What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
125 Comments
- idonthack, on 10/12/2007, -3/+27Girlfriend? What!?
You're posting on Digg, remember? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+28just what i need to scare off the o'l burlglar
- rowlodge, on 10/12/2007, -10/+26say hello to my little friend...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -10/+24Make love, not war!! **calls girlfriend and asks her to come over to apartment immediately***
- Turminator999, on 10/12/2007, -5/+17why would we need that when we have chuck norris?
- pezz453, on 10/12/2007, -11/+23I'm sure you'll still be thinking that when a sexual predetor comes into your home and stabs you in the chest 3 times the proceeds to "harm" (for the lack of a cleaner word) your wife and two daughters.
"Yeah right, that would never happen."
Tell my next door nieghbor that.
I'm all one for peace, but we must protect ourselves. End of story. - timmclargehuge, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16Don't be such a dirty hippie. I approve of turning genocidal ***** perpetuating oppressive regimes and their uniformed minions everywhere into very small pieces.
Off topic joke: How do you keep a hippie from stealing your money? Hide it under the soap. - swax, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea.
They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall
mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by
small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is
clear: To build and maintain those robots. Thank you. - OregonTrail, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12I bet they got the idea from a game
- ph713, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10ZeroXD: "Having" a gun doesn't mean standing there with it and getting shot. Even supposing a one on one confrontation between a gun wielding criminal and a gun-wielding self-defender, the defender's odds are considerably better than if the criminal was the only one of the pair that was armed. If multiple family members were armed, almost certainly one of them would put a stop to the criminal after the criminal had shot just one of them, at the latest. A firearm is a great equalizer in situations like this. It doesn't automatically save you, it merely puts you back on a more level footing with the aggressor.
As to the "only police should have guns" thing: that only works if you can effectively disarm *everyone* but the cops. History, as well as modern statistics, have shown that you cannot effectively disarm everyone except under limited circumstances, which usually involves limiting yourself to a very small and well-isolated country full of relatively upper-class people (Singapore's gun ban is a good example here).
If you cannot effectively disarm everyone, criminals included, then disarming law-abiding citizens is better known as "victim disarmament". You can never have enough police officers to effectively protect even a good percentage of the people a good percentage of the time, therefore most police response to violent crime occurs after-the-fact, when the shooting is all done with. If the criminals still have their guns, but the innocent guy doesn't, he's screwed in defending himself.
And in a country like the US, it is impossible for all practical purposes to disarm the criminals. Futile gun-bans and gun-restrictions merely limit the defense options of the innocent, who are the only ones that actually try to obey the laws. - matts0344, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8No, we don't "wonder why the world hates us", why do people always say that? We don't care, cause it gives us excuses to make cool weapons.
Even before I opened up this story I knew people inside were gonna be saying things like: "Teh IRAQ warrz! DAMN aMericans! The world hates you!" When this digg is about a new weapon/tech, not a political debate - longofest, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8the guy who carries that around ONLY carries that around. He is a support specialist, so he won't have an M-16... Support guys typically have either really big machine guns that lay down covering fire or they have grenade launchers like that...
- KentuckyRedNeck, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11War isn't cool....but sometimes necessary.
Weaponry is always cool. =0) - ghinch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Our job then is clear: to build and maintain those robots
- ph713, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Furz, your understanding of war, like that of many general-case anti-war activists, is fatally childish. The truth of the matter is that no reasonable and relatively mature human being desires war, or initiates war for bloodthirsty, murderous reasons. That includes our current administration officials individually and collectively, as well as most responsible leaders in most of the world today.
Political calculus on a global scale for the ultimate purposes of Good is not for the weak of mind, spirit, or determination. Sometimes one must commit minor atrocities for the greater good. Sometimes 1,000 innocent children will have to die, directly or indirectly, as a result of the actions one must take to save 10,000 others. And the probablities, temporal and spatial spread, connectivity, and general logic of the issues involved can approach complexities unfathomable to mere human beings.
If I were capable of making those kinds of decisions and had the knowledge to do so, I wouldn't be here, I'd be there doing that. But that aside, I can guess at least a little better than your accusations of bloodthirst. I suspect one of the ultimate underlying reasons for the US' current stances in the middle east actually boil down to the looming long-term issue of China. China is well-poised to take the top superpower spot away from the US over the coming decades, if they can sustain their growth and manage their relations correctly. China will need ever-increasing amounts of oil from the middle east to sustain their growth and modernization trends - oil that is increasingly undersupplied to other hungry consumers like the US as it is. Therefore, if the US can gain some control over oil supplies in the middle east, it can help them suppress China's growth and maintain their number one spot in the world.
You might say that mere national pride over being number one is still not a good reason for war, and you'd be right. But the US trying to stay on top of China isn't just about national pride. Much like the old Cold War, it's really all about the global struggle between those that would empower individuals through democracry, versus those that would enslave them within communism. - Woknblues, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5can everyone shut the hell up about the politics? sheesh. nobody is saying war is cool. nobody. I think that there is nothing wrong with thinking that a particular piece of weaponry is cool/interesting/beautiful. Look at samurai swords.. this thing needs to be in BF3....
@ some people above ----I didn't know that Digg was just for stories on iPods and Linux..Can anyone direct me to the page that states that? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yes, it's so awful of our government to spend money on our security. Who do they think they are, defending our rights like that?
- grendelwraith, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Quick little hint for ya.
Guns are technology. - Kingmishima, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4can't wait to see these get added to battlefield 2 lawl
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8That picture looks photoshopped.
- kennpeters, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Like it or not, weaponry is technology. If you disapprove of the use of said technology, fine your opinion and right. A weapon like this in a crowd control situation loaded out with CS, beanbags, flash-bangs and such would improve *non-lethal* response to such situations and allow such responses to be carried out by fewer personnel. Technology is *supposed* to do that, make things easier.
- 0Troy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Um guys?
This looks like a "tricked out" arwen. That thing has been around for a bit... - Ansible, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Wow, looks like something straight out of a FPS. Looks heavy too, it might be a pain to tote around, especially with another gun. That would be fun to play with at a junkyard.
- Metal_Guru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Zero, dude, there is a BIG gap between having weapons that are made to kill, and items that are potentially dangerous. Doesn't mean we should outlaw everything else if we ban guns. You don't make sense.
- jbus, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Those days are long gone buddy... We are screwed. People will eventually realize that when we're living in a military state and have the threat of being on the receiving end of weapons like this. But don't worry it will be "for our own good".
- frangalvez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This isn't that new, SWAT, D-force, and Spec Force have been using this for gas, smoke, and flash bangs. But this one has a cool RIS on it and an armalite retractible stock on it. Cool.
- daFilms, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Anyone else thinks it looks like the Grenade Launcher in N64's GoldenEye? http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/screenshots/2/197462/goldneye_thumb009.jpg
Anyways, you may find this link of interest...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGL-MK1 - OregonTrail, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The terrorist says, "OMG WTF HAX!"
- rnscwas123, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2DICE has to put this in the next patch they create for Battlefield 2!
- arpad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Why would we wonder why the whole world hates us? As long as all the whole world is doing is impotently grinding its teeth that the U.S. is ignoring the whole world's very important opinions then there's no reason for the U.S. to pay the slightest attention.
If the whole world wants to do something other then grind its teeth impotently, like, say, kill Americans then we've made it pretty clear what happens. You wake up one morning, if you're lucky, with the muzzle of a nineteen-year old Marine's M-16 screwed in your ear.
If all you want to do is burn Uncle Sam in effigy then knock yourself out. We don't care. Hate us as much as you want, just don't act on the conclusion that you ought to do something about it.
And by the way, the whole world doesn't hate the U.S. You're not the whole world, in case you're confused on that point.
On the evidence, alot of the world displays it's feelings toward America by wanting to come here and drive cabs, run party stores and take our blood pressure. Maybe that's an indication of hatred to you but I don't interpret it that way. - timmclargehuge, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8I sure am glad that I'm driving around with all this cheap-ass oil.
Also, President Bush graduated from Yale and earned his MBA from Harvard. How many of you mindlessly repeating "Bush is stoopid" have academic credentials approaching that? - wizardofmars, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Yes, weapons are very cool. Until you find yourself or your family on the receiving end. And if you don't think you ever will, study history, esp the rise and fall of the nation-state.
Hey Longofest, if the support guy with the launcher doesn't carry an M16, then why is he carrying one in the photo? It's clearly visible. - BryanTheCrow, on 10/12/2007, -12/+14Just try not to think about how much of our tax dollars went into developing this... :(
- Computer_Kid, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6So, when can I buy one :-)
Hi-Res Photo:
http://www.dod.mil/transformation/images/photos/2006-03/Hi-Res/060309-M-8112O-MGL14.jpg - Conky, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7Why are we even wasting money on weapons for humans to use. Robots are the future of warfare. PERIOD.
- Mambo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Ya, I can't wait till they implement this in bf2
- ZetSabre, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Keep in mind that this is a very versatile weapon; not just used for killing. Some of the specialty rounds are used for breaching doors and reconnaissance.
- incognegro, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5OMG, its teh n00b gun!
- LotharZogg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That's Marine Corps. With an "s".
- Arramol, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Because I'm sure this was designed with the intent of slaughtering civilians. And out of curiosity, how many of those civilians were killed by insurgents? I love how you just sit back and casually place all of the blame on the US and its weapons. Saddam was not a nice man, and neither are the supporters he left behind. I hate war as much as the next guy, but do you honestly think that if we disarm ourselves, the rest of the world will follow suit? If so, I suggest you get a reality check in the form of a history education.
- Pxtl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Actually, that's a good point. Grenade-like baton launchers are much better for riot control than rubber bulets. Baton launchers spread the impact over a wider area, and so can deliver more force - more likely to knock someone off their feet, less likely to injure or kill them.
This weapon could likely be repurposed as a baton launcher and be a much more humane and useful riot control weapon than many current approaches.
On the other hand, the increased ability to shoot high-explosive weapons around with less regard to ammo - particularly since the person armed with this device will be using it in place of a rifle (instead of as an underslung weapon, where they have access to more accurate weaponry) is probably not a good thing for civilians. - 0Troy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3That's exactly right. The ability to load the launcher with flares, gas, smoke, rubber bullets, and door breaching ordinance all at the same time makes this weapon much more than just a weapon.
- CalebBlusummers, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Except that the 'old' one (M-203) was an M-16 attachment and not stand alone.
I was in Boot when they were talking about replacing the M-203. One of the attachments they were talking of replacing it with was a Shotgun attachment, I instantly thought of KillZone for PS2 when I heard that. - sWeEtReVeNgE, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That looks like the exact thing in goldeneye, or in enter the matrix, OR in Ghost Recon: Jungle Storm
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Don't be a moron, even Yoda had a Lightsaber.
That said, this type of grenade launcher was originally developed in 1983 by South Africa!
http://world.guns.ru/grenade/gl14-e.htm - thexder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That soldier's 8-bit camo is in need of some anti-aliasing.
- almightyis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A few thoughts -
1. The US has had an automatic grenade launcher for a while now, it's called the Mark 19 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MK19_grenade_launcher and it's a blast to fire, but a bitch to tear apart and clean) , this just looks like a semi-auto 6 round replacement for the M203, which replaced the M79 from the Vietnam era. I've used the M203 for about 6 years now, and this new weapon looks like a great improvement. More comfortable to fire, easier to reload, and there's no confusion about firing with the M4 or the M203 (although if you hold the M4 with your right hand and the M203 with the left, it's a lot easier to switch back and forth)
2. Grenade launchers are not just indiscriminate killing tools and neither are soldiers, we receive plenty of training on the escalation of violence and the rules of engagement, we don't reach for the rocket launcher or BFG at the first sign of trouble. Men and women that have made bad judgment calls in the heat of the moment and killed innocent civilians are torn up by that fact and live with that guilt, whether they were at fault or not.
3. Getting off the soapbox, WTF is up with that scope/optical sight? It looks like if you ***** it up to maximum range the scope is pointing right into the god***n barrel. WTF kind of engineering decision was that? Unless it's just a bad angle and the scope is offset from the barrel, that makes no sense. - adderx99, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1kinda reminds me of an airsoft gun i saw...
http://www.depot53.com/products/4/787?cat=1
here's a movie:
http://www.caw.co.jp/caw/revlauncher/movie.html - jpesicka2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1halo 3 should have this. it would be awesome in a video game.
- OregonTrail, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I watched the video, pretty funny actually
-
Show 51 - 100 of 125 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
