Smart Guns are back in the news

again, I MAY buy one after every single LEO and Fed switches over to them exclusivly. In ADDITON to my normal firearms anyway..

As I was reading I noticed they referenced retro-fitting some firearms. I am totally not interested in that at all.
 
the free market is scary for smart guns, because they know so few will actually buy them, the only way it can survive is government mandated regulations

I have nothing against the sale of them, what someone wants to buy is their own choice
 
the free market is scary for smart guns, because they know so few will actually buy them, the only way it can survive is government mandated regulations

I have nothing against the sale of them, what someone wants to buy is their own choice

I'm with you. Let the free market decide.

You're also right that "smart" guns won't survive a free market without .gov intervention.

Sent from the depths of Hell with TapaTalk V2
 
I'm with you. Let the free market decide.

You're also right that "smart" guns won't survive a free market without .gov intervention.

Sent from the depths of Hell with TapaTalk V2

I wonder if they spontaneously combust just like the Chevy volt?
 
Unfortunately the moronic politicians cant resist ****ing with free-market capitalism. They know what is best for everyone after all....

I'm with you. Let the free market decide.

You're also right that "smart" guns won't survive a free market without .gov intervention.

Sent from the depths of Hell with TapaTalk V2



Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk Pro - typos are from the GD auto correct unless they are funny substitutions those I'll take credit for.
 
How hard would it be to hack and make it work with someone else's fingerprints?

Do they really believe that criminals are that stupid?

How about just disabling the mechanism that locks it? Probably a small pin that can be removed and now you have a gun that works like the old "stupid" guns.

I guarantee you that if they give this gun to someone, that person can find a way to defeat the security measures within a day or two.

These people are retarded.
 
"Imagine a gun that a person could leave on his or her kitchen counter, without having to worry that someone else would fire it."

Another article by someone who knows nothing about guns or gun safety.
 
I spend enough time troubleshooting systems during the day. The last thing I need is to have my last thought, or the last thought of a family member be, "crap, what is the number for smart gun tech support?"

I'll keep my dumb guns, and hopefully, if it ever comes to that, my life.
 
Every article I have seen on Smart Guns there is always a quote from a Chief of Police or high level law enforcement official stating these are a good idea. I have never seen a quote from those same officials stating they are moving their organizations to this technology. Here is a piece of marketing info, civilian populations will buy what the police carry. If it is tried and tested in law enforcement it would see a greater market and some folks will buy them. Now I wonder how the police unions will feel about Smart Guns if they had them jammed down their throats.

Side note: A friend of mine wants one, he figures it will be a collectors item.
 
Anything that operates on an RF signal can be disabled. Period.
Think about it , why in the name of F*ck all would an anti who wants all guns removed give a rats ass about making it safer for people who own them?
They don't.
Would be pretty nice for whomever wanting to, to be able to flip a switch and kill every gun in a given area though wouldn't it?
 
As long as they are sold alongside regular firearms, that's one thing. But something tells me once this becomes common and viable, we'll see more and more laws or subsidies to make smart guns the de facto only gun. Fingerprints are too unreliable for a life and death situation decided in seconds.

http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/m...-database/fingerprint-scanners-unbeatable.htm
And http://www.ijser.org/researchpaper\...ation-Based-on-a-Single-Fingerprint-Image.pdf read page 3 - even registered fingerprints can get false non-matches up to half the time.

And not only that, but if my house was getting broken into, or if I was getting mugged, there's a good chance of a scuffle. In that scuffle, there's a great chance my fingers will get injured and make scanning even less accurate. If I get a cut on my thumb, will I be unable to use my gun until it heals?
 
As long as they are sold alongside regular firearms, that's one thing. But something tells me once this becomes common and viable, we'll see more and more laws or subsidies to make smart guns the de facto only gun. Fingerprints are too unreliable for a life and death situation decided in seconds.

The problem with this is that the antis have been trying to mandate this technology since before it existed, and are trying to do it now, even though it isn't widely available. There is no reason to believe that this is anything except a device to reduce lawful gun ownership, just like every other piece of gun control legislation. Hence the term 'gun control' and not 'criminal control'.
 
I'm sure they're EMP proof too.

What happens if you're wearing gloves and the gun can't take your print?

What happens if you lost the "connector" watch and it can't fire when you NEED it?

What happens if the watch or RFID or gun gets wet from blood or rain or sweat?

If they're so wonderful, is the US Army going to run trials to replace the M9?

Why do they need government mandates and subsidies for funding if the market will support it?

What happens if I run out of batteries and need it to work?

The bottom line that these jerks don't understand is that when you need a gun to work, you really need it to work. Your life literally depends on the watch/RFID/print from being read by the gun. If it doesn't, it's the last computer glitch you'll ever experience.
 
Back
Top Bottom