The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

John Robins · August 29, 1999, 02:08 AM

Imagine the advantages of having a weapon that could only be fired by the one person authorised to fire it..a weapon which checked your voice print before it allowed you to pull the trigger...a weapon that checked that the fingerprint of the finger on the trigger was that of an authorised user.Imagine a weapon which allowed you to tell it by voice command that the round you are about to fire within the next instant should be a tranquilizing dart instead of a full load or a rubber bullet instead of a titanium tip. It all sounds like something from a comic book but a new company has just demonstrated working prototypes to The Pentagon and major law enfocement agencies.

These were just 2 of their new products...have a look at their new electronically fired gun that fires at the rate of one million rounds per minute...it is likely to be used by the Navy to replace the Phalanx Systems on all vessels.

This new company is about to revolutionise modern weapon systems making everycurrent rapid fire weapon appear slow...its like the introduction of INTEL to the computer market except that the hold the only patents

The company is currently only listed on the Australian Stock Exchange and their aren't many shares on offer...so you probably wont be able to buy in now..but if you get the chance give it a go because the price will skyrocket when the Navy sign up in the next few weeks

To have a look at the new technology go to [URL=http://www.metalstorm-ltd.com]www.metalstorm-ltd.com/URL]well worth a look

I hope you find this interesting and pass the information on to anyone who has had the misfortune to have their weapon used without their permission or even turned upon themself or their family. All law enforcement agencies will find it interesting because it will ptotect their officers against loss of their weapon to a perpetraitor and if they set up each officers weapon so that it will not fire unless the authorised officer says "police" then there can never be an allegation that an officer failed to identify before firing

[This message has been edited by John Robins (edited August 29, 1999).]

August 29, 1999, 02:08 AM	#1
John Robins Junior Member Join Date: August 27, 1999 Posts: 3	Imagine the advantages of having a weapon that could only be fired by the one person authorised to fire it..a weapon which checked your voice print before it allowed you to pull the trigger...a weapon that checked that the fingerprint of the finger on the trigger was that of an authorised user.Imagine a weapon which allowed you to tell it by voice command that the round you are about to fire within the next instant should be a tranquilizing dart instead of a full load or a rubber bullet instead of a titanium tip. It all sounds like something from a comic book but a new company has just demonstrated working prototypes to The Pentagon and major law enfocement agencies. These were just 2 of their new products...have a look at their new electronically fired gun that fires at the rate of one million rounds per minute...it is likely to be used by the Navy to replace the Phalanx Systems on all vessels. This new company is about to revolutionise modern weapon systems making everycurrent rapid fire weapon appear slow...its like the introduction of INTEL to the computer market except that the hold the only patents The company is currently only listed on the Australian Stock Exchange and their aren't many shares on offer...so you probably wont be able to buy in now..but if you get the chance give it a go because the price will skyrocket when the Navy sign up in the next few weeks To have a look at the new technology go to [URL=http://www.metalstorm-ltd.com]www.metalstorm-ltd.com/URL]well worth a look I hope you find this interesting and pass the information on to anyone who has had the misfortune to have their weapon used without their permission or even turned upon themself or their family. All law enforcement agencies will find it interesting because it will ptotect their officers against loss of their weapon to a perpetraitor and if they set up each officers weapon so that it will not fire unless the authorised officer says "police" then there can never be an allegation that an officer failed to identify before firing [This message has been edited by John Robins (edited August 29, 1999).]