5.56LLAx45 Automatic Less-Lethal Conversion Kit for AR-15 / M4

Less Lethal Africa has developed a conversion kit to allow AR-15 rifles to cycle their 5.56LLAx45 less lethal round. The 5.56LLAx45 rounds can be fired one round at a time or fully automatic. This video demonstrates it in action …

In recent years rubber bullets have had a bad reputation in recent years leading to a numerous new less-lethal weapons, everything from fancy paintball guns to ray guns. I believe the reputation is underserved. When modern rubber bullets are correctly used the mortality rate is very low.

The 7.62LLAx39 bullet in ballistic gel.

The company makes less lethal rounds in a number of modern calibers up to and including .50 BMG rounds for anti-piracy operations.

[ Many thanks to Lionel for the tip. ]

Steve Johnson

Founder and Dictator-In-Chief of TFB. A passionate gun owner, a shooting enthusiast and totally tacti-uncool. Favorite first date location: any gun range. Steve can be contacted here.


  • Peter BE

    Firing a regular looking military rifle in a crowd would look rather bad on the 6 o clock news imho.

    • bbmg

      Not to mention the ease with which lethal ammunition could be loaded, unintentionally or not.

      • gunslinger


      • MattInTheCouv

        not to mention that if someone is shooting at people with a ‘real’ gun with ‘fake’ bullets, and somebody pulls out a real gun in defense of the people he thinks are being killed (they are screaming, and probably bleeding after all)…. the situation would become very very complicated very very fast.

      • John Doe

        On the flip side, if there is a protester that poses a serious danger to others, and it warrants lethal ammunition, it would be easier to switch magazines from non-lethal to lethal than it would be to switch weapons.

      • JMD

        …and the bolt, etc., It’s a conversion system, not just special ammunition. I don’t think it’d be feasible to switch quickly enough to deal with a threat that requires lethal ammunition.

        I think that if some organization insists on using something like this, they’d be best off setting a few of these up as dedicated riot tools, and paint them orange or something to make the difference obvious, and leave their “regular” firearms alone.

  • DrewN

    Why the hell would you want less than lethal rounds to combat piracy? I’m sorry, but the penalty for piracy since time freaking immemorial is death on the spot. Why the hell are we changing it up now? Seriously, this has baffled me ever since this crap started up again. Hang em from the freaking yardarm, put up those iron cages on pylons and leave them to die and go to town. If they keep it up, burn some damn villages. You are telling me it’s ok to rain Hellfire missiles down on every mud hut in Northern Pakistan, but you can’t kill a few (or even a lot) @#$%%# pirates? Why the kid gloves? No one gave a shit about these skinnies before this crap started, why now?

    • Alex-mac

      Modern piracy is just stealing, not raping, enslaving and murdering, calm down. When pirates kidnap they do get killed, so that seems fair.

      • David/Sharpie

        Tell that to all the people they’ve killed……although I haven’t heard of any rapes.

      • MattInTheCouv

        Are you kidding?


        plenty of murders and kidnappings. if you haven’t heard of any rapes, it’s probably because it’s hard to tell if a body was raped after it’s been floating at see for a while.

    • Roy Rapoport

      It’s not so much a moral or ethical question, but a legal one, which focuses on the people wielding the firearms.

      There’s not a whole lot of problems with the idea that some nation’s military (probably navy) would be going around shooting at pirates. The issue is that pirates tend to, in general, avoid actual navy ships and attack defenseless commercial vessels.

      While having an M2 on your container ship may be an effective pirate deterrent, it’ll play havoc with your easy accessibility to cargo ports all over the world, which tend to frown on that sort of thing. So one of the challenges in figuring out how to make it so civilian vessels can deter piracy is how to do it in a way that doesn’t result in a whole lot of paperwork and problems when they go in and out of ports.

      • bbmg

        One discussion I remember having is to use some sort of pneumatic device. A ship of the sort commonly attacked by pirates is usually liberally provided with compressed air points, one could cobble together a launcher that would look completely anonymous when disassembled, just essentially a tube and a fast valve, common items on board. Ammunition could be large ball bearings, again something you would expect to find on a ship.

        Power would be nothing to scoff at, here’s a nice example of what can be done:

      • MattInTheCouv

        At least ‘some’ companies have begun to work with private security contractors, and they have ‘operators’ ride on their container ships only while underway and traveling in the risky areas. once they are out of danger, the ‘operators’ disembark, and spend a few days on another ship while it goes through the same dangerous area. so there are never guns aboard when they are actually in port. this also gets around the difficulty in training ship crews to be able to effectively repel pirate assaults. plus, it’s not that expensive since the security guys are only on the ship for a short time. this seems like the best solution to me. also, i’d imagine that when your insurance company finds out your container ship with half a billion dollars in cargo will have well trained, armed men aboard to assure the cargo and ship reaches its destination… they might give you a discount.

    • Brandon

      I agree. I remember reading some post about some anti-piracy corp using less-lethal defenses against piracy. They said when they used these countermeasures, the approaching ships would break off, and they’d hear about an attack on another ship nearby.

      So I’m reading this thinking ‘Maybe you guys should have killed them’

  • Michael

    Not to be rude, but there are quite a few grammatical errors in this post. I don’t think it was even edited before posting.

  • Other Steve

    If it warrants pointing a gun at it, it warrants real bullets.

    • Esh325

      So you think protesters should be gunned down even if they might kill bystanders?

  • Lance

    Ok, But as for most practical ops who wants less lethal bullets when facing gangs and terrorists, I prefer MORE Lethal rounds LOL


  • derfel cadarn

    The entire concept of less than lethal rounds continues to baffle me. When it comes time to shoot an attacker your intent should be to kill. It is assumed that your fire is in response to their lethal actions,if their actions are noy construed as lethal then you should NOT be shooting. Less than lethal rounds lead to the deaths of those using them when the situation starts going south as the death of Agent Terry attests.

  • Mike Knox

    Finally, soething worth using on trespassers and hippies..

  • Jaymes

    Nice, the Ohio State Highway Patrol SRT uses that “Fancy paintball gun” you listed. I handled one, and must say that I wouldn’t want to be shot at by one of those!

    • Bryan S.

      Either a Pepperball branded Tippman, or an FN303

  • Renato

    “When modern rubber bullets are correctly used the mortality rate is very low”. I do agree. But, IMHO, less-lethal (LL) weps/ammo should be made completely different from the lethal stuff to avoid Murphy messing around. A good combination, yet not yet the perfect one, is to use less-lethal stuff attached to lethal stuff. So you shoot LL 1st and if things get messy, simply push another trigger. But that is still not the ideal.

    The quasi-ideal solution is to have every LE agent carrying a LL wep + lethal wep, both separated. It is heavier, bulkier, costlier, etc. etc. but is the closest you get to perfection. Needless to say, the most important part of any wep sys, lethal or LL, is training and CONOPS. I mean, if the LE guys are not trained well enough (even if properly trained sh*t happens), they will probably use both LL and lethal stuff in a sub-optimal manner.

    There are occasions where even LL is unnecessary. I recall a recent incident in Australia, when a fellow Brazilian tourist, with money, proper docs and fluent English speaker, was killed by LE guys because he was shot THREE TIMES with Taser guns. Yeah, you read it correctly. THREE policemen shot at an unarmed person with Tasers, when everyone knows (at a minumum, the guys who use it should know) ONCE is enough. I don’t know you, but even if I were doing something wrong, I wouldn’t try to escape from 3 policemen. And it happened in a developed country, where I assume police is well trained. Sh*t happens. Murphy says so. You can reduce it with training, but you cannot eliminate it completely.

  • TxDog

    Less lethal rounds: for when you absolutely, positively have to complicate an already stressful and chaotic situation.

  • anon

    While less-lethal ammo is useful for riot control situations, it’s also more likely to result in fatalities if it’s improperly used. eg, shooting at the upper torso or head/neck instead of the limbs.

  • TheIrateBlackGuy

    Less lethal Africa??? That’s an oxymoron. Do us all a favor and make it lethal Africa.

  • MattInTheCouv

    A buddy of mine was military police at a detention facility in Iraq. He said most guards there were equipped with less lethal projectiles for M203’s, and real bullets for the M4’s they were attached to. I think this is a good-ish option.

    A little while back a cop in Portland, OR accidentally shot someone with a real 12ga, he thought it was a less lethal (can’t remember if he confused the weapons or the ammo). So, I agree that mixing real guns with real and less lethal ammunition is not an ideal or very workable solution.

  • MattInTheCouv

    Totally separate thought just occured to me:

    Anybody here ever watch that show “Special Ops Mission”? It is/was on the military channel and Featured an ex Ranger and AF PJ going against teams of ex-cop/ex-military type folks to complete random, sorta-realistic objectives. Anyhow, they were equipped with actual M4 type weapons with similar looking blue bolt [carrier] assemblies, and they fired paint rounds at each other. I am wondering if this is basically the same thing, except instead of paint rounds, solid plastic/silicone rounds. The participants on the show only wore safety glasses (that you could see), so if these less lethal rounds are the same as those ‘simunition’ rounds as far as power levels go, they are very much LESS lethal.

  • I enjoy reading the comments regarding our less lethal ammo. The idea is to give law enforcement/military folks another tool in their kitbag. It is NOT the solution to every problem and yes it is fraught with risk. The moment you point a firearm at another person the potential for utter catastrophy is there; we all know and accept that. However, the rifle and pistol fired less lethal ammo was specifically developed for use in countries that have many old military rifles available but few dollars to go buy new weapons for less lethal use. So, now the AK-47 can become a “less lethal launcher”; better than a “killing machine” n’est ce pas? The video does not show the complete kit – mea culpa – but the magazine is wrapped in bright yellow tape, the forestock and buttstock of the rifle will have bright yellow tape wrapped on it as well. Is this a perfectly safe solution ? No; but it is a far better option than what happened at Marikana a month or so ago. Most N. Americans have no idea what it is like to have a mob of people coming for you that will kill you without question; but it is routine in Africa.

    The .50 BMG rounds were initially made for fun !!! and to attract people at our shows; but the joke was on me. A number of naval forces from SE Asian countries asked for it. The idea is to fire blank .50 then 2 – 3 rubber .50’s at the unarmed people smugglers. Its all very well for you tough guys to espouse your “kill ’em all” philosophy but its a far different thing to see the results of an M2 chewing up a boat load of helpless refugees.

    Thanks for the comments ! DR

    • Alex-mac

      Advantage of this is unlike a rubber bullet at close range, a head shot won’t kill them, probably just knock them out.

      A mounted bayonet could provide sufficient lethal force within grappling range.

      • Mike Knox

        I said the same thing about headless arrows shot at a third of a draw, still killed a doe..

      • rjackparis

        remember knocking someone out isn’t putting them to sleep. like in the movies.

        ( which is why everyone freaks out at boxing matches when someone is ” put to sleep”)

        it’s causing enough brain damage to interrupt normal brain function. leading to problems down the line. you run the possibility of ruining someones life when someone is knocked out.

        • patriot89

          or if you cut off airflow to the brain , i know unrelated just wanted to say.

          • rjackparis

            blunt force trauma to the throat can easily do that.