*BEEP*
*BOOP*
*KABANG*
That's all it takes for a police robot to break into your house with the intent to explode and kill you.
Why don't you own an EMP?
>>80609842
>>80609842
BRB going to EMP store
>>80609842
What sort of cuck doesn't own an EMP?
In an unrelated note: do EMPs do permanent damage, or will my computer be okay after some amount of time should an EMP go off and disable it?
Really makes you think...
>>80609842
Seems to only be useful in a situation where you couldn't shoot the target.
I don't know why we care about the rights of people who have armored up and dug themselves into a defensive position after killing officers.
I doubt they will be deploying these at traffic stops or in any other situation where the suspect could still be innocent.
They kinda have to be blatantly guilty if this thing is even going to be useful.
Stairs.
wtf i hate robots now
>>80609842
It's clearly stated in the Second Amendment that we have the right to bear arms. There's no doubt whatsoever that this robot has arms (unlike most military-style assault rifles or even nuclear weapons), so undoubtedly I have the right be bear bomb-wielding robots with arms. The Second Amendment couldn't be more clear on this.
Where can I buy one online, anons?
>>80610113
Anything that gets fried with an EMP basically cannot conduct electricity ever again
>>80610113
Depends on the scale and the hardware.
A big one can physically distort circuitry and components so while your flashlight (simple circuit) might survive your iPhone won't.
>>80610820
>>80610933
>mfw my redundant backups of Game of Normies and multiple Chinese cartoons isn't enough to save them in an apocalyptic scenario
WHY EVEN BOTHER
>2016 A.D.
>Not building a HERF gun from a microwave
Enjoy dying in the robot uprising you stupid normies.
>>80610820
Nonsense. The biggest problem is wiping storage media. Followed by circuit/component distortion. Old simple electronics are better at surviving them than complex electronics like computers and smart phones.
>>80609842
>current year
>doesn't own a dozen or more explosively-pumped flux compression generators
>does carry them in grenade pouches on his chest rig
It's like you WANT to be cucked by robots.
>>80610113
Think of EMP as a wide-range static shock.
It would basically fry integrated circuits due to over-voltage.
Older less dense technology can better survive an EMP event.
Also, grounded shielding helps a lot.
A good example are desktop computers. Most desktops are made of metal, and the cases are grounded, so the sensitive components are shielded by the outer case. Narrower energies can actually fit through the fan holes and other spots, though, so your average computer is not "hardened", but it is resistant.
Older CPUs like the 8080 and 8086 have a very large circuit design and high voltage tolerances, and this affords them a degree of protection against EMP and static.
>>80610615
loli is better
>>80609894
Why buy an EMP when you have stairs?
>>80609842
R2Dindu
http://www.techworm.net/2016/07/build-mini-emp-generator-disrupt-electronic-gadgets.html
>>80610778
Good question, is it illegal to own a combat robot?
Police Lives Matter
Bomb for Peace
>>80610113
people in here act like they know what an EMP does,
I spent a long time studying all of the literature and conducting tests regarding EMP, its practically worthless. Even nuking the atmosphere probably won't produce a hollywood style result.
>>80609842
Strangely enough I'm not worried about this because I don't randomly shoot cops.
>>80611935
It's not because the Second Amendment explicitly confirms that it's legal in clear language. We just need the Supreme Court to confirm that "right to bear arms" really means "the right to bear weapons that feature arms, i.e. robots." One of these will be guarding every home soon, like old fido used to in the past.
>>80611935
>is it illegal to own a combat robot?
Probably not because laws haven't caught up yet.
They only just started limiting people from having drones.
>*beep boop*
>'bomb the niggers race war now'
what did he mean by this?
>>80612448
Does it also give you the right to a bear's arms?
>>80611432
>>80611179
Honest question: what does age and density of a circuit have to do with possible damage? To my understanding the danger of an EMP lies in a too high induced voltage that leads to electrical breakdown. If that's the case, then every circuit, no matter the components, can be damaged. Whether you have a 20 year old or a 1 year old computer, both will have capacitors with dielectrica that can be fried at high field strengths.
>>80612692
Good question. It hinges on whether or not "to bear arms" means the same as "to bears' arms" (where in the first case the possessive would be implicit). I'm leaning toward this being a viable interpretation of the Second Amendment too. It could potentially even cover a bear being in control of a weapon that features arms, such as a robot bearing a bomb. I think the astonishing prescience of the founding fathers is that they seem to have anticipated, nay even to have known in advance about, these coming transformations in self-defense technologies. Thank goodness for the American Constitution is all I can say. Praise be to the Lord!
>>80609955
You have EMP stores in America?
All I have to defend myself with is a bag of salad.
>>80609842
I'm invulnerable to any kind of explosive device with less than 7,8 petajoules of energy.
>>80611558
DALAS
SALAD
Nigga, just splash water at it.
This will be a legitimate weapon in the near future.
>>80609842
>tfw yurocucks can't go to Walmart and by a personal EMP
>>80613128
Or maybe control bears through a neurological interface technology, like the Enclave does with Deathclaws in the Fallout series. Right to bear arms, as in the right to a bear's capabilities.
We could train bears using this technology and equip them with a powered bear armor with modular weaponry and power tools.
>>80614110
The Second Amendment seems to cover this quite clearly too. Might provide an important legal avenue when bears make their next evolutionary leap and start organizing themselves into militias, which we will be forced to confront with our own militias that will bear arms, perhaps involving weapons with arms (robots), or the arms of bears, or the remote controlling of arms already on bears, or perhaps (though more remotely) the use of various high-shot capacity lethal weapons that might, at a stretch, be included in the general category of "arms."
Thanks for the wise thoughts, anon.
>>80614058
This ain't an invasion of aliens from Signs, those robots are fully encased.
>Bomb has been planted
>Counter Terrorist Win
>>80609842
we racewar with bombs now?
>>80611147
what if they shield with copper ?
>>80614919
So the right to bear arms is interpreted as the right to bear weapons, but also the right to a bear's capabilities, and also the right to weapons with arms.
I get it now. The true embodiment of this amendment would be to build a giant heavily armored robot with lasers, autocannons, missiles, arms, and bear claws.
>>80612448
Is it illegal to arm bears?
>>80616909
I don't believe that's covered by the Second Amendment, but maybe another amendment could be introduced to cover that scenario. I don't see why bears can't have their own rights and if humans helped them out a bit, then they might very well become more successful hunters. I really can't think of any objection to arming bears, but it seems different from the general question of bearing arms / weapons with arms / bear arms / arms with bear features / robots with bombs.
