EXACTO demonstrates first-ever guided .50-caliber bullets • Hacker News Board

Re: EXACTO demonstrates first-ever guided .50-caliber bullets

#141

Post by sophacles » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 2:29 PM UTC

walshemj wrote: post #135

sosborn wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What can a "well regulated militia" do against smart bullets, M1 Abrams, Apache helicopters, etc? First of all, have you seen how much of a fight low tech militias have put up against the U.S. lately? Secondly, don't forget that the people trained to use that technology are U.S. citizens too and will fight for their family before they fight for their county (most of them anyway).

They don't in most cases come out and fight - they use the most effective tactics for their lower quality troops and poorer equipment.

And an armed insurrection in the US would do different? Further, as pointed out above, anything popular enough to become a huge deal would have an awful lot of military members supporting it. The fancy gear would find it's way into the hands of both sides.

Re: EXACTO demonstrates first-ever guided .50-caliber bullets

#142

Post by BugBrother » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 2:34 PM UTC

moe wrote: post #139

spingsprong wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These bullets are not going to be used from a machine gun. It would make zero sense. They're for long range sniping.

Well, sniper drones then?

Cough... five comments and no one wonder about the possibility of shooting at drones with this rifle?

Re: EXACTO demonstrates first-ever guided .50-caliber bullets

#143

Post by nmrm » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 3:33 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #140

njharman wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counter examples. Civil war, Japanese internment, numerous actions against native Americans although you may not consider them protected by bill of rights.

In the context of "oppressive government" I'm thinking of the classic 1984 type situation, with a small faction suppressing the will of the majority. I.e. subversion of majoritarian will through military power. Civil war was a civil war, with the country split into two sides. Regional bonds took precedence over national ones but the military of each faction sided with the people of their region. Japanese internment a…

I can't even begin to express how ass-backwards this comment is. Genocide of natives and internment not only constitute existential threats to democracy; by the time either of these happens, democracy is already long dead (excluding voting and other basic human rights to only the demographics most aligned with your interests generally doesn't count as democracy. The US today would probably impose massive sanctions on the domestic US of WWII or especially the US of westward expansion).

What you're saying, albeit you managed at least a bit of tact, is that Japanese internment and the genocide of Native Americans don't count as military-assisted oppression because "it was just the minorities".

Re: EXACTO demonstrates first-ever guided .50-caliber bullets

#144

Post by lifeformed » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 3:38 PM UTC

throwaway7548 wrote: post #123

rayiner wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The basis of American freedom isn't some libertarians with rifles. Its the fact that the U.S. military consists of poorly-paid kids who care more about family and community than they do about abstract ideas. That and the fact that the military and its arsenal is physicislly distributed over numerous states. More powerful military technology makes us more free, not less. It just means it takes fewer people to break ra…

Well, pretty soon the U.S. military will consist of even more poorly-paid drones who care less about family and community than they do about abstract bits of information coming from the command center.

Well, those are controlled by humans too. You could say the same thing about those pilots.

Re: EXACTO demonstrates first-ever guided .50-caliber bullets

#145

Post by bmelton » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 3:48 PM UTC

BugBrother wrote: post #142

moe wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, sniper drones then?

Cough... five comments and no one wonder about the possibility of shooting at drones with this rifle?

Impractical. The effective ceiling of an MQ1 Predator is 25,000 feet, which approximates to 4.5 miles.

The effective range of a Barrett M82 (50 Caliber rifle) is approximately 6,000 feet, and that's not shooting straight up.

Point blank (which, despite the common vernacular meaning 'really close', actually means 'the range of the bullet before you have to adjust for elevation') is 1500 feet, past that, gravity begins taking over.

TL;DR, the range of a Predator drone is definitely greater than the naked eye's visibility range, and even with optics, target acquisition is nearly impossible, and even if it weren't, unless it's flying very low relative to its ceiling, you can't hit it anyway.

Re: EXACTO demonstrates first-ever guided .50-caliber bullets

#146

Post by XorNot » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 5:19 PM UTC

spingsprong wrote: post #126

XorNot wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think bigger: a drone at 2000 ft having to deal with the cross-wind from different altitudes.

Drones don't use 50cal machine guns. What they use is missiles and bombs, and they've been guided for decades.

Missiles have the problem of collateral damage. Anytime you explode things, shrapnel and shockwaves will endanger people you may not see nearby.

What you'd like to do is put a drone in the air where you can lase 5 people, and have it precision assassinate them. Then have it loiter and wait till their colleagues show up, who, by observing their actions, you can assassinate them to.

The size of a bullet means you'd have a lot of operational time would be very long - you could carry hundreds of rounds on a drone, that would still be just as capable of disabling vehicles or hitting passengers.

Re: EXACTO demonstrates first-ever guided .50-caliber bullets

#147

Post by ctdonath » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 5:38 PM UTC

ErikRogneby wrote: post #27

I wonder what each bullet will cost once production starts? I sometimes think about the origins of the second amendment and if it's intent was to empower citizens against a potentially oppressive government then it has failed. US military technology might as well be black magic. What can a "well regulated militia" do against smart bullets, M1 Abrams, Apache helicopters, etc? Thank goodness we are kept fat and happy.

Every year in the USA, some 18,000,000 (yes, eighteen million) snipers engage in live fire live target training. They operate independently with their own weapons, camo, comms, transport, and other gear (much if it high quality) - and do so as lone operators with minimal government involvement. "Operation Deer Season" is a resounding success.

Re: EXACTO demonstrates first-ever guided .50-caliber bullets

#148

Post by jackpirate » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 5:43 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #111

fragsworth wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at what the U.S. military has been doing - they're effectively well paid mercenaries. For the last 60 years, hardly anyone in the military has had a vested interest in any of the conflicts, and does it just for the money.

That describes zero of the people I've met who serve in the armed forces.

As someone who used to be a submarine officer, it describes about 80% of the people I met.

If you took away the college loan forgiveness and other benefits of the military, you'd lose quite a bit of the force.

Re: EXACTO demonstrates first-ever guided .50-caliber bullets

#149

Post by cobrausn » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 7:33 PM UTC

yongjik wrote: post #76

wyager wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Militias don't have to fight directly against tanks and fighter jets. That's why they're effective. You can't maintain a police state by blowing up houses. If you do that, you end up cutting off your only revenue source (taxing employed people), because your tax base either can't or won't work (because they're dead, the roads are impassable, etc.). In fact, this situation would actually be quite beneficial to an insu…

The flip side is that you can't fight a police state by blowing up houses, because you cut off the support of your people. (That is, unless the government is already busy blowing up houses and people decide there's no other way out.) I always feel that "well-regulated militias" acting as a counterweight to the US government is a silly idea, because by the time a militia is called into action, (1) the government can a…

I don't think they ever intended the 'well-regulated militia' to be an organized force. They used it in the way we mean 'militia' when we talk about middle eastern nations in conflict - armed locals organizing when they feel as though they need to.

Re: EXACTO demonstrates first-ever guided .50-caliber bullets

#150

Post by rayiner » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 8:48 PM UTC

nmrm wrote: post #143

rayiner wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the context of "oppressive government" I'm thinking of the classic 1984 type situation, with a small faction suppressing the will of the majority. I.e. subversion of majoritarian will through military power. Civil war was a civil war, with the country split into two sides. Regional bonds took precedence over national ones but the military of each faction sided with the people of their region. Japanese internment a…

I can't even begin to express how ass-backwards this comment is. Genocide of natives and internment not only constitute existential threats to democracy; by the time either of these happens, democracy is already long dead (excluding voting and other basic human rights to only the demographics most aligned with your interests generally doesn't count as democracy. The US today would probably impose massive sanctions on…

Democracy is nothing more or less than rule by the will of the majority, either directly or indirectly. If the will of "the people" is to exterminate a minority, and the military carries out that intent, that's not anti-democratic. It's lots of other things, it's definitely oppression, but it's not anti-democratic. It doesn't represent an existential threat to a political system rooted in rule by the majority.

The genocide of native Americans, slavery, segregation, and Japanese internment were all carried out consistently with the desires of the relevant polity of the time. When George Wallace stood in front of the school house and shouted "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" he didn't do it to try and impose his idiosyncratic view of the world. He did it because he knew it would endear him to "the people" of Alabama.