Toy Maker Now Building Weapons For The Army

from the going-in-reverse dept

Thu, Jul 24th 2008 6:41pm — Mike Masnick

Toy makers have often made weapons into toys, but what about the other way around? Wired points out that a maker of a toy rocket has been hired by the US Army to create a variable speed gun using the same basic technology used in the toy. The weapon would allow soldiers to use the same gun to fire both lethal and non-lethal rounds. Nonlethal weapons are a big business these days, but it still seems a bit out of place for a toymaker to start building one.

Filed Under: army, toys, weapons

31 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2008 @ 7:09pm

YO
Can we test it out on Dorpus?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Niles Gibbs, 24 Jul 2008 @ 7:14pm

Old news?
A marine friend of mine once told me that the Army had commissioned Mattel to build the M-16 back in the day, because they wanted a gun that could easily pop together and apart (with little thought required by the user).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bill G, 24 Jul 2008 @ 7:36pm

M-16 mattel
I was in the Army and no it was not made by mattel, though they did make a toy version of the M-16 just search for "Mattel M-16 Marauder Automatic Toy Rifle" on google or ebay.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
drkkgt, 24 Jul 2008 @ 7:47pm

HEy I saw this movie but don't worry Robin Williams will stop them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chris, 24 Jul 2008 @ 7:51pm

Re: M-16 mattel
He didn't say it was made by Mattel, just the army commissioned Mattel to build a rifle that would be dismantled and put together easily. Toy makers sometimes have simplified yet effective technology or concepts which can be used in military action.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dave, 24 Jul 2008 @ 8:19pm

I just hope they don't mess up the production lines.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2008 @ 8:43pm

Waste of Money?
I keep getting this weapon confused with this. Essentially it is a weapon with a slider that can change the intensity of the shot for the distance you are aiming, with integrated sight to increase accuracy. Less-lethal of course. It has some qualities you'd find in some older Nerf guns so I suppose that's it. Personally I think it'd be cheaper and more effective over all to have seperate weapons for their purpose (so don't mix the less lethal with the lethal). Enough problems have been happening of late with soldiers mixing up Blanks and Live rounds. Hate to be involved in the riot where they used live ammo instead of rubber bullets...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nick, 24 Jul 2008 @ 8:54pm

Mattel has never made the m16, they made a few of the plastic parts for it.

http://www.snopes.com/military/m16.asp
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2008 @ 9:45pm

Presumably the company will subcontract with Hasbro to militarize its G.I. Joe action figure to carry and use the new gun.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Billy, 24 Jul 2008 @ 10:12pm

Re: Old news?
When the army first started getting the M-16 in the Vietnam war, a rumor was started that it was made by Mattel (it was and is made by Colt) because some of the pieces are plastic like the stock and guards. Unlike the M1 Garand, which was metal and wood.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2008 @ 11:08pm

If I recall, toy companies were involved in making spy balloons in the 40s, 50s and 60s. I think. I read it in a Carl Sagan book and I'm comfortably in bed at the moment and I am *not* getting up to find the page number/reference.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hoeppner, 25 Jul 2008 @ 1:47am

That is an accident waiting to happen.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Twinrova, 25 Jul 2008 @ 3:46am

History 101
This is NOT the first time this has happened in our history.

Besides, who cares? Most toy makers need to get out of the business because all they make is overpriced, cheap plastic toys that break the moment a child takes it out of the box.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jul 2008 @ 5:01am

I dunno if I'd like to be a soldier and walk onto the battlefield in Iraq holding a rifle that said "WHAM-O!" on the side.

And no, Mattel never made M-16 rifles. That is an urban legend. Soldiers in Vietnam said "you can tell it's Mattel" in reference to the cheap toylike apearance of the M-16 compared to the previous wood and steel M-14.

http://www.snopes.com/military/m16.asp
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Matt Bennett, 25 Jul 2008 @ 6:38am

Why is it out of place? It's weird an ironic, but out of place? Mike, as free market sorta guy, you should definitely appreciate that if this company has the best technology, it has the best technology, and that should be pursued.

Roombas are only a small part of revenue of the company that makes them. They are, or at least were, primarily a bomb disposal robot maker. Is that "out of place?" The company took the skills it had to make military and police robots to make a harmless consumer robot. This company is using the skill sit has to make toy rockets to make a little rocket gun.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yakko Warner, 25 Jul 2008 @ 8:27am

Re:
You beat me to it.

"Actually, I think it'd be ironic if we were all made of iron..."

But anyway, I agree, it makes perfect sense. If the idea is good and it has a useful application, why should it matter where it came from? Isn't that part of the "innovation" mantra I hear anytime an article about patents pops up on Techdirt? In this case, the government is going to the creator of the idea, crediting them as the "expert", and asking them to do something different with it. Seems like good business sense to me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike (profile), 25 Jul 2008 @ 11:53am

Re:
Why is it out of place? It's weird an ironic, but out of place?

I didn't mean out of place as in "wrong." I meant it as in weird/ironic. :)

I just found it amusing. Nothing more.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Niles Gibbs, 26 Jul 2008 @ 11:53am

Re:
Mattel has never made the m16, they made a few of the plastic parts for it. I should have known it was just an urban legend. I didn't even think of checking Snopes, and I usually harp on people for not doing so. I stand happily corrected.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Felix M. Lopez, 19 Nov 2008 @ 6:16am

Mattel M-16
I had an M-16 issued to me back in 1987 at Fort Hood as an MP for an Intelligence unit. So all these lies about being a joke and talking about toys is just wrong. I had one and fired it lots of times at the range. Why the denial?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bill H, 24 Dec 2008 @ 8:33am

Mattel M16
I was stationed at The Marine reserve Unit in St. Louis from 1982-1983. During this time period I was issued two M16's. The first had the logo "Made by Mattel" stamped into the Lower Receiver. That is NOT a Plastic Part. My Second had the Logo "Made by GM Hydromatic" which is GM's Transmission Division. Both were Vietnam era weapons. Once Active duty, I had several over the years issued that did say Colt on the Lower Receiver.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Steve Wetzel, 21 Jun 2009 @ 5:10pm

Mattel
I served in the Marine Corps from 79-82. I certainly had an M-16A1 with the Mattel stamp on it. I remember pointing it out to another recruit while in boot camp. Snopes is wrong (GASP!)in this case. There are just too many of us who have seen it with our own eyes.

So what if Mattel made a few parts of the rifle - or the entire thing? The weapon worked well and did its job.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Eric Johnson, 26 Jun 2009 @ 6:18am

Re: Mattel
I was also issued several m-16 rifles with the lower marked with the mattel logo. Which as stated above is not a plastiv part. I don't think I ever had one marked with the colt logo. They were all M16a1 rifles. I had mattels in the guard and on active duty at Ft Carson in the 80's, so sorry folks but snopes in incorrect again, I do not understand with I found it "here" so it's really true, this is not the first time I have found snopes to be wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
دردشه, 5 Jul 2009 @ 3:13pm

Besides, who cares? Most toy makers need to get out of the business because all they make is overpriced, cheap plastic toys that break the moment a child takes it out of the box
[ link to this | view in thread ]
شات صوتى, 17 Jul 2009 @ 10:26am

Thanks for
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dondi, 27 Nov 2011 @ 2:33pm

Toy Maker Now Building Weapons For The Army
Serial number 3331925 (an M-16 A1)was made By UNI-Royal Co.
I was issued it in June of 78' at Ft. Dix N.J. And it was quite well worn then!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Tavo, 12 May 2015 @ 10:02pm

I served from 83 to 93 in the army an I do remember seeing the Mattel logo on the lower receiver. Made me laught
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Cben, 14 Aug 2015 @ 9:20pm

Mattel M16
I joined the Army in 1973 at Ft. Jackson S. C. and was issued an M16A1 with the Mattel logo on the left side of the lower receiver above the magazine well and Mattel Firearms Division on the same side above the selector lever. The serial number was something like 00002168 and below the Mattel logo and 5.56mm. I got dropped all the time for being cute and only reciting the last four numbers. I appear in a photo with her from basic but unfortunately she's at Port Arms so you can only see her right side. No myth or mystery for me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
steve walters, 15 Sep 2016 @ 8:38pm

Re: Mattel M16
Fort Dix, NJ boot camp I was issued mattel m-16 stamped on the reciver,al us guy's comparied an found gm stamp as well.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Feb 2018 @ 4:07pm

I wa visiting the UDT seal base in Philippians in early 80s and was told Mattel made some of the portable hand held rovket launchers
[ link to this | view in thread ]
J Robinson, 20 Sep 2019 @ 6:41pm

Re: Re: Mattel M16
I was at Fort Dix in January of 1990 . I know for a fact that my m16a1 that I was issued had Mattel stamped on the lower receiver . It also had like a watermark of an eagle identifying it as property of the federal government.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Robert Kendrick, 12 Jun 2020 @ 8:00pm

Mattel m16A1
When I was stationed at Ft. Dix I. 1985, I was issued a M16 with Mattel Toy Division stamped on the lower receiver and then at Ft Sill I had one stamped GM Hydromatic Division.... so the rumors aren’t just rumors. They are facts.
[ link to this | view in thread ]