Okay, we've got phasers. How shall we regulate them?

In My Humble Opinion
1

Using sensing equipment gleaned an alien spacecraft, scientists at Hypothetica University recently discovered that a vein of dilithium crystals in a Pennsylvania coal mine; so far as they can determine, this is Earth’s only source of the wondrous substance. Their findings were passed on to the research & development arm of Ridiculous Industries, who naturally intended to build starships. So far, all attempts at faster-than-light travel, teleportation, and artificial gravity have failed as miserably as The Secret Diary of Desmond Pfeiffer. They did, however, invent phasers.

RI’s personal phasers can fire at different intensities determined by the user. There are 20 factory settings. Levels 1-4 are the police/self-defense settings: what Jim Kirk would simply call stun. At level 1, an RI phaser can, with a single bolt, render unconscious a healthy human weighing 100 pounds or less. The victim will typically awake with a severe headache but require no medical attention other than prescription-strength ibuprophen. Levels 2, 3 & 4 are used on heavier people, up to about 400 pounds for level 4. Repeated stun bolts on any setting can burn severely or even kill, as can higher-power bolts on lighter or less-healthy persons.

Levels 5-12 are the industrial/infantry/hunter settings. They’ll severely injure or kill any human outright (though without any magic vaporization effects). Heavier animals are more resistant. A lion will react to a phaser-5 shot like a 100-pound human shot at level 1; a healthy bull elephant will be killed by two or three level-9 bolts, or instantly by a single 12. The higher levels in this class can also be used for welding and such.

Levels 13-20 are the demolition settings. You want to knock a hole in a concrete wall with one shot, you want level 13, and you’d best stand back a ways. Blow up a car? Try 16, but do it from cover as there resultant kablam has is not pleasnt. At level 20 you can destroy a tank, but you’d best be a sniper firing from a mile off.

Personal phasers come in three sizes: pen, pistol, and rifle. The pen models are the size of a penlight; they can be shot only (and exactly) at levels 1, 2, 3, & 4, and they’re good for a maximum of 30 shots before running out of charge. The pistols are the size of a Sig-Sauer; not only can they reach level 12, but they can be programmed to incremental settings for fine work. The rifles can reach level 20 and are even more programmable; also they can have sniper attachments, targeting-assistance modules, and so forth. As a coherent-energy weapon, a phaser’s useful range is determined by the user’s markmanship.

How shall we regulate the phasers?

2

Unless I’m missing something, I don’t see any particular reason that these weapons shouldn’t be regulated akin to their real-world analogues. That is, the taser-like pen models should be regulated like tasers, the pistol-like models should be regulated like pistols or rifles, and the rifle-like models should be regulated as artillery pieces (since their maximum destructive power appears more akin to artillery than actual rifles.)

Of course, I’m really indulging in something of a dodge here - the question of how to regulate public access to arms is hugely controversial in the United States. I don’t see, though, how the fact these weapons use different technology for their destructive effect changes the regulatory needs greatly. (Except, perhaps, that we’d want to make sure these things incorporated elements that would make them recognizable as weapons - perhaps we’d ban the incorporation of pen-phasers into innocuous-looking items, for example).

3

There won’t be any need to regulate them. With only one limited source for the crystals, the crystals themselves will be declared a national resource of strategic importance. The phasers that use them will never legally make their way into civilian hands. The only laws will be WRT how severe the penalties are for possession.

4

As I wrote the poll, I decided that pen phasers were the ones that made me most nervous. Absurdly easy to conceal, and unless they’re terribly loud, good assassination weapons. And given the description of pen phasers, I think they already look innocuous, which is going to cause problems.

5

Skald, I’m afraid this thread is likely to be hijacked by the obvious gun analogy. In my view, a phaser is just a fancy gun, and private ownership thereof is protected by the Second Amendment.

6

There are other issues, for instance. For instance, supposing that the supply of dilithium is great enough, would you want your local police to keep carrying the more-dangerous handguns?

Also, are you okay with civilians having phaser rifles? Since even the pistols can kill an elephant, phaser rifles seem to be unneccessary for hunting; likewise, for self-defense I’d rather have a pistol or pen phaser than a rifle. In terms of raw power, why should a civilian be allowed to own a device that can destroy a school bus from a mile away?

7

Fair enough. I think, though, that we’ve already got most of the legal framework to address this issue. Or at least, a number of legal frameworks, as they vary from state to state. But in general, carrying a concealed pen-phaser would probably be regulated much like carrying a concealed handgun. As for the fact that the devices don’t necessarily look like handguns - well, my guess is that they’d be required to either adopt some sort of distinctive shape or coloring scheme in order to be readily identifiable as weapons. If nothing else, I can’t imagine state legislatures or Congress would be happy with this conversation:

“Hey, neat! Did you get a new laser pointer?”

“No, that isn’t a laser pointer - be careful -”

“OH GOD, MY EYE! THE PAIN!”

But other than that, I don’t see how a penphaser is all that different from a small handgun.

8

I’m giving all my red shirts to Goodwill!

Of this much, I am certain.

9

Just to play devil’s advocate, though, Oak - haven’t the Supremes said that bans on “unusual or dangerous” weapons are permissible? There’s certainly a strong argument to be made that a phaser is unusual. Now, I think the stronger argument is that the key factor making a weapon unsual is the danger it poses, and a phaser that is gunlike in size and effect actually isn’t unusual in the Constitutional sense. But I don’t think it’s so obvious that this point wouldn’t be litigated.

And I do think that civilians wouldn’t, and shouldn’t be, permitted to own the rifle-sized weapons, for the same reason we aren’t permitted to own RPGs: There really isn’t a legitimate self-defense or recreational argument for them, and the public danger is tremendous.

10

Damnit, man - poorer Americans are exposed to enough violence and danger in their lives as it is. Are you really such a callous elitist that you’re indifferent to the pain such an action would bring?

11

I’m pretty much OK with civilians having anything short of a nuke/chem/bio weapon. And there are perfectly lawful weapons available now that can disable a school bus from a mile away. Hell, I could do that with a Sharps .50 buffalo gun made in the 1870s.

12

How about the penphasers? For the average civilian, what are they other than a murder, larceny, and rape aid?

But the rifle phasers can DESTROY a tank (and certainly a bus) from that distance, not simply disable them. I just don’t see the public good in civilians having those.

'Course, I’m not completely comfortable with a beat cop having a pistol phaser.

13

The way I figure it, if levels 1-4 are reliable people stoppers, they serve the necessary functions for personal defense and police use. Reliable, in this case, meaning that they will bring down a person and render them harmless as frequently as a typical pistol or shotgun. They should be as freely available (or moreso) than firearms are today. I don’t see any danger with a pen phaser that isn’t just as bad, or worse, with a .22 pistol.

As with machine guns and demolitions, I would allow for specialized licensing of phasers that can go above level 4. The military, of course, gets to use whatever they want. We let them be in control of tanks, bombs, and ICBMs, they can handle phasers.

14

Ditto. The question is resolved. Amend the Constitution if you don’t like it.

15

I agree with you. But then, I feel the same way about handguns - sure, they’re sometimes used for personal defense, but it’s at least as likely they’ll be used to commit crimes.

The Supreme Court, however, is taking a very dim view of restrictions on handgun ownership of late. And so long as this is the state of the law, it’s hard to see how penphasers would be treated differently.

16

We just disagree at a rather fundamental level. I’m not a criminal, so I oughta be able to own whatever weapons I like. If I misuse one of my weapons, I will have to answer to currently existing criminal laws.

17

We have the constitution today, and I really don’t feel like the issue of gun ownership is “resolved”. We have laws that severely restrict your ability to own guns that would be comparable to levels 13-20 in this example.

I’m not saying unrestricted ownership is wrong, just that the 2nd amendment doesn’t require it.

18

Assuming they’re anything like the phasers we’ve seen on ST:TNG onwards (I never did get around to watching TOS), I’d want to keep hand-held phasers out of military hands. Why? Because while the label says they’re super-destructive, in practice they’re far, far, far less lethal than the guns we have now. I think that over the runs of TNG, DS9, and Voyager, they killed a grand total of about eight people. The military brass will still think they’re better, though (because that’s what the label says) and insist on replacing our troops’ current firearms with them. The end result is a much weaker military, vulnerable to attack from nations with older and more effective weaponry.

Allowing phasers into civilian hands would probably make criminals less effective, too. Suppose there’s a bank robbery, and someone considers trying to stop them. “Don’t be a hero! It’s not worth risking y̶o̶u̶r̶ ̶l̶i̶f̶e̶ getting a superficial burn over this! You have a family!”. Allowing civilians to own phasers would not only reduce deaths from violence, but eventually illustrate to the military brass why they shouldn’t want to equip their troops with phasers.

19

This question is not so very far from a real-life situation. Laser pointers have long been a concern, and there are already regulations about not pointing them at aircraft. but now that hand-held laser pointers putting out 1 watt of cw output are readily available on the open market, they’re potentially a concern for things besides airplanes. One random idiot walking with a high power laser pointer can cause immense damage just shining the thing around – dazzling drivers, destroying cameras, and even damaging parts of people’s retinas. Arizona already has a law against improper use of such devices:

Considering the destructive potential of such devices, it might only be a matter of time before high-power laser pointers are regulated or even banned.
Here’s a sheet from NSW Australia:

www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/139894/…

(warning: PDF)

http://74.6.238.254/search/srpcache?ei=UTF-8&p=laser+pointer+regulation&fr=yfp-t-980&u=http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=laser+pointer+regulation&d=4713353102033489&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=8092d930,437a595d&icp=1&.intl=us&sig=XtM1T79fSb0GReiGP9FKxg--

20

There are, of course, other ways to regulate than an outright ban. F’instance, are you okay with requiring that all phasers sold for civilian use (and maybe even police use) have the more-likely-lethal settings be locked out?

The OP specifically says they’re not. No magic disintegrations, for one thing.

Are you kidding? Sisko alone killed that people people with phasers in one episode. (In the sense that, as captain, he’s responsible for every shot his troops take.)

Before I replaced military rifles with phasers, I’d need to know how reliable they were in the field and how much of a charge their dilithium crystals could hold. I can’t imagine they’d have any settings under 4 available. I can easily imagine phaser rifles being much more (or less) efficient than the M16 or AK-47. It would depend on how many kill shots you got from a given power cell, and how difficult it is to swap out cells.