Pretty good stopper........
 

My FNP in 357 Sig with a laser sight is/would be a pretty good "stopper"! If that's not good enough, move on to the 12 gauge with OO buck!!

I'm not interested in the 'stopper" because sometimes the person you want to "stop" needs to be destroyed and not merely "stopped".

Yes, this Stopper would not be good for the gene pool at all.

The bad guys ditch the handguns and start using sniper rifles to stay out of range of the Stoppers.

Bad guys are...bad. Why do people not get that.

I dunno, there's just something, almost romantic, about pointing a firearm at someone and watching them almost ____ their pants.

Side question: Can I put the stopper on a low power setting and put it in my pants for a thrill?

"Stoppers" of a sort already exist. Tasers and pepper spray approach what you're talking about. The rub is in some states those too are either illegal or require a state issued license.

EVERYTHING THERE IS TO KNOW
ABOUT GUN CONTROL IN 99 WORDS!
© 2007 January 07 by G. Edward Griffin

There have been millions of pages and billions of words written on gun control, and thousands more are added almost every day. How preposterous to claim that all there is to know about this topic can be said in just ninety-nine words. Yet, after reading a substantial sampling of the books and essays (pro and con) that comprise the body of this literature, I have concluded that it all boils down to just two concepts. One has to do with protection against crime; the other with protection against tyranny. All the rest is historical and emotional support for these two main theses. Here, then, reduced to its essence, is my ninety-nine-word summary:

Gun-control laws do not control crime because crimes are not committed by guns; they are committed by criminals. Criminals will always have guns because they do not obey laws, including anti-gun laws. Those without guns are easy prey for criminals with guns. Gun control encourages crime.

The right to bear arms was included in the Bill of Rights, not to deter crime, but to deter oppressive government. Just governments honor and protect the right to bear arms. Oppressive governments fear and prohibit the right to bear arms.

Guns are dangerous. The only thing more dangerous is not having them.

'' I don't need a gun to kick your sorry @ss.'' Wyatt Earp

Stoppers would be better than a trunk monkey. When the stoopid driver wakes up..."Hey, I was stopped".....maybe I WAS stoopid.

Then again, I would be tempted to use it multiple times on some....

Sums it up pretty damned well.

Right on!!!

Guns do not give freedom or protect against oppression, money does. It makes me laugh to see how people can be enslaved by debt, and yet believe they are somewhat free because they own a firearm.

There is also that thing with these bears that got armed... does the stopper stop bears too?

it would be simple to build in a GPS locator and camera in the stopper
when it is triggered it alerts the local cops and shows pictures in real time

I do not think robbers or rapists want the cops to respond quickly
or with pic's of the crime on record

Nobody goes out into the desert with ammo, tin cans and a stopper. So, no.

Twenty-seven easy payments from now they will own that gun.

You can't put the genie back into the bottle. Guns can not go away once they were invented. Guns are the great equalizer and the emotional ties to guns is just too strong...

Perhaps if the stopper worked like the zat'nik'tel from Stargate SG1 I would almost go for it but shooting steel and paper with one doesn't have the same appeal as a projectile weapon.

The zat stuns on the first hit, kills on the second and the body disapears on the third consecutive hit. Convenient, yes?

Yes indeed.