The proposal is for a short-barreled two shot single-use firearm in a pistol calibre, than is non-reloadable.
The weapon resembles a small bore sawn-off shotgun made entirely of metal, with a pistol grip. It has basic sights and two short smoothbore barrels; it also has a shoulder stock.
It does not use metallic cartridges. The projectiles, propellant and percussion cap are installed at the time of manufacture; the firing pin, spring, sear and trigger are so integrated into the "stock" that sawing off the stock renders the weapon unusable. The casing is welded to prevent reloading; after use it must be discarded or recycled.
Concealment of the weapon under garments is therefore extremely difficult, and its accurate range is short; no more than five metres. It is also limited to the preloaded two shots.
No rational criminal would choose such a device for a robbery, but if confronted with one in (for example) a burglary would have considerable pause for thought, even if the individual wielding the weapon was small, female and elderly (representing a very vulnerable group in society, deserving of greater protection).
Ownership criteria would be considerably less stringent than for conventional firearms, and purchase price would include a training course which must be successfully completed before the weapon was delivered. Failure to pass the course results in a full refund.
The weapon requires no routine maintainance and has several safety devices including a grip safety.-- 8th of 7, Jan 17 2014 You know, [8th] old borg, this is not actually such a stupid idea.-- MaxwellBuchanan, Jan 17 2014 Drawing inspiration from the fabled FP-45 Liberator, I see?
//No rational criminal would choose such a device for a robbery//
Why not? Given the choice of one of these and a knife, why not choose the gun? And if the knife is preferable, why wouldn't the homeowner choose the knife instead? I can't see any argument that this makes sense for the average user, but not for a criminal. Frankly, a cheap and disposable (i.e. difficult to trace) seems like an ideal hold-up weapon.
//Ownership criteria would be considerably less stringent than for conventional firearms//
From your description, it sounds like acquiring one of these would be even more difficult than getting a shotgun, even in the UK. And a shotgun would be far more useful to the average homeowner, anyway.
I'm just not convinced that your premise is sound—that people are really looking for a low cost firearm that's less regulated because it's not as useful to criminals. In the US, black powder firearms are largely unregulated, and a cheap black powder pistol could be purchased via mail order and used for pretty much this exact purpose without the government either knowing or caring. The incidence of black powder pistols being used for home defense, however, is near zero.-- ytk, Jan 17 2014 OK, [ytk]'s convinced me. This was such a stupid idea after all.-- MaxwellBuchanan, Jan 17 2014 //Given the choice of one of these and a knife, why not choose the gun? //
Ease of concealment when approaching the target location.
Ease of detection by metal detectors.
// why wouldn't the homeowner choose the knife instead? //
A knife is a close-quarters weapon requiring skill and practice to inflict a disabling wound. Approaching to close quarters with a physically superior opponent invites the risk of being disarmed. A firearm also makes a useful amount of noise, guaranteed to attract the attention of law-enforcement.
// a shotgun would be far more useful to the average homeowner //
Not so. Shotguns are relatively heavy, and have substantial recoil, making them difficult to handle. They generally have only a simple safety catch. The long barrel makes them unwieldy for the purposes of FISH. They are attractive to thieves and require secure storage which takes time to access. They are capable of being reloaded relatively rapidly.
// In the US, black powder firearms are largely unregulated, and a cheap black powder pistol could be purchased via mail order and used for pretty much this exact purpose without the government either knowing or caring. //
Due to its hygroscopic characteristics, black powder is a very poor choice as a propellant for standby applications.
A pistol is ipso facto a concealable weapon; the proposed device is not readily concealable.-- 8th of 7, Jan 17 2014 // They require fastidious care and maintenance to operate reliably //
Would you allow a loaded Pattern 1861 Springfield to sit in a closet for five years, winter and summer, and then trust your life to it firing first time ?
But yes, a valid point.-- 8th of 7, Jan 17 2014 (waits patiently for anti-firearm advocate to show up and derail conversation)-- normzone, Jan 17 2014 I keep a hatchet and a powerful torch ready for burglars. I would immediately hand them over on demand! "Oi hand over that hatchet and torch." Ok - your need is obviously greater than mine, but Jesus and Mary will not be happy. (names of my two pet hyenas)-- xenzag, Jan 17 2014 // enhancing your skill with the weapon //
Precisely - the proposed device allows an individual who lacks, and does not wish to acquire, a skill with weapons, to present a credible and effective (but limited) threat.
//a hatchet and a powerful torch ready for burglars. //
Not good. A battery-powered reciprocating saw* is much better for dismembering the corpse, and it's safer to do it using night vision goggles so it's less likely that anyone will see.
* Be mindful that you need to use different blades when cutting muscle or bone; best is to freeze the body first, then you can use a fine tooth saw for everything without it clogging, and there's almost no blood. But the pelvis is hard work - has to be done in small sections.-- 8th of 7, Jan 17 2014 //Shotguns are relatively heavy, and have substantial recoil, making them difficult to handle.//
A lightweight pistol such as you describe is going to have considerably more recoil than, say, a .410 shotgun. In terms of legal requirements, your proposed weapon would have to meet the same overall length requirements as a shotgun to fall into the same category for licensing purposes. So at best, it's going to be no less difficult to handle than a lightweight shotgun.
//They are attractive to thieves and require secure storage which takes time to access.//
I can think of no reason why you'd be able to store such a weapon any less securely than a shotgun, regardless of what type of safeties are provided. If a child gets access to an unsecured gun and injures himself with it, you're liable no matter what. And a disposable gun with a grip safety can be stolen just as easily as a reusable gun with a safety catch. Any notion that you'd be able to keep this gun anywhere but in a locked safe is just promoting irresponsible gun ownership.
//They are capable of being reloaded relatively rapidly.//
Why is that a good thing? I can't see your government being more permissive regarding ownership on that basis alone than they already are regarding long guns, so there doesn't seem to be any benefit to that.
So what's the primary advantage here?
Oh, and as for this: //The long barrel makes them unwieldy for the purposes of FISH.//
You should really reconsider your technique. Have you tried simply using a rod and reel?-- ytk, Jan 17 2014 It means Fighting In Streets and Houses (alt. Fighting In Someone's Home), a colloquialism for house-to-house urban combat.-- Alterother, Jan 17 2014 //freeze the body first, then you can use a fine tooth saw for everything without it clogging//
That's not actually the case. Frozen soft tissue will turn to mush under the friction of the saw. The main advantage of freezing tissue first is that it doesn't move with the saw. It's difficult to saw unfrozen flesh with an electric saw that has a small travel.-- MaxwellBuchanan, Jan 17 2014 Yes, we know.
A fine-toothed saw, used with moderate pressure, will cut deep-frozen tissue quite efficiently - even if the saw stroke is relatively short. Circumferential cuts, and frequent pauses to allow the blade to cool, as the best method.-- 8th of 7, Jan 17 2014 //house-to-house urban combat//
This has really become a pandemic. Just last week I saw a whole gang of townhouses beat a rustic log cabin nearly to splinters. I guess it wasn't from around here and had just wandered into a bad neighborhood.-- ytk, Jan 18 2014 This idea has a certain pragmatic charm. I'd add a VERY large and visual serial number which can be read at a distance or via camera. [+]-- AusCan531, Jan 18 2014 //If someone can't be arsed to learn to defend themselves, then they have effectively chosen to give up their right to do it.//
So for example, women deserve to be raped for not knowing karate.-- ytk, Jan 18 2014 // If someone can't be arsed to learn to defend themselves, then they have effectively chosen to give up their right to do it.//
Bollocks. I do not expect to have defend myself - I expect the police to do that for me, which is one of the reasons I pay taxes.
However, if I am put into a situation where I do need to defend myself, I would like to think that I am entitled to do my best, using whatever resources are to hand.
So, to reiterate, bollocks mate.-- MaxwellBuchanan, Jan 18 2014 //If someone can't be arsed to learn to defend themselves, then they have effectively chosen to give up their right to do it. //
What about elderly people who may have formerly attained prowess in self-defence skills, but are, simply due to age and infirmity, too frail to use their skill ?-- 8th of 7, Jan 18 2014 //I do not expect to have defend myself - I expect the police to do that for me, which is one of the reasons I pay taxes.//
Ooooh, bad form. Since you've walked right into [21Q]'s trap, let me go ahead and pre-empt him by responding with “Actually, the police have no obligation to protect you, they're only sworn to uphold the law”, which is true (in fact, in the US there's a Supreme Court decision that explicitly states that the police are not required to protect any individual citizen). Also, “When seconds count, the police are only minutes away”. Again, this is true, and a very good argument for being able to defend yourself without depending on the police.
His argument *is* utter bollocks, just not for the reasons you cite.-- ytk, Jan 18 2014 //If someone can't be arsed to learn to defend themselves, then they have effectively chosen to give up their right to do it. //
I resent 'having' had to learn how to defend myself the hard way.Does this mean I have effectively chosen to give up my right to peace just because I can fight if I need to?-- 2 fries shy of a happy meal, Jan 18 2014 //Actually, the police have no obligation to protect you, they're only sworn to uphold the law//
That is true, perhaps. However, in those cases where I may need to defend myself, or be defended from, an attacker, I believe that the attacker is quite likely to be in breach of some kind of law.-- MaxwellBuchanan, Jan 18 2014 //Actually, the police have no obligation to protect you //
Really? I wonder what they mean by 'To Protect and Serve', then...-- Alterother, Jan 18 2014 //No rational criminal
That's the problem. Maybe if we stop deifying crime then people would find it less acceptable to do it? Cheaper to change society than to knock out more weapons.-- not_morrison_rm, Jan 18 2014 My big problem with this idea is that the gun only holds 2 rounds. In a close quarters situation, even people who are trained and know how to use a gun often fire off 10-15 rounds without hitting anything.
As an American, my idea of the ideal home defense weapon is an H&K USP 45 with a holographic sight and blinding LED light on the bottom of it, with at least 2 extra magazines on a quick access bandolier.-- DIYMatt, Jan 18 2014 That's actually not an argument against this idea, [Matt]. Remember the first rule of gunfighting; this is targeted at people who would otherwise have no gun at all.-- ytk, Jan 18 2014 // The only scenario in which they could actually prevent you from being victimized would be that portrayed in the film 'Minority Report'. //
Or the scenario in which a police officer happens upon a crime as it is comitted, or the one in which said officer's presence prevents the crime altogether, or the one in which a police negotiator brings a hostage situation to a peaceful conclusion, or the other one in which a police sharpshooter does it the cheap way, or the one in which the combined efforts of law enforcement agencies result in a reduction of the overall crime rate...
But only in those six scenarios could a law enforcement agency prevent a person from becoming a victim of crime. No more. Just yours with Tom Cruise and the five realistic ones.-- Alterother, Jan 18 2014 You know, if ideas relating to, say, tea invariably and reliably brought out a predictable series of strongly- held opinions, people would accuse us of being obsessed with tea.
What is it with you people and guns?-- MaxwellBuchanan, Jan 18 2014 // What is it with you people and guns? //
They are the ultimate distillation of the machine, artifacts of endless variety and design but all devoted to accomplishing the most simple and pure of mechanical actions. They are a union of physics and art.
And they go bang.-- Alterother, Jan 18 2014 Still perfect for killing your spouse, then yourself. You could even call it the murder-suicide special.-- WcW, Jan 19 2014 //the most simple and pure of mechanical actions// i.e. killing-- pocmloc, Jan 19 2014 //And they go bang.//
Fair point. Carry on.-- MaxwellBuchanan, Jan 19 2014 // i.e. killing //
No, i.e. moving an object from point A to point B in as straight a line as possible. But don't blame yourself for your error, most people mistakenly equate guns with violence.-- Alterother, Jan 19 2014 What you have to really watch out for are the ones who mistakenly equate guns with violins. I went to a concert once where it wasn't until halfway through the third movement before I realized they weren't playing the 1812 Overture.-- ytk, Jan 19 2014 // the fabled FP-45 Liberator //
Nothing fabled about it, they were real. Many thousands were air-dropped into Nazi-occupied Europe. Several hundred German occupiers are thought to have been killed by resistance fighters wielding them. There are also stories about a few hundred of them misfiring, hilarity ensuant.
Also, I done seen one inna museum. So there.-- Alterother, Jan 19 2014 I don't think you know what “fabled” means…-- ytk, Jan 19 2014 I beleive the greatest trick pulled on humanity in modern times is convincing ourselves that we should be responsible for neither our actions, or our own personal safety.
In my country you will be told, and encouraged, to flee or barricade yourself in some part of your home if someone breaks in. You will commonly get charged and severely punished for harming people who are trying to hurt you. As a legally licenced firearm owner, I would never consider using my firearms to defend myself even in my own home, because of the absolute certainty that I'd be pursecuted in both media and courtroom for doing so - self protection is neither a legal reason for owning a firearm, nor a legal use for one.
I like this idea. I'd prefer nerve gas dispensors, but a gimped "home use only" firearm is an okay second best.-- Custardguts, Jan 19 2014 " You could even call it the murder-suicide special "
Ah yes, the Wednesday night special.-- normzone, Jan 19 2014 // I don't think you know what “fabled” means… //
It means 'told of in the context of fables', which are mythological tales that impart some form of value or wisdom. In other words, a thing that is 'fabled' is a thing of fiction, not reality.
I think you may have been after one of the word's more flexible synonyms, such as 'legendary'.-- Alterother, Jan 19 2014 //You will commonly get charged and severely punished for harming people who are trying to hurt you. As a legally licenced firearm owner, I would never consider using my firearms to defend myself even in my own home, because of the absolute certainty that I'd be pursecuted in both media and courtroom for doing so - self protection is neither a legal reason for owning a firearm, nor a legal use for one.//
Sounds ranty to me.-- MaxwellBuchanan, Jan 19 2014 would you like some cites ?-- FlyingToaster, Jan 19 2014 In my neck 'o' the woods it's not just a rant, it's bollocks. If somebody is threatening me or my family in my home I won't hesitate to fenestrate them with the shotgun I keep for that express purpose, and the authorities will see it my way (I can cite two recent examples in my county and an adjacent county).
Some cultures just don't have the stomach for it, I guess.-- Alterother, Jan 19 2014 //It means 'told of in the context of fables', which are mythological tales that impart some form of value or wisdom. In other words, a thing that is 'fabled' is a thing of fiction, not reality.//
You're gonna be really embarrassed when you finally look up the word.-- ytk, Jan 19 2014 [Max] - yep I think that ticked all the boxes koalafying it as a rant. Albeit one relevant to the discussion (wherein people were chiming in that you don't need to defend yourself, the police will do that for you - which they generally won't).
I just don't like things that disempower people to help themselves, but rather encourage us to be insipid, useless weaklings totally dependent on outside assistance for our every need.-- Custardguts, Jan 20 2014 The whole gun/home defense debate could be simplified if everyone were limited to owning and operating muzzle-loading black-powder based weapons such as duelling pistols, blunderbusses, Enfield 1853 rifles and the like. Those who wish to fire more than one salvo between lengthy reloading operations will need to carry a "brace" of pistols, much like a pirate. Everyone wins.-- Zeuxis, Jan 20 2014 Well then can I install a brace of 12 pounder cannon in my living room, hallway and possibly a couple in enfilade on the balcony looking over my backyard? I promise to only use grapeshot...-- Custardguts, Jan 20 2014 You're right, maybe we should also stipulate that you're only allowed whatever muzzle-loading weaponry you can comfortably carry about your person. The use of cannon, field-guns, howitzers and other artillery pieces might fall outside of that stipulation. Large barrels of gunpowder *are* allowed, as long as they have long trailing fuses that can be comedically stamped/blown upon should they get lit accidentally.-- Zeuxis, Jan 20 2014 From the OEM:
Fabled:
Syllabification: fa·bled
1. mythical; imaginary: the fabled kingdom
2. well known for being of great quality or rarity; famous: a fabled art collection
By the secondary definition you are using the word correctly--technically--though I would consider the Liberator pistol neither well-known nor of great quality (I would even go so far to say that what fame it has is due to its novelty and poor quality). Surviving examples are rare, but not exceedlingly so, but not exceedingly so. There are many in museums and the hands of private collectors, and a few are available for sale on the web if you dig deep enough.
For the sake of harmony, I will concede that--technically-- you used the word correctly, and I will reduce my argument to a well-educated and informed opinion that you could have used a much more accurate word.-- Alterother, Jan 20 2014 My home defense is impregnible, I have a complex and cripplingly expensive line of concrete fortifications that stretch all the way across my garden. The neighbors don't have a similar system, but their gardens are a little hilly and full of trees. So I don't expect any problems there.-- bs0u0155, Jan 20 2014 Good cover is essential to the layered defense strategy. It sounds as thought you've got a good start, but you could used some anti-tank ditches, fire zones, and dug-in heavy weaponry.-- Alterother, Jan 20 2014 //I have a complex and cripplingly expensive line of concrete fortifications//
Oh, for goodness' sake. Why aren't simple moats good enough for people these days? They're effective, cheap, and nice to look at too.-- MaxwellBuchanan, Jan 20 2014 //For the sake of harmony, I will concede that--technically-- you used the word correctly, and I will reduce my argument to a well-educated and informed opinion that you could have used a much more accurate word.//
In the most basic sense, it simply means “famous” (as your provided definition indeed indicates). I am, of course, aware of the positive connotations of the word, and regarding that I would point you towards the following:
“irony: the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning”
It's “fabled” for being a low-quality piece of crap, that never saw anything close to the intended or expected usage. My comparison of this idea to the FP-45 Liberator was not an attempt to place either in a flattering light, but rather to point out that a facially similar idea had been tried before, with (extremely) limited success.-- ytk, Jan 20 2014 //It sounds as thought you've got a good start, but you could used some anti-tank ditches, fire zones, and dug-in heavy weaponry//
Got that, what's more it's all kept under lock and key. Like I say, there's no way anyone's coming round the side of it. Slight hills and trees are a formidable deterrent.
//Why aren't simple moats good enough for people these days?//
The cost of keeping them full of human excrement is prohibitive these days.-- bs0u0155, Jan 20 2014 My garden is full of snow.-- Alterother, Jan 20 2014 random, halfbakery