to stay subsonic. In fact, it's become clear from some long-range shooting sports that holding velocity below the sound barrier avoids certain wind drift problems. Try reading Understanding Firearm Ballistics by Robert A. Rinker. If you can hack the math, his explanation of the characteristics of transonic bullet flight make very clear that low velocity rounds can be highly useful in a number of applications.

        • While the parent post is disturbing

          Some juveniles confuse Counter Strike with real life.

          There are very active research programs going on in a number of defense groups concerning rail guns at all scales from personal defense to large scale cannons.

          A handheld rail gun need quite some strong batteries if it's gonna match an typical ordinary handheld gun available today. Likely the weigth of the batteries will not make the gun handheld anymore. But shooting darts at close range might be practical.

      • Re:No sound! (Score:3, Funny)

        by gfody ( 514448 ) *
        mention something covered in a howstuffworks [howstuffworks.com] article and sudenly every geek is an expert on gun silencers

      • Re:No sound! (Score:5, Funny)

        by josh crawley ( 537561 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:28PM (#6475958)
        Um, yes, but if the bullet is going faster than the speed of sound, then the fuckers head will already be exploded by the time he hears it!!
        • the fuckers head will already be exploded by the time he hears it!!

          Yes, this is the case for all sniper rifles. But the as the original poster was aware it can be pretty useful to snipe silently anyway, because the fucker may have friends (with weapons).

          Tor
          • Don't try to fool me because I'm a seasoned expert at this. If you just use an AWP with an aimhack you can waste all of them before they turn around.
    • Cute, but the round still has to be subsonic to be silent, which limits the velocity and thus the range.

      Also consider the power modern military sniper rifles impart to a projectile weighing 168 grains or so.

    • Airports (Score:4, Funny)

      by www.sorehands.com ( 142825 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:13PM (#6475886) Homepage
      Will the airport security start taking away your magnets, and wires?

      Instead of propelling metal slugs, you can propel paper clips -- "you can take an eye out with that thing."

      • Re:Airports (Score:5, Funny)

        by Hanzie ( 16075 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:54PM (#6476068)
        Will the airport security start taking away your magnets, and wires?


        Do you seriously think you could sneak one of those on a plane? did you see the pictures? It would be confiscated on sight, while you were arrested. If you tried to hide it in your luggage, it would look to the x-ray tech like you were trying to disguise a bomb as a gun.

        Yes, airport security will take away your magnets, wires, batteries and pointy slugs. And you too.

    • Re:No sound! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by the_2nd_coming ( 444906 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:14PM (#6475891) Homepage
      1) a good sniper rifle can hit a target at around a mile away or more....you will here no sound

      2) a good sniper will position him/her self in a place out of the site range of his /her target

      3) people know the general direction a shot comes from when a person is hit.
    • the perfect sniper gun

      A typical sniper gun needs to have a kill range of at least 1km. This would need a major power increase. As the author suggests, however, this could be a great hunting weapon. Fire at the quary; if you miss, wait a few seconds and fire again -- the target has not been spooked because of the lack of noise.

      This would also be great concept on a firing range. Imagine being able to have a bunch of people firing away and not even need ear muffs.

      Under existing US laws, I do not see t

  • We need to embrace weapon technology. For what is keeping these illogical "intellectual property" laws in place? Their weapons. All technology is cool, but weapon technology is cooler right now.

  • Slashterrorist? (Score:5, Funny)

    by eric434 ( 161022 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:05PM (#6475830) Homepage
    Lots of dangerous DIY type sites, two in a row in fact...

    Note to self: Call off team planning to burglarize Slashdot Headquarters.

  • Great... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:06PM (#6475835)
    The next thing you know, these will come standard in every computer sold, to protect the RIAA's IP.

  • Gauss driven pistol (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Almost-Retired ( 637760 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:06PM (#6475844) Homepage
    Interesting concept. Just one Q though, as it doesn't seem to be discussed on the site in the link, and that is how does it achieve the effect of a normal rifled barrel in causeing the iron bullet to spin and therefore be stabilized in flight?

    • Re:Gauss driven pistol (Score:5, Informative)

      by Zirnike ( 640152 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:58PM (#6476080) Journal
      APDSFSDU ammo, used in tank rounds: Armor piercing discarding sabot fin stabilized depleted uranium (I'm almost sure that's the right order for the acronym...)

      Alternately, you could use magnets that are 'twisted' in pole (I can't get to the site to see the actual design, so bear with me). For example, you could use 3 rod magnets in each 'stage' (or 3 e-mags, whatever) and then rotate them relative to the previous row, giving you a triple helix. Then 'lobe' the slug. The magnets will 'draw' the lobes along and spin it.

  • 5mm bullet, 33 m/s muzzle velocity (Score:5, Informative)

    by homer_ca ( 144738 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:08PM (#6475855)
    "Bullet is iron, diameter is 5 mm, length 25 mm, weight is 2,75 g.
    Muzzle velocity about 33 m/s."

    In comparison, an air rifle shoots a 4.5mm pellet at about 800 ft/s.

    • Re:5mm bullet, 33 m/s muzzle velocity (Score:4, Funny)

      by Auckerman ( 223266 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @09:12PM (#6476127)
      You must work for NASA. Hint, if you want to land on Mars, learn to use only metric...
  • Superman: The Escape uses magnetic propulsion and mag-brakes. nice to see the idea slimmed down.

    all we need now are high-tech voltrons that fire the plastic pellets with a gauss gun. THAT would be cool.

  • Metal Storm (Score:3, Informative)

    by Squidgee ( 565373 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:10PM (#6475867)
    This has been done, and is now recieving military funding. Check it out here [weeklystandard.com].

    Scary stuff.

    • That's not a gauss gun. RTFM:
      http://www.metalstorm.com/10_technology/tec hnology .html
    • "This has been done, and is now recieving military funding."

      Sorry, no. Metal Storm is something entirely different. (And, incidentally, *way* more powerful and practical at this point.)

      The Metal Strom projectiles are powder-driven, although the ignition is electronic. In the gauss gun, it's all electromagnetic.

    • If you had read your own link, you'd realize that Metal Storm's guns aren't Gauss guns. They're using chemical propellant... the electronics are just for ignition.
    • Oops! Looks like Metal Storm does use some explosives.

      Sorry! =/ For once, I was wrong.

    • Re:Metal Storm (Score:4, Informative)

      by JaredOfEuropa ( 526365 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:29PM (#6475967) Journal
      Metal Storm is not a Gauss gun. It's simply one or more barrels, each containing multiple bullets with a propellant stacked in between the bullets. Electronics set off the propellants in a timed fashion, allowing incredible rates of fire.

      The use for Metal Storm seems to be rather limited though. Large caliber and/or explosive or armor-piercing rounds are more efficient against hardened targets, and a Gatling seems to do just fine against fast moving targets (Goalkeeper / Phalanx antimissile systems). The only interesting application I saw was in underwater anti-torpedo systems.

  • I will be more impressed... (Score:4, Funny)

    by craenor ( 623901 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:11PM (#6475870) Homepage
    When they build the first Gauze pistol!!
  • I think there will be quite some time before we get Gauss handguns. In terms of energy content, batteries are much more cumbersome than gunpowder.

    Artillery is another matter, the next generation carriers (in 10-15 years) are planned to be equipped with Gauss cannon, with superior range and accuracy. Then of course you have the energy from a nuclear power plant.

    Tor
  • ... of how much energy you have available. A slug from this gun will never have any high velocity nor any significant penetration power. The energy released by the handheld batteries are quite simply not enough.

  • Thank you Slashdot! (Score:5, Funny)

    by PseudoThink ( 576121 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:19PM (#6475912)
    Now I have all I need to build my own NUCLEAR POWERED GAUSS CANNON!

    Pls post more info on how to refine radioactive materials...oh, wait, you've already got my back [slashdot.org].

    Slashdot...news for terrorists. Stuff that works.
  • Gauss [st-and.ac.uk] looks evil. I suggest that he knew that his math theories would eventually be used for cool weaponry.

  • Do you feel lucky punk? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:19PM (#6475916)
    Uh-huh. I know what you're thinking. Does he have six AA batteries or only five AA batteries in that thing?

  • Sidetracked. (Score:3, Funny)

    by chendo ( 678767 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:21PM (#6475928)
    What is a Russian software developer making gauss guns for? Isn't he supposed to be making lethal software?

  • the origin of the Gauss Pistol (Score:5, Funny)

    by kurosawdust ( 654754 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @08:31PM (#6475981)
    Oh wait, wait, I know this story, a math prof of mine told me in class once...Gauss's elementary school teacher wanted to keep his class busy so he told them to sit at their desks and sum the integers from 1 to 100 so Gauss got pissed off and shot him! ...right?...why is everyone staring at me like that?
  • ... I was just thinking about what a big attractive target my office mate's ass can be.

  • I Still Prefer the Lepage Glue Gun (Score:4, Interesting)

    by good soldier svejk ( 571730 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @09:09PM (#6476116)
    "What "Lepage gun?" Colonel Korn inquired with curiosity.

    "The new three-hundred-and-forty-four-millimeter Lepage glue gun," Yossarian answered. "It glues a whole formation of planes together in mid-air."

    - Catch-22, Joseph Heller

    All kidding aside, the Germans did have Gauss gun research projects among their myriad secret weapons. Back then they called them "rail guns" as often as not. Not to be confused with these. [www.dvgu.ru]

  • Thinking of a pun (rhymes with gun... hrmm...) (Score:5, Funny)

    by ToadMan8 ( 521480 ) on Friday July 18, 2003 @09:57PM (#6476307)
    SO I was readin' this guy's webpage and was thinkin' "Wow, this guy's site is bulletproof; his server is solid man..." then I was thinkin' "hey, good thing - the guy makes gauss guns..." Get it? Good thing server is bulletproof, makes gauss guns... Ya know, like 'cause the guy better have a bulletproof server 'cause it could get all accidentally shot up and stuff with those Gauss guns he's makin'?! Heh... Bedtime. Please karma gods be good to me.

  • Here, have a mirror (Score:5, Informative)

    by Biogenesis ( 670772 ) < ... ptushome.com.au>> on Friday July 18, 2003 @11:17PM (#6476543) Homepage
    http://members.optushome.com.au/dbsite1/www.pskovi nfo.ru/coilgun/index.htm [optushome.com.au]

    abount time i used the webspace my ISP gives me for something usefull.

  • Even more fun!!! Non-weapon Phaser! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by SharpFang ( 651121 ) on Saturday July 19, 2003 @07:41AM (#6477538) Homepage Journal
    go.to/phaser [go.to] This non-military device easy to build at home will provide you with a lot of pleasure! Literally!

  • when i hear the word gun, i reach for my culture (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gobbo ( 567674 ) on Saturday July 19, 2003 @10:39AM (#6478410) Journal
    I remember being a spry 19 with a Eurailpass and a girlfriend living in Switzerland. When I got there to visit, I was profoundly struck by the culture around guns. I'd go to restaurants and there'd be rifles leaning up against the umbrella stand, and other kinds of casual behaviour with the weaponry of those in military service.

    Maybe someone Swiss can throw perspective on this. The Swiss murder rate is low, gun ownership is very high [the stats I've seen are for handguns, but as in Canada a higher proportion of guns are rifles than in USA]. (I'm not going to karmawhore with links to stats--the gun debate uses stats like bullets, anyway--google away.)

    Even in Canada, where we have very low handgun murder rates compared to our neighbour, we don't just leave rifles unattended in public spaces. What that spoke to me of was a trust that everyone else around is more or less responsible, understands and respects the rules around guns, and is not desperate.

    Since the country has survived with great stability through some incredible historical pressures, I figure the trust wasn't naive. (Maybe things are different in the EU now.) They had/have a cultural understanding around guns and poverty, about getting along politically, perhaps, an expectation of honesty, smaller town sizes...?

    Everyone was involved in public military service in some way, at various times. They certainly weren't a big melting pot at the time. Who knows. But it's obvious that gun proliferation is damaging to US society... Not because of the arming of the people, but what they're arming with, and why. Maybe gun advocates should also be anti-poverty activists, in order to achieve their goals.

    • Re:when i hear the word gun, i reach for my cultur (Score:4, Interesting)

      by NerveGas ( 168686 ) on Sunday July 20, 2003 @03:58PM (#6486411)
      The answer is extremely simple, really.

      In Switzerland, pretty much *everyone* has a firearm. Now, think to yourself: Are you going to cause trouble in a society like that? You certainly wouldn't think of sticking up that cafe, now would you?

      Now, move your thoughts to America. The gun laws serve only to take guns away from honest citizens, while doing very little to keep them away from criminals. Think about it: You're a criminal, you've got your gun. You know that the honest folks don't. Now how scared are you of sticking up a cafe?

      There are still places where guns are common-place. Guess what! Things go along without problems.

      I've also lived in countries where guns were extremely difficult to come by - if the laws didn't stop you, the economics of the situation probably would. Guess what! The murder rate was astronomical compared to the United States. Serial killings, mass killings, murder/suicides, family dispute killings, they all happened - and they happened a lot. Just because a gun isn't available doesn't change a person's predisposition to violence.

      • Re:when i hear the word gun, i reach for my cultur (Score:4, Insightful)

        by gobbo ( 567674 ) on Monday July 21, 2003 @09:45AM (#6490402) Journal
        In Switzerland, they don't carry guns around on their hips! What are you thinking, the wild west? The answer is NOT "extremely simple" -- and I think you've never lived there. Plus, the murder rate by guns isn't as low in Switzerland as other places that have restricted access to handguns, like Canada (I guess Canucks prefer knives or broken beer bottles).

        I would be interested in knowing just which countries you've been in where the murder rate is astronomical compared to the USA. If you mean places that are an economic disaster, with widespread desperate poverty, well big surprise! But if you mean heavily industrialized nations, please enlighten.

        "You're a criminal, you've got your gun. You know that the honest folks don't. Now how scared are you of sticking up a cafe?" -- Well, thank you for illustrating my point about culture perfectly. You exhibit an acceptance that crime carries an acceptable risk of lethal violence. I think that that is a cultural attitude that suggests societal immaturity, rather than an abhorrence of lethal violence... in other words, a culture where someone wants/needs to steal but is more likely unwilling to kill, will have a different relationship to guns -- "you" would be scared of sticking up a cafe because of the risk of killing someone! No it's not naive to think this, but it is dependent upon social and cultural conditions, everything from income disparity to racism to what's on the tube.
      • In Switzerland, pretty much *everyone* has a firearm.
        They are usually military rifles because almost every adult male is serving in the militia.

        I have no problem with everyone having a gun who is properly trained and on a regular basis.

Slashdot Top Deals

He who steps on others to reach the top has good balance.

Close