# Most effective SF small arm for the modern world
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900
**Category:** Cafe Society
**Created:** [May 24, 2012, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900 "2012-05-24T01:04:56Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 3
### Author:  [@Max\_the\_Immortal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_the_Immortal)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/41 "2012-05-24T16:19:08Z")
I wondered about the Culture knife missile, too. I assume it would be disqualified by the OP’s restrictions. Considering that you can hide behind cover while the knife missile spectacularly eviscerates your enemies at a rate of several (or possibly several dozen) per second, I’d call that a superweapon.
I’m tempted to dig out my Rifts books and review the weaponry in them; probably either something by the Naruni in the Phaseworld setting, or (oddly enough) the core Rifts book. The game’s mega-damage system is cheesy and straightforward: MD weapons are roughly two orders of magnitude more powerful than conventional firearms, and anything that doesn’t have MDC armor can be expected to be one-shotted by any MD weapon. This would make nearly any MD weapon excellent for soldiers. Taking out an enemy tank becomes a matter of getting a clear shot. Any cover that the enemy tries to hide behind may as well be made of cardboard boxes for all the good it will do them. Bunkers become nearly worthless.
That’s another thing that bugs me about Star Trek’s phasers. If they can disintegrate things, why do people hide behind barrels and crates and walls during firefights?
---
### Author:  [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/42 "2012-05-24T16:21:07Z")
> [@Scumpup](#):
>
> The thing about typical sci-fi zorch guns, especially as they are seen in the movies, is that they don’t appear to be any more effective than firearms while requiring a level of technology orders of magnitude more complex. The lack of recoil is about the only real world advantage they bring to the table…
I disagree. Stun and distintegrate settings would be very useful, I think (the first, especially, for law enforcement).
---
### Author:  [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/43 "2012-05-24T16:22:37Z")
> [@bup](#):
>
> At least in ST:TOS, they seem to send blasts at the speed of light (photon torpedoes don’t, oddly enough, but phaser beams do, or at least, some significant fraction of c).
That’s because a phaser is a pure energy weapon, emitting a beam of light “similar to that of a laser, but of a ‘phased’ nature” that can interfere with a target’s molecular structure (i.e., disrupt it).
Photon torpedoes, as we first saw in “STII: Wrath of Khan,” are actually a type of guided missile, i.e., solid matter. Presumably, they’re powered by warp engines, since in “The Changeling” they were able to reach NOMAD’s position in roughly the same amount of time it took for “his” energy bolts (traveling at approximately warp 15) to reach the _Enterprise_.
What I always wanted to know was how the hell a phaser beam can (a) be fired from a ship traveling at warp speed, and (b) hit a target traveling at warp speed. It seems to me some kind of physical law is being violated here…
---
### Author:  [@JSexton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JSexton)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/44 "2012-05-24T16:24:56Z")
Dammit, psiekier, I got all the to the end without anyone mentioning my ZF-1, and you beat me by mere minutes.
(You didn’t mentioned the red button, though. A real killer would have immediately asked about the little red button on the bottom of the gun.)
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/45 "2012-05-24T16:27:42Z")
On _Babylon 5_, the reason they used zorch guns instead of conventional firearms is that conventional firearms would have too much risk of penetrating the hull. The pulse pistols, though, would do just as much damage to an unarmored target (what they were dealing with most often) as a firearm, but would _not_ damage metals.
Personally, though, I’m probably going to go with the phaser, just for the stun setting. The existence of a weapon that can reliably and instantly incapacitate targets while reliably _not_ killing or inflicting long-term harm would utterly transform both police work and war. This is especially so if we use one of the models that has a wide-beam setting (which appears to be one of those things the Trek writers invented for one episode and then forgot about all those other times it’d be useful).
Oh, and it’s perfectly possible to dodge lasers, for appropriate combinations of low range, high-speed ships, and small targets. All you do is move about randomly, so that your attacker doesn’t know where you’ll be when the laser reaches you.
---
### Author:  [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/46 "2012-05-24T16:27:42Z")
Decisions, decisions…
[ ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vxK4kf4AqA)
---
### Author:  [@Sir\_T-Cups](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sir_T-Cups)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/47 "2012-05-24T16:30:24Z")
> [@JSexton](#):
>
> Dammit, psiekier, I got all the to the end without anyone mentioning my ZF-1, and you beat me by mere minutes.
>
> (You didn’t mentioned the red button, though. A real killer would have immediately asked about the little red button on the bottom of the gun.)
I’m just as mad at you because my response was going to be “what about the little red button on the bottom of the gun?”
---
### Author:  [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/48 "2012-05-24T16:34:20Z")
> [@Chronos](#):
>
> Personally, though, I’m probably going to go with the phaser, just for the stun setting. The existence of a weapon that can reliably and instantly incapacitate targets while reliably _not_ killing or inflicting long-term harm would utterly transform both police work and war.
Just a reminder here (since no one else has mentioned it to this point), they also used “stunners” on _Space:1999_. And pretty effective weapons they were, too…
---
### Author:  [@Mr.Excellent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Excellent)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/49 "2012-05-24T16:39:43Z")
The coolest weapon ever imagined in a Star Trek series was, of course, never discussed again after one episode of Deep Space Nine: A high-powered slug-firing sniper rifle, mated with a scanner and a transporter. Result: You can fire through as many walls as you wish, instantly reach out and touch anyone within transporter range.
Yah, I’d like one of those.
---
### Author:  [@Scumpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scumpup)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/50 "2012-05-24T17:06:14Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#):
>
> I disagree. Stun and distintegrate settings would be very useful, I think (the first, especially, for law enforcement).
Well, not every science fiction zap gun has all those settings, just for starters. I was talking about energy beam/bolt weapons in general not just the Star Trek phaser guns. Consider the Star Wars blasters or the guns from the Logan’s Run movies or the Blade Runner blaster. What, other than cool visual effects, makes them appear any more effective than a .45 automatic?
---
### Author:  [@President\_Johnny\_Gentle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/President_Johnny_Gentle)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/51 "2012-05-24T17:21:17Z")
It’s a comic book, but I need to push for Transmetropolitan’s [Bowel Disruptors](http://www.comicvine.com/bowel-disruptor/18-56018/). It can stun (and kill in a particularly gruesome fashion) and is untraceable.
---
### Author:  [@AndrewL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AndrewL)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/52 "2012-05-24T17:51:53Z")
> [@bup](#):
>
> A phaser has no recoil. \*Much \*easier to aim.
Accurately aiming a weapon has much more to do with ergonomics, the design of the grip and the sights or lack thereof. With the possible exception of the pistols in the original TOS, Star Trek phasers have astonishingly poor phasers. The small hand phasers in TNG are especially bad - it’s not clear how you’re supposed to aim them at something more than a few dozen feet away with any accuracy, there’s no sights or barrel or any way to accurately tell what it’s going to hit. The phaser rifles in DS9 are a slight improvement but still a mess in terms of ergonomics.
---
### Author:  [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/53 "2012-05-24T18:14:23Z")
> [@Scumpup](#):
>
> Well, not every science fiction zap gun has all those settings, just for starters. I was talking about energy beam/bolt weapons in general not just the Star Trek phaser guns. Consider the Star Wars blasters or the guns from the Logan’s Run movies or the Blade Runner blaster. What, other than cool visual effects, makes them appear any more effective than a .45 automatic?
Ammo supply, I suppose.
But there is an inherent limit to how effective a hand weapon can be. Generally, you don’t want one that will do too much damage, because you have to worry about unintended effects. If you had a hand weapon that made a beam that could shoot a hole through anything in its path, using it would be a trifle worrying.
A real improvement would be a weapon that targeted itself on your say-so, or tied to your thoughts, rather than one you aimed and shot like a gun - so all you had to do was think “hit X” and X would be hit automatically. If you had a weapon like that, it would make little difference whether it was a bullet or a laser beam that did the hitting.
---
### Author:  [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/54 "2012-05-24T18:46:56Z")
I’d want: Fallout 3, [Rock-It Launcher](http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Rock-It_Launcher). It’s large and clumsy, sure, but ammo is essentially infinite, and limited by the size of your pockets. It’s also easy to build, somehow requiring a vacuum cleaner, leaf blower, firehose nozzle, and a conductor. Plus it would make war more caring 🙂 to have a soldier decapitate someone with a teddy bear.
And of course the [Alien Blaster](http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Alien_blaster_%28Fallout:_New_Vegas%29) if ammo is not a concern.
---
### Author:  [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/55 "2012-05-24T18:55:30Z")
> [@Mr.Excellent](#):
>
> The coolest weapon ever imagined in a Star Trek series was, of course, never discussed again after one episode of Deep Space Nine: A high-powered slug-firing sniper rifle, mated with a scanner and a transporter. Result: You can fire through as many walls as you wish, instantly reach out and touch anyone within transporter range.
>
> Yah, I’d like one of those.
Ah, yes, the TR-116. Pretty cool. There’s some interesting speculation here as to why it was probably not more widely issued: [TR-116 rifle | Memory Alpha | Fandom](http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/TR-116_rifle)
---
### Author:  [@Scumpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scumpup)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/56 "2012-05-24T19:52:43Z")
> [@thelurkinghorror](#):
>
> I’d want: Fallout 3, [Rock-It Launcher](http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Rock-It_Launcher). It’s large and clumsy, sure, but ammo is essentially infinite, and limited by the size of your pockets. It’s also easy to build, somehow requiring a vacuum cleaner, leaf blower, firehose nozzle, and a conductor. Plus it would make war more caring 🙂 to have a soldier decapitate someone with a teddy bear.
>
> And of course the [Alien Blaster](http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Alien_blaster_%28Fallout:_New_Vegas%29) if ammo is not a concern.
If you’re talking Fall Out, I’d really like to have a Gauss Rifle and a .223 revolver AKA “That Gun.” The basic idea of That Gun doesn’t sound like it should be impossible to have in real life, but high intensity bottlenecked cartridges have a [history of not working well in revolvers](http://www.reloadbench.com/cartridges/p22rj.html). Realistically, That Gun appears to have a 4 or 5 inch barrel and the .223 wouldn’t perform well from it.
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/57 "2012-05-24T20:13:42Z")
> [@](#):
>
> A real improvement would be a weapon that targeted itself on your say-so, or tied to your thoughts, rather than one you aimed and shot like a gun - so all you had to do was think “hit X” and X would be hit automatically. If you had a weapon like that, it would make little difference whether it was a bullet or a laser beam that did the hitting.
Iron Man has a few gizmos that come pretty close to that. Remember in the first movie when he’s confronted with a hostage situation, and it looks like he’s frozen in indecision? But it turns out that he’s just painting crosshairs on heads using his marvelous in-helmet interface, and then a little fiddly bit pops up from his shoulder and shoots all the terrorists at once.
---
### Author:  [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/58 "2012-05-24T20:32:11Z")
> [@Chronos](#):
>
> Iron Man has a few gizmos that come pretty close to that. Remember in the first movie when he’s confronted with a hostage situation, and it looks like he’s frozen in indecision? But it turns out that he’s just painting crosshairs on heads using his marvelous in-helmet interface, and then a little fiddly bit pops up from his shoulder and shoots all the terrorists at once.
That’s my favorite scene!
---
### Author:  [@Mnemnosyne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mnemnosyne)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/59 "2012-05-24T21:23:10Z")
I am somewhat torn between two weapons:
The TOS Type II Phaser, which is the only non-rifle version that can be reasonably aimed. It also has all those neat settings that allow it to do things from cutting through walls and obstacles to heating up rocks to serve as campfires, to disintegrating things and enemies. And of course the stun setting means I don’t necessarily have to kill anyone with it, so I can whip it out at the first sign of hostile intent without worry.
The other weapon I like is Andromeda’s High Guard Force Lance. While this weapon is shaped in such a way as to make aiming difficult-to-impossible, that doesn’t matter because the projectiles it fires are actually tiny self-guided attack drones, able to find your enemy anywhere nearby. More significantly, the effectors are also able to shoot incoming bullets out of the air, and it can even be switched to a mode to defend from artillery strikes by shooting _those_ out of the air. Finally, it has a few additional uses in that it functions as a grappling hook, a flashlight, and a scanner of some sort.
---
### Author:  [@Saltire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saltire)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2012, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900/60 "2012-05-24T21:30:33Z")
I kind of like _ **smart guns** _ as described in the Shadowrun RPG and its attached novels. They require some cyberware built into the shooter for full function, though, so I’m not sure they’re inside the rules.
It could be any kind of gun. But it had electronics that would interact with an inductor patch under the skin of the palm that would allow it to only fire for a particular person, and to transfer sighting information directly to a heads-up display in the shooter’s cybereyes. So as long as you were holding the gun, you would see crosshairs in your normal vision to indicate where your shot would land. Or it could be a sort of picture-in-picture thing for aiming outside your field of view, so you could have perfect accuracy shooting behind yourself while running the other direction.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900.md?page=2)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-effective-sf-small-arm-for-the-modern-world/622900.md?page=4)