Slashdot Mirror


Commercial Flamethrower Successfully Crowdfunded

ColdWetDog writes: You've always wanted one, of course. Zombies, the occasional alien infestation. The neighbor's smelly roses. You just need to be prepared for things. You can get freeze dried food, AR15's, enough ammo to start a small police action (at least here in the U.S. -- YMMV), but it has been difficult to get a modern, portable flamethrower until now. CNET has a brief explanation on the XM42, which doubled its Indiegogo funding target in just a few days.

39 of 181 comments (clear)

  1. Merchandising, Merchandising by bkmoore · · Score: 4, Funny

    "....where the real money from the movie is made. Spaceballs-the T-shirt, Spaceballs-the Coloring Book, Spaceballs-the Lunch box, Spaceballs-the Breakfast Cereal, Spaceballs-the Flame Thrower.... The kids love this one."

    1. Re:Merchandising, Merchandising by khallow · · Score: 2

      I was expecting actual warnings about hyperbolic space.

  2. Legality... by osu-neko · · Score: 2

    Chris Byars, CEO of Ion Productions, the company behind the XM42, told me: "It is legal where there are no laws or codes written against such a device."

    Incoming legislation in 3... 2... 1...

    --
    "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  3. Re:the big question by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's legal in all states except MD and CA. There generally hasn't been a big problem with drive-by flamethrowings.

    --
    Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
  4. Re:Legal by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know from Myth Busters they are not legal in California.

    Is anything legal in California these days?

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  5. Re:Bad name by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Informative

    no, there are different types of flamethrowers with differing fuels, see my other comment.

    The Geneva convention only forbids flamethrowers in certain situations, look it up. Two armies roasting each other in a field is perfectly fine by the GC

    The U.S. military still has flamethrowers and practices with them

  6. Mr President we have a flamethrower gap by Crashmarik · · Score: 3, Insightful

    On a more serious note but nonetheless just as funny, the liability suits from this should be hilarious.

  7. Loadsa uses! by Twinbee · · Score: 2

    I'm sure this has hundreds of uses!

    Such as erm...... uh....... well... bonfire lighter! Er, and you know.......... other things!

    Now this on the other hand....

    --
    Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    1. Re:Loadsa uses! by Mars+Saxman · · Score: 2

      I use my flamethrower for gardening - my back yard has a strip of asphalt for parking, but all the rest is gravel, so it's easy to keep the weeds down by hosing the place down with fire every now and then. It's a great way to start fires in the firepit - no need to mess around with kindling and wait an hour for the flame to really get going; just toss in some logs, torch 'em for a minute, and you're set. Beyond that, it's also a great way to grill vegetables - hold a bell pepper or an ear of corn in a pair of metal tongs, then give it a quick squirt with the flamethrower. Cooks right up, ready to eat in seconds.

      I am not kidding about any of this.

    2. Re:Loadsa uses! by Aighearach · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Gravel may be all you can grow, but that isn't a garden. That isn't even a rock garden.

  8. Re:Bad name by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Informative

    A flamethrower is primarily useful for clearing bunkers.
    Squirt a jet of flame through the firing slit on a concrete bunker, and it quickly ceases to be a threat to the guys on the outside.

    Like a demolition charge, it's utility is pretty limited, but when the right (or wrong, depending on perspective) situation comes up, there's no substitute....

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  9. Re:OMG america is stupid by Whorhay · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As someone else pointed out far above, there is actually a variety of legal uses for flamethrowers. I've seen them used by landowners to conduct controlled burns to keep underbrush down and help prevent wild brush fires.

  10. Re:Legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    I know from Myth Busters they are not legal in California.

    Is anything legal in California these days?

    Idiot politicians who waste taxpayers' money are legal in California.

    Also, idiots who make frivolous lawsuits against their former employers
    appear to be legal.

    All in all, it is a good place not to live.

  11. Re:Bad name by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

    Gasoline and vaseline.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  12. Welcome to the USA by Qbertino · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sorry to the 90% U.S.ians here on /. for my upcoming rant, but bear with me please:

    WTF? I mean, seriously, WTF??? Who in hell would think that what the world needs now is a small concealable commercially available *FLAMETHROWER* ?!??. This is so bizarly US american, words fail me.

    When's the first one going to run amok with one of these? Who's gonna pay the medical bill of the first rampage victims with 80% burnt skin for life? The people who built this thing? ... I hope as soon as the first one falls victim to one of these, that these people get sued into next wednesday big-time USA style. Better would be they'd abandon the project alltogether.

    Does anybody here know what a gastly cruel final effort weapon this is? Seriously folks. Even as a military weapon Flamethrowers are about as wicked as it can get - even hardboiled hardcore SS members would instantly surrender at the mere sight of the "Churchill Corcodile", a british tank with a flamethrower attached. Which shows they actually can, in rare cases, have a 'use' - if I may use this notably unfitting verb in this context - as a last ditch (no pun intended) effort in marginal scenarios, such as finally and once and for all bringing down a totalitarian regime bent on ruling the planet by ethnic cleansing and such. And communicating to members of such a regime that you're effing serious and now won't stop short of total surrender.

    But a commercially available flamethrower for "normal" people? "normal" in double quotes(!!). Jebus H.B. Crickey, this is so sick words fail me. However, this guy pretty much puts the finger on the insanity.

    My 2 cents.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:Welcome to the USA by blind+biker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not a practical weapon, and no one sees it as a threat, hence the almost complete lack of laws in the U.S. Even in WWII, it had limited use. No one wanted to be the one carrying either, since you became a target of enemy fire with an explosive backpack on. This thing is also incredibly dangerous for the user as well; just look at the protective gear in the video. Sure, it's whacky and unnecessary for most people (some people need a portable flamethrower for clearing land on large properties, but that doesn't seem to be the marketing here). But some people might say the same about your hobbies and spending habits. Let bygones be bygones.

      Nobody said that "it's a practical weapon", just that it's incredibly dangerous. It's perfectly suited to kill, mail or deface for life a busful of random people. In this case not even the "if we outlaw handguns, only outlaws will have them"-argument flies, because you don't protect yourself from a flamethrower with another flamethrower. In fact, a flamethrower is not suitable for self-protection, only for attacking large numbers of soft targets. It's the perfect mass murderer's weapon.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    2. Re:Welcome to the USA by physicsphairy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While you're linking to youtube, you might checkout the homemade flamethrowers. I can't claim to have made one but plenty of my friends have (including my school physics club). The mechanics of a flame thrower is just a squirt gun + a match. I can buy propane "flame throwers" as is at the local hardware store (used for burning weeds).

      Why are people making all these flame throwers? Because something that shoots jets of flame is freaking cool. As far as I could discern on a quick google search, none of them have been used to commit murder.

      What I personally find horrific is the idea that anyone would be so afraid of their fellow citizens that their first assumption on hearing they have access to a projectile shooter/flame maker/etc. is "OH GOODNESS HOW ARE THEY GOING TO USE THAT MURDER ME?" I realize unhinged people are out there, and will do bad things, but there are also bears in the woods which could find their way to my house and easily maul me to death. But the statistics are low enough that I don't worry about. I suppose my luck could run out some day, but trusting my fellow citizens not to murder me has worked so far, and I wouldn't care to live any other way. I like the idea of a society and a government that assumes I have good intentions until proven otherwise and I consider it worth some risk to have it even if I am not personally a person who is interested in owning a weapon.

    3. Re:Welcome to the USA by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 4, Interesting

      1. If I recall correctly they were very popular in South Africa as a self defense weapon at one point. So, not quite uniquely American

      2. The "clearing snow" thing might be a reasonable usage case. Depends on the efficacy.

      3. Regarding deadliness, there are flamethrowers and then there are flamethrowers. Glancing at the pics and vids, I'm not seeing any burning fuel on the ground. If this thing spews a fireball that burns itself out instantly without coating anything with the still-burning fuel, it's probably not something you can accidentally maim someone with. Singe their hair off and give them second degree burns, sure, but it's not napalm. Barring fuel tank rupture, I'd say this thing appears to be significantly safer than a gun.

      4. I appreciate the desire to stop bad ideas before they snowball, but having a society based liberty (and generally averse to the idea of a nanny state) means asking "why not?", not "why?" Europe is safer in a lot of ways, but there's a reason why it's not the main driver of innovation despite having a higher GDP and a population 50% higher than the USA. The side effect of letting people innovate is that sometimes someone goes and starts selling flamethrowers. Oh well.

    4. Re:Welcome to the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Allow me to take a moment to mourn what Slashdot has become as many of the interesting people have left for other pastures.

      There was a time I'd come to an article about this and learn all sorts of neat details, such as why flame throwers existed, the mechanics and challenges involved with producing something like this, why it hasn't been done before and speculation as to how this is working... along with stories of where their usage has gone wrong by those with interesting backgrounds, and yes, a healthy dose of humor at the absurdity of it existing and maybe one or two freakouts.

      Now? Mostly just some freakouts. Where have all the slashdotters gone... I'm starting to feel like only the helicopter moms are left, refreshing slashdot because they like their macbook air so think they enjoy tech.

  13. Re:Bad name by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

    Well, if you have a shotgun that you don't care much about, you can buy some "Dragon's Breath" shells for it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  14. Re:OMG america is stupid by Aighearach · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If ever there was a weapon that would be classified as only a weapon of terror with no practical application beyond fear.

    This is it.

    I hope this fails, and i'm an NRA member who is often caught saying things like "from my cold dead hand"

    The only time I ever used a flame thrower was to put out a forest fire. I don't doubt that the deer were frightened of me, but in my defense I was trying to protect their home.

    Why are NRA members so dim-witted? Do you even understand your own propaganda, or do you just spew it like a mindless zombie? It isn't the flame-thrower that scares people, it is the asshole waving it around.

  15. Re:OMG america is stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I wanted so desperately for there to be a comment on this that I could mod flamebait. Thank you for your contribution.

  16. Re: Legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Good we don't want any tea-baggy cry babies here anyway

  17. Re:as usual faith in humanity is gone... by hey! · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Having fun isn't necessarily stupid. Having fun with flamboyantly dangerous things isn't necessarily stupid. It's endangering unwilling bystanders that's stupid.

    Some people like to build and shoot powerful crossbows, or even replicas of medieval siege weapons. These are extremely dangerous and useless things. The dangerous power of a trebuchet to throw an upright piano 150 yards is part of the charm.

    But a trebuchet is something that takes certain amount of thought and sacrifice to obtain and use. This flamethrower thing is more like a powerful handgun. There's been a recent fad for ridiculously overpowered handguns, which pack superfluously fatal power into a convenient, affordable form factor. The recent brouhaha over "armor piercing" ammunition was a side effect of a manufacturer selling a cut-down semi-automatic carbine as a "handgun", even though if you look at videos of people using them they're obviously terrible as handguns. This raised the question of whether 5.56 NATO ammunition should be regulated as "handgun ammunition", and in the end I think the decision not to was reasonablee. These aren't cop-killing or military handguns. They're extremely dangerous toys designed to get your rocks off.

    There are some who'd say that because these guns are dangerous and impractical they should be banned. But I don't agree. "Impractical" isn't the same as "useless" because getting your rocks off is a legitimate use for a thing. I think people should be able to enjoy their ridiculous firearms as long as they do it at some kind of appropriate range. I also think there's a real danger though from stupid people who will go plinking in the woods with the things like they were BB guns.

    That's really the only problem I have with this flamethrower, whether it's gold, chrome, or gunmetal gray. Any idiot can buy one, but it'd take someone reasonably intelligent and determined to find a place where it can be used safely. I'm not against people buying them, but I am for coming down hard on people who use them where they're a danger or public nuisance.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  18. Re:is there an app for that? by NotInHere · · Score: 2

    Using the flameCloud4000 app, you can quickly access your flamethrower controls from around the world. Do you not want to to put a cloud-controllable flamethrower on top of your roof, to get rid of stupid flanders neighbours showing up, or pidgins shitting onto your roof? Using our patented BirdAway algorithm, the cloud-connected camera quickly scans for birds on your roof and roasts them with the remotely controllable 360 degrees flameWielder flamethrower[1]. With the flameCloud4000 app, you can access your flameWielder to control your roof to be free of pidgins. It also features roast statistics, together with a flameCloud4000 share-this button, where you can share images of the roasted pidgins on Instagram, Facebook, or Twitter.

    [1] might roast cats too.

  19. Gas is good, liquid bad by Checkered+Daemon · · Score: 2

    We played around with what were known as 'Flame Effects Generators', also known as 'Fire Cannons', for years out at Burning Man. We even shot them directly at people, clad in fire suits of course (search YouTube for 'Dance Dance Immolation'). As far as I know no one ever got hurt, or even burned a little, and we compared notes a lot. But these were all pressurized propane. The subject line above was something of a motto. These things use liquid, and the potential for an accident is pretty high. I've used FEGs for years, but I wouldn't want to be within a city block of a liquid based flame thrower.

    One early year a guy had a kerosene-based torch, a big one. I heard him tell the Black Rock Rangers, "You know, if anything goes wrong here you're gonna have to move 2,000 people 100 yards in about 20 seconds".

  20. Re:Bad name by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

    Oh come now folks, just look it up.

    It's practically on Recipes.com.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  21. Welcome, Permanently Afraid Euroweenie by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Let's be clear, absolutely no-one is going to be using this as a weapon. It's not even a "last line of defense" weapon for home invasion, because while some may want to watch the world burn, they have different feelings about their own home specifically.

    There are actually some pretty valid uses for this thing - farming an pyrotechnic displays being just two. There are a lot of people in the U.S. with large properties that could have very good uses for these things.

    But basically, this is just fun, because fire is fun. Anyone who fails to see that has had irrational fear of EVERYTHING so deeply ingrained into them I cannot possibly see how they can function in real life.

    People always accuse people who like guns, and now fire, of being fearful. But it seems to me like instead, those afraid of such things are the ones always afraid, and without any real joy.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Welcome, Permanently Afraid Euroweenie by lgw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you want to be afraid of something, worry about ladders - those fuckers are dangerous. If you want a rational view of danger, then statistics, not imagination, is your friend.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  22. Awful choice of weapon against zombies!! by LostMonk · · Score: 2

    A flame thrower, however powerful, is a short range weapon. A zombie by definition doesn't feel pain. Result? Getting up close and personal with a zombie . . . only now it's a flaming zombie.

  23. Re:Legal by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

    Is anything legal in California these days?

    Medical marijuana, gay marriage, conceal/carry.

    Say you're not really pissed that fucking flamethrowers aren't legal there, are you? I don't know if you've gotten a look at your fellow man in the United States lately, but are these really people you want to be able to have flamethrowers? Geez, louise, there can't be more than maybe 1 in 100 that I think should be allowed to drive a car. Maybe 1 in 10 should be allowed to have shoelaces for chrissake.

    Although I'm sure we can find someone reading this that believes "More flamethrowers = Less crime".

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  24. Re:Better fund water wells than flame throwers by Adriax · · Score: 4, Funny

    Says you.
    I've been itching to whole roast a deer mid jump.

    --
    I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
  25. Re:Better fund water wells than flame throwers by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 4, Funny

    Killing isn't bad when it's mosquitoes. You've supped your last on me you little bloodsucking bastards!

  26. Re:Legal by FrozenGeek · · Score: 2

    Stupidity. It's not merely legal - it's a requirement.

    --
    linquendum tondere
  27. Would anyone really want to use one? by FrozenGeek · · Score: 2

    If something goes wrong, you're carrying a boatload of highly flammable material while playing with fire. Sounds like a setup for a Darwin award.

    --
    linquendum tondere
  28. Re:Bad name by Mr.+Shotgun · · Score: 4, Funny

    Er, when you say "clearing".....? [fearing the worst].

    Burned the people inside to death or near enough so they stopped fighting. What do you think the flamethrower did? Spewed chocolate bunnies inside to make the enemies lapse into a diabetic coma?

    --
    Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the (supposed) good of its victims may be the most oppressive
  29. Re:OMG america is stupid by dbIII · · Score: 2

    who is often caught saying things like "from my cold dead hand"

    Likely to be hot burning hands. An ex-army guy I know who got to play with military flamethrowers before training on them became limited noted that they are tempremental things that don't just roast the thing you are pointing them at unless you are out in the open on a perfectly calm day. Such weapons are "on the backburner" due to it being a real bitch if the bad guys have them, it looking really bad in the press to roast kiddies with them and difficulties in operating them without burning your own guys located anywhere near the operator.

  30. Re: Better fund water wells than flame throwers by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 3, Funny

    That sounds a bit like claiming to be celibate while boasting that you've the neighbourhood's biggest and best porn archive.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  31. Re:Bad name by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 2

    Spewed chocolate bunnies inside to make the enemies lapse into a diabetic coma...

    I think that's a wonderful idea. Say, I've been looking for a potential Kickstarter for some time now...

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.