# Science Fiction Guns That Are Real



## PhotonGuy (Dec 15, 2018)

Check this out, these guns all look like stuff out of science fiction, but they're real. In my opinion some of them are definitely worth getting. Time to start saving up.
The Coolest Futuristic Guns That Actually Exist


----------



## CB Jones (Dec 15, 2018)

*If any of yall are looking for me a last minute Christmas present:*

*TrackingPoint .338 ShadowTrax8*
*




*


----------



## CB Jones (Dec 15, 2018)

I hate this idea:

*Armatix iP1*

*



*


----------



## Buka (Dec 15, 2018)

Quicker, easier ways to kill each other from a distance. We are an interesting species.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 15, 2018)

CB Jones said:


> I hate this idea:
> 
> *Armatix iP1*
> 
> ...



It will suit a niche.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Dec 15, 2018)

CB Jones said:


> I hate this idea:
> 
> *Armatix iP1*
> 
> ...


For the paranoid, it works. Or people who live with someone that's mentally unstable. The guns should be locked away, but just in case.


----------



## Buka (Dec 15, 2018)

kempodisciple said:


> Or people who live with someone that's mentally unstable.



So you're talking about every married man on the planet.


----------



## PhotonGuy (Dec 15, 2018)

CB Jones said:


> I hate this idea:
> 
> *Armatix iP1*
> 
> ...


Me too and so does most of the gun community.


----------



## PhotonGuy (Dec 15, 2018)

Buka said:


> Quicker, easier ways to kill each other from a distance. We are an interesting species.


Or, to prevent innocent people from being killed.


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 15, 2018)

So, the criteria for "futuristic" seems, in the most part, to be based on looks, right?  Not really impressed with their list.


----------



## PhotonGuy (Dec 16, 2018)

jks9199 said:


> So, the criteria for "futuristic" seems, in the most part, to be based on looks, right?  Not really impressed with their list.


The criteria for futuristic is based on function.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 16, 2018)

jks9199 said:


> So, the criteria for "futuristic" seems, in the most part, to be based on looks, right?  Not really impressed with their list.




and presumably if they already exist they can't be fiction, science or otherwise.


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 16, 2018)

PhotonGuy said:


> The criteria for futuristic is based on function.


What is futuristic about the function of any of them?  The best case for that argument would be made for the PHASR and the Armitix, and it's a stretch for either of them, I think.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Dec 16, 2018)

Semantics point, its not Sci-fi if it exists. 

Edit: skimming through the article, most of these aren't really THAT new and fi you keep up with military technology updates etc, not that obscure.    I namely have issue with listing all but the IP1 and tracking point being called Sci-fi guns, maybe the blinding laser but i heard about a U.K development version of that a couple of years ago.

I know im a spoil sport.


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 16, 2018)

PhotonGuy said:


> Check this out, these guns all look like stuff out of science fiction, but they're real. In my opinion some of them are definitely worth getting. Time to start saving up.
> The Coolest Futuristic Guns That Actually Exist


I'd love to have the Atchisson shotgun for bird hunting. Of course there probably would not be much bird left.


----------



## PhotonGuy (Dec 19, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> and presumably if they already exist they can't be fiction, science or otherwise.


Well before they were invented they would be fiction, so you could say they were science fiction before they came to be but as of now you would be right they are not fiction. So right now you could say they're, "science fiction like."


----------



## PhotonGuy (Dec 19, 2018)

jks9199 said:


> What is futuristic about the function of any of them?  The best case for that argument would be made for the PHASR and the Armitix, and it's a stretch for either of them, I think.


None of them are futuristic or have futuristic functions in the sense that they now exist so before they existed you could call them futuristic but now since they do exist they are no longer futuristic. Anyway, as to their function the FN Five Seven's function is quite a new concept when you take into account the size and speed of the round it fires, supposedly it can defeat many types of body armor and as such you can only get sporting ammunition for it. The Chiappa Rhino with its new design recoils straight back instead of up and that helps with accuracy. I haven't had the opportunity to fire either, not yet, but I've studied reviews on them.


----------



## lklawson (Dec 19, 2018)

PhotonGuy said:


> Or, to prevent innocent people from being killed.


Sorry, but the Armatix, and most <ahem> "smart guns," really aren't as great an idea as the seem.  They are easily defeated, depend on inconsistent battery power (ever had the battery on your flashlight suddenly just not work?), often (as is the case here) require some sort of dongle be within proximity (which can be lost, stolen, taken by someone else, or allow unauthorized use of the gun anyway if the dongle is close enough).  "Smart guns" don't actually do what the people promoting them hope they will but have tons of issues and "unintended" negative consequences.

I understand why the idea is appealing, but the technology to actually do, with the needed reliability, what is wanted is decades (or more) away and may never truly be achievable.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Dec 19, 2018)

PhotonGuy said:


> Check this out, these guns all look like stuff out of science fiction, but they're real. In my opinion some of them are definitely worth getting. Time to start saving up.
> The Coolest Futuristic Guns That Actually Exist


It's not listed in the article, but I always wanted a gyrojet.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 19, 2018)

PhotonGuy said:


> None of them are futuristic or have futuristic functions in the sense that they now exist so before they existed you could call them futuristic but now since they do exist they are no longer futuristic. Anyway, as to their function the FN Five Seven's function is quite a new concept when you take into account the size and speed of the round it fires, supposedly it can defeat many types of body armor and as such you can only get sporting ammunition for it. The Chiappa Rhino with its new design recoils straight back instead of up and that helps with accuracy. I haven't had the opportunity to fire either, not yet, but I've studied reviews on them.



Lots of rounds available for lots of guns can penetrate various body armor -- and if you're going to use a round in the rifle and handgun, there's a damn good chance it'll penetrate a lot of armor.  Especially if the ability to do so was a design requirement... The "only can get sporting ammo" seems more hype than a real concern; amazingly enough, rounds headed my way don't care a whit if they're labeled "sporting" or "personal defense" -- and I care even less.  The most "novel" thing I see about the FiveseveN is that the same round works in either the rifle or handgun. 

It's a click-bait list.  No justification for what made a particular gun "science fiction" or "futuristic"... just the writer picked 'em...


----------



## PhotonGuy (Dec 19, 2018)

lklawson said:


> Sorry, but the Armatix, and most <ahem> "smart guns," really aren't as great an idea as the seem.  They are easily defeated, depend on inconsistent battery power (ever had the battery on your flashlight suddenly just not work?), often (as is the case here) require some sort of dongle be within proximity (which can be lost, stolen, taken by someone else, or allow unauthorized use of the gun anyway if the dongle is close enough).  "Smart guns" don't actually do what the people promoting them hope they will but have tons of issues and "unintended" negative consequences.
> 
> I understand why the idea is appealing, but the technology to actually do, with the needed reliability, what is wanted is decades (or more) away and may never truly be achievable.
> 
> ...


That's why I don't like smart guns and I don't ever plan on using them. My post #9 was in response to Buka's post, I was pointing out how guns in the right hands prevent innocent people from being killed although not necessarily smart guns. As I said, I don't trust smart guns.


----------



## lklawson (Dec 20, 2018)

PhotonGuy said:


> That's why I don't like smart guns and I don't ever plan on using them. My post #9 was in response to Buka's post, I was pointing out how guns in the right hands prevent innocent people from being killed although not necessarily smart guns. As I said, I don't trust smart guns.


I understand now.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------

