-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Smart Gun article in Bloomberg
- Thread starter snd1t
- Start date
Whutmeworry
NES Member
ReluctantDecoy
NES Member
There are so many scary issues with smart guns that I can't picture how they would ever work in my lifetime. Imagine having to pull your pistol in a real life or death situation only to find the battery is dead so the trigger is disabled? What if you get hit and need to pass off the pistol to a friend/family member in order to save both your lives? Sure, that's not strictly legal if that person isn't licensed, but if both our lives are on the line, I'll cross that bridge later (and hopefully alive). What if it is biometric and you somehow burn your hand in a fight? What if it's grip based and you have to go off hand due to injury? What if it's voice controlled, but you're hiding?
The only way to really make a "smartgun" is to make a smart owner.
The only way to really make a "smartgun" is to make a smart owner.
Yeah bc the fingerprint sensors are 100% reliable on our smartphones so obviously we should trust our lives to that tech on a gun when our hands are shaking and potentially bloody, dirty, wet, etc.
ReluctantDecoy
NES Member
Agreed. If you think about it--who benefits from a smartgun? That's not going to reduce gun crime. That's not even going to reduce suicides, one of the leading handgun casualty figures. It is just going to make some politician get the warm and fuzzies from soccer moms for "protecting the children". It will have nearly net zero impact on any of the core issues that gun rights advocates are supposedly for. It is just something to get behind because it sounds good to non-gun owners who don't know any better. I just wish those in opposition would care to educate themselves on the topic.
Exactly. What problem is it trying to solve? To allow kids to play with loaded handguns "safely"? What's the use case, as we call it in design?
It's far worse than that... fudds and wonkies and other "only shoots 1 box on sundays" types will suck for it too, without realizing the downstream peril it sets up for gun ownership in the US. I mean look at this shit now, many states are getting ERPO stuff, due in part to the fact that some fudds probably "think it sounds like a good idea" without knowing how dangerous it is, because they're too f***ing stupid to understand such things. By having technology at first, that doesn't appear as an outright infringement, they can get their foot in the door with the soft, mentally defective underbelly of gun owners in the US...
-Mike
It's abundantly clear what the problem is and what it's trying to solve, but it certainly isn't the advertised problem of guns being misused or gun violence, etc. Gun control advocates have difficulty expanding their scope of influence with mainstream american society, and this technology is designed and intended expressly to do just that. They want it to permeate the gun culture such that mainstream gun owners will use it and browbeat others into using it, etc. Then once the virus makes its way further down the food chain there's no going back, because everything is contaminated.
-Mike
StevieP
NES Member
I have no problems with smart guns, per se'. If someone wants to develop and market them, and if people want to buy them because they think it will help prevent access by an unauthorized or prohibited person, more power to them. Build a better mousetrap, capitalism, yada yada.
But NFW should .gov on any level be subsidizing or mandating their use. Not even in the context of "only if the police or .mil to have to use them first."
I wouldn't want good cops getting hurt or worse because their gun didn't or couldn't work, for the same reasons I wouldn't want such a thing.
This is America. Let the market decide.
But NFW should .gov on any level be subsidizing or mandating their use. Not even in the context of "only if the police or .mil to have to use them first."
I wouldn't want good cops getting hurt or worse because their gun didn't or couldn't work, for the same reasons I wouldn't want such a thing.
This is America. Let the market decide.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2015
- Messages
- 1,732
- Likes
- 1,206
You would think that the USSS would get them first, since they are in charge of VIP protection, ranging from the POTUS and his family to visiting heads of state. They always get the latest technology, way before it trickles down to us peons. Let them identify and correct all of the "bugs" in these systems first. Why should us regular folks be the guinea pigs? When my life and the lives of my loved ones are in danger, my firearms need to perform reliably and kill my opponents before they kill me and my family. No room for experimentation. No room for guesswork.
Right now, I can't use the finger print sensor on my phone.
I have random flare ups of dyshidrotic eczema which basically causes thousands of small blisters all over my hands. Here is a picture from early in this flare. My fingers feel like plastic for 2-4 weeks at a time, until the blisters dry up and are replaced by good skin.
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
Yeah I don’t think the words smart, gun, and Bloomberg could be used in any combination that would prompt me to click that link (other than perhaps as descriptive terms in Mikey’s obituary).
:emoji_tiger:
:emoji_tiger:
allen-1
NES Member
New Jersey already has law in place, when the first smart gun hits the market, all guns must have same technology within certain time span.
Links:
View: https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2014/06/24/325178305/a-new-jersey-law-thats-kept-smart-guns-off-shelves-nationwide
Gun control groups accuse New Jersey of ignoring 'smart gun' law
I’m not saying gov should ban them, but any gun owners who don’t take a huge shit on companies (or dealers) hawking this crap are digging their own graves. Nothing good will come from the proliferation of this crap.
Not one attempted smart gun has proven to be 100% reliable. All of them slow down reaction. Finger print readers are the worst. My phone never unlocks on the first try.
You can be darn sure that no police department will ever adopt this. If they won't there is no valid argument for mere mortal citizens to be forced into this crap.
But Bloomers will still spread the fairy tales.
You can be darn sure that no police department will ever adopt this. If they won't there is no valid argument for mere mortal citizens to be forced into this crap.
But Bloomers will still spread the fairy tales.
I have eczema too. On my right hand, though I am left handed. Any scratch or cut on either hand takes weeks to heal. When I travel to China, my right thumb print often doesn't work because the skin is too dry and cracked.
Hetzer
NES Member
Think of all the times you put your thumb on the phone to unlock it and it didn’t work, then picture that happening with the gun in your hand while a maniac is stabbing the person you love most in this world.
Smart phones are a stupid concept.
Smart phones are a stupid concept.
Smart guns are the future and they always will be.
The debate does produce some truly idiotic arguments in favor. Take this Obama quote from the article; "President Barack Obama sounded the call for the Apples and Googles of the world to get into guns. “If we can set it up so you can’t unlock your phone unless you’ve got the right fingerprint,” he asked in 2016, “why can’t we do the same thing for our guns?”
Apparently, the "Chosen One" was not aware that a locked iPhone is still capable of placing an emergency call. What would be the equivalent override for a smart gun?
The bottom line is that any of today's biometric technology that could be incorporated into a firearm would require a low enough sensitivity level so as to eliminate false rejection (not really possible) and would result in a false acceptance rate rendering the biometric useless as a safety mechanism. There is no acceptable crossover error rate that would allow a firearm to satisfy the dual mandate of firing reliably while being biometrically linked to a known operator.
Let's save the James Bond stuff for when James Bond becomes a real person.
Apparently, the "Chosen One" was not aware that a locked iPhone is still capable of placing an emergency call. What would be the equivalent override for a smart gun?
The bottom line is that any of today's biometric technology that could be incorporated into a firearm would require a low enough sensitivity level so as to eliminate false rejection (not really possible) and would result in a false acceptance rate rendering the biometric useless as a safety mechanism. There is no acceptable crossover error rate that would allow a firearm to satisfy the dual mandate of firing reliably while being biometrically linked to a known operator.
Let's save the James Bond stuff for when James Bond becomes a real person.
If this is actually the case then it'll be the death of the 2nd amendment as we know it, and we'll get to watch it unfold.... unless the courts get involved and block any attempt at mandating the use of the tech or block any attempts of trying to penalize people for not using it. A HUGE potential danger is it being called a "Reasonable restriction" and all the downstream BS that entails... although as the supreme court is constituted I don't think that's going to fly but you never know.
IMHO the fundamental tech has been around awhile (at least 10 years) to do this reliably, but it hasn't gone anywhere because most people don't actually want it, for
a whole bunch of reasons. Part of the problem is you can't get around the simple "physics" of involving more parts in the equation. I also think that many people, whether they're willing to admit it or not, at even a modest enthusiast level even, are attracted to gun ownership because its one of the few things left that's not contaminated in that way. It's a relief valve from the complexities and technology of modern life.
ETA: BTW the Jetsons have basically been insinuating that we'd have flying cars someday. That show came out almost 60 years ago. Still no flying car (well, one that isnt some hackneyed piece of crap at least. )
ETA2:
If this was actually something that could potentially even in the slightest way make real money, or cause a paradigm shift, then where's the interest? It doesn't
exist. If it did exist, love or hate the guy, but Elon Musk would probably be selling commercially viable smart guns by now. Even a Tesla is about 1,000,000 times LESS dumber than any smart gun, and I pretty much f***ing hate those things. (but at least they have a real purpose (in terms of driving technology with EVs ahead, even if I think its a stopgap) and lots of people want them.). The same cannot be said for "Smart guns" which are basically just a collective wet dream of a bunch of antis and an even smaller amount of people who want guns but have no business having them. (EG, like some beta cuck type that thinks he could convince his wife to "Let" him bring a gun back into the house if it was a smart gun).
-Mike
Last edited:
Koolmoose
NES Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2011
- Messages
- 1,045
- Likes
- 509
Smart chainsaws, now that’s an idea!
From Chainsaw Safety Training in Springfield, MO
http://extension.missouri.edu/webst...ingfield_Public_Works-BobSchultheis-print.pdf
40,000+ chainsaw injuries per year
Average # of stitches: 110.
Where are the Moms Demand Action on chainsaws?
Oh, the humanity!
Whutmeworry
NES Member
I’m not trying to put words in his mouth, but I think what Knuckledragger might be trying to say is that Smart guns “always will be” the future because they will never actually “get here”. Amiright Knuck??
ReluctantDecoy
NES Member
That's kind of how I read it as well, but only OP knows.
This alone should be reason to crush the hell out of the whole idea and anyone who pushes it.
BREAKING: Smart Gun Maker Filed Patent for Remote Kill Switch - The Truth About Guns
ReluctantDecoy
NES Member
In thinking about the question, "who is this for?", a scary possibility came to mind. Imagine a "smart gun" has online capability? You could then have the possibility of a government agency being able to turn off your guns if they want. Maybe activation is only upon registration.
Similar threads
