Weapons of War Now Include Lightning Guns

An anonymous reader writes "The Washington Post is running a lengthy article today about Xtreme Alternative Defense Systems, an Indiana-based company that says its developed a nonlethal weapon that shoots lightning bolts. This article is an in-depth look at a company that's stirred up some controversy on Slashdot in the past. From the article: 'Lightning guns, heat rays, weapons that can make you hear the voice of God. This is what happens when the war on terror meets the entrepreneurial spirit.'"

Comments

Wow. Just wow...

[Vorondil28]

I have to say, it's far beyond me when a person seeking "first post" posts as a reply to someone else's attempt at a first post. The inordinate lack of logic here is striking.

This proves that first-posters are certifiably insane.

Re:"dazzler" laser

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't tell whether you're joking or not, and this concerns me.

That's fine, but the alternative...

[Ravensign]

is to horrible to fathom.

Could Google be building the PERPENDICULAR Internet?

If so, it would run crossways to everything the human race stands for.

We can't, we musnt'nt allow this to happen.

2nd Amendment, the right to own BFG9000

[infonography]

You never know when demon mutant zombies will attack! You will need A BFG9000

Re:How does this help fight the so-called WOT?

[sumdumass]

No, we pulled out of vietnem. If by giving up, you mean we lost then yes i guess your right. But we pulled out for polictical reasons at home not because of the NVC or chinese military supporting them.

did bad things happen in vietnem? sure by both sides. I'm not sure what the point is here other then they didn't tell the folks at home we were doing bad stuff.
And if i remeber right, it was the south defending itself form the north so no they didn't win thier independence rather lost thier chance at it. IF the US would have gone into north vietnam instead of :"defending it form invaders" the whole outcome might have been different. If nothign else longer to achieve the same outcome.

There will never be a stable US puppet gov't in Iraq -- not unless the US starts killing millions of Iraqis instead of "only" tens of thousands. But hey, the US military has used so much depleted uranium (DU) in Iraq, maybe that plan is already underway... :-(

And if the US gov't is so honest and honorable about eventually leaving Iraq -- like Bush and his fellow liars claim -- why are we busy building multiple permanent military bases in Iraq? And why won't the US gov't and military publicly state that we will not retain military bases in Iraq?

How can you have a pupet government when the people of IRAQ run for election themselves? Sure the US can though support thier way and maybe money but the fact remains that Iraqi people are running for government, making thier own constitution, and electing the people running for office. Even if a pupet governemnt exist today, it wil be a matter of time before it is weeded out by the proccess.

And for military bases? thats called long term planing. This is for worst case scenario. If, like many in the rest of the world think is true, and the iraqi people are not capable of being "free" then we will have to protect them. On the other hand, most of these long term bases aren't even started building yet and they probably won't be. the provision is there if they are needed though.

Also i notice you eluding to it being about oil. I'm getting sick of reading people who's battle cry is :it;s about the oil. The fact is that the oil is being sold on the open market under the supervision of the UN. There is nothign about the oil playing into the action there right now. Never was and never will be outside solme people fantasy worlds. If it was about the oil, do you think we would be paying more today then before the war when the oil wasn't being sold at all? Look at whats going on and quit repeating shit thats been debunked years ago.