[Ewok]

NRA offers secure gun safe using patent pending biometric technology and protocals to recognize a person's fingerprint to open. (https://secure.sequiam.com/NRA/biovault/quantity.asp)

BioVault provides safe storage and easily controlled access for handguns, weapons, ammunition, jewelry and other valuable items including; pharmaceuticals, coins, stocks, bonds, critical data and personal documents.

Designed to be nearly impenetrable to attack and unauthorized access, BioVault utilizes the verification of an authorized persons’ fingerprint to control and permit access.

BioVault is easily programmable and can store up to 15 authorized fingerprints in its memory. You decide who gains access to the BioVault.

BioVault has no override keys and no special security codes, - just the biometric characteristics of your individual fingerprints.

[Mike Irwin]

Oiy Christ, that one could backfire...

[Ewok]

You betcha. How'd you like a law that says you have to buy one of these $600 safes every time you buy a handgun?

[gun-fucious]

better not be wearing yer fuzzy bunny slippers when trying to open the safe

BioVault has no override keys

[FPrice]

" NRA pushes "smart" gun safe"

Being a little loose with the truth, aren't we? Following your link you come to a website that is NOT the NRA, but a company selling a product and offering a discount to NRA members.

Nothing on this site (that I saw) could lead a reasonable man to believe that the NRA is pushing, or in any way endorsing this product.

do you have anything else?

[Ewok]

You betcha, skippy. http://mynra.com/

[F4GIB]

NRA's balance sheet gets worse every year no matter how many members it has. Big salaries and perks at the top.

[4v50 Gary]

Reduce the Bd of Directors and the # of meetings. Either that or have them meet via Internet Chat room or TeleConference. Much cheaper for we the members.

[FPrice]

"You betcha, skippy"

Still doesn't show any evidence that the NRA is "pushing" this. I still consider your accusation to be "loose".

[Ewok]

NRA offers secure gun safe using patent pending biometric technology and protocals to recognize a person's fingerprint to open.
That's a quote from mynra.com

[Ewok]

Sequiam Corporation's BioVault Goes Live and Online with the National Rifle Association - NRA- (http://www.hostingtech.com/news/2003/9/11/St_Nitf_Sequiam_Corporations_BioVault__b0904016.3sw.html)

The National Rifle Association internet site attracts over 500,000 unique visitors each month which translates into a large interested audience for the BioVault(tm) said Nick VandenBrekel, Chief Executive Officer of Sequiam Corporation. Wilson Phillips Jr., NRA's CFO has expressed his enthusiasm about the BioVault(tm) technology and the solution it offers for safe gun storage with both secure and rapid access to a personal firearm. Sequiam is pleased that as of today it is able to offer the BioVault(tm) for sale on the NRA site.

The BioVault(tm) will also be featured among the products offered in connection with the NRASafe(tm) program that the NRA announced at its annual meeting of members in April.

[Ewok]

Vital Enhancement in Firearm Safety: NRA To Offer Secure Gun Safe Using Biometric Technology (http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/webnews/wed/bf/Bva-nra_sequiam.RssF_DaC.html) FAIRFAX, Va.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 12, 2003--The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) and Sequiam Corporation. Sequiam Biometrics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Sequiam Corporation (OTCBB:SQUM), announced the intention of the NRA and Sequiam to enter into a licensing agreement through which the BioVault(TM), a secure gun safe that utilizes patent pending technology and protocols to recognize a person's fingerprint to unlock, will be offered for sale to NRA members.

[Mike Irwin]

Frosty,

Absolutely NO loose about it.

This could turn out to be an ENORMOUS mistake for NRA and gunowners.

Why?

Do you want to hear a liberal gun-grabber pick up the refrain, "Well, obviously NRA thinks personal identification technology is advanced enough for its members to use in accessing their safes, so why not in accessing their guns?"

[Mike Irwin]

"NRA's balance sheet gets worse every year no matter how many members it has. Big salaries and perks at the top."

Those big salaries at the top are actually some of the lowest for any membership organization, and certainly among the lowest, if not the lowest, for an organization with NRA's clout.

[FPrice]

" Those big salaries at the top are actually some of the lowest for any membership organization, and certainly among the lowest, if not the lowest, for an organization with NRA's clout."

Gee Mike, looks like we both have something in this thread to disagree with.

I guess I suffer from the "reasonable man" syndrome. I try not to react to every issue as an NRA-plot to deprive us of our rights. I suppose the NRA could choose to attack this project from the start and give the anti's immediate cause to attack us (as if they need any excuse to attack).

I have the feeling that this technology is going to be be pursued and developed whether the NRA supports Sequiam Biometrics or not. IIRC there are developments in other similar areas for security purposes. Perhaps by being in on the bottom floor the NRA can better understand it and influence it's future course.

[Ewok]

I guess I suffer from the "reasonable man" syndrome.Must be a very mild case. :D

[Waitone]

Really bad mojo on a biometric safe.

I don't like the idea for the same reasons I don't like biometric handguns.

Looks like the NRA has found another bone to toss to the anti-2's just so they won't say bad things.

I am sick unto death of organizations and politicals parties being afraid of bad words out of the opposition. Whatever happened to a principaled stand?

Spinelessness: pure and simple.

[Mike Irwin]

"I try not to react to every issue as an NRA-plot to deprive us of our rights."

Gee, Frosty, if you're seeing that in this thread, then I'd have to question your "reasonable man" statement.

My concern is that at this moment, a biometric device is simply not as of yet of sufficient reliability to condone its acceptance which, by allowing this safe to be advertised on its website, NRA is doing.

In essence, this becomes an issue of the rope we use is the rope we have is the rope our enemies try to hang us with.

Biometrics are the wave of the future; I've little doubt about that.

But sometimes the future gets here before it should, with negative results. Let's not hurry it along to our detriment.

A good example of current biometric technology?

My brother's office computer has a very high-end voice recognition security device installed on it.

Despite assurances to the contrary, I can operate it easily and gain access to his computer.

I shocked him, and his boss, and their IT people, by doing so.

And we don't share the same father.

[O.F.Fascist]

Better hope the batteries dont die.

[XenaduKhan]

biometrics for a gun ain't there yet, and no one is saying that it is (except some nutcases in NJ)


But a biometric safe isn't that big of a deal. I work with computer tech and I would feel reasonably comfortable with it. People had the same arguments about keypads, but how many people trust bank vaults or keypads at work/home? Plenty. System should be about as fast as opening a drawer if they have done it right (don't know if they have - never used their product).



The safe should be plugged into the wall, with a built-in charger/battery, along with a warning light for battery replacement time. Then it feeds off wall power but uses the battery if power fails, and will warn you when the battery must be replaced (say within the next 30 days) before the battery won't be good anymore.

Your bank records, credit card transactions, and such are already entrusted to these kinds of systems. The datacenter has batteries and automatic switchover systems. Works just fine, and warns ya well before the battery wears out. In fact lives are entrusted to these systems (think hospitals.) What do you think keeps that ventilator going while the generator is trying to start up?


Don't be a bunch of old farts :p

[powerstrk]

I would hate to have a perp cut my thumb off for a key to open it after I refused:D :what:

[Mike Irwin]

XenaduKhan,

You're missing the point of the argument.

In the soundbite wars, it's image that matters, not substance.

And this is a very, very poor image -- NRA valianty fighting biometric technology WHILE promoting the same technology to its members...

Doesn't matter that the two USES (substance) are significantly different. That has no bearing on the image at all.

You don't think the disconnect between image and substance is all that great when the gungrabbers and their media whores get behind it?

Two words...

Assault weapon.

[FPrice]

"Gee, Frosty, if you're seeing that in this thread, then I'd have to question your "reasonable man" statement."

Just for you Mike I will share one of my concerns with biometrics.

It comes from a TV show, an old Brit Sci Fi series, "Blakes 7". The good guys are being held prisoner on a prison (space)ship. The door is locked with a sensor system that recognizes the guards palm print.

The good guys stage a revolt, capture the guard and are trying to escape. The guard refuses to open the door. The big guy, Oleg Gan, tells him (as best I can remember), "We don't need you to open the door, all we need is your hand."

The guy capitulates.

Any security system can be defeated. It all depends upon the resources you can bring to bear on it.

[Andrew Rothman]

I would hate to have a perp cut my thumb off for a key to open it after I refused

Don't bother with the smilies -- that's a real concern.

Most high-security applications include two pieces - something-you-have and something-you-know.

For example, to connect to my work computer network from home, I need an electronic token (a little key fob with a changing LCD number on it), plus my password.

Even if someone steals the token, they can't get in without the password. And even if someone discovers the password, they still need the token.

At work I use a subscription financial service. It requires user ID, password, and a fingerprint. And that's all to protect the $1500 subscription price.

No backup key, huh? Well, electronic locks use servomotors to unlatch the safe. You know -- moving parts? Ever heard of moving parts failing? How do you get you gun out now? Blowtorch?

Here's what I've learned from 15 years in the technology industry. ALWAYS have a backup.

So I'm not ready to hop on board.

[Mike Irwin]

I'm well aware that any security system can be defeated, Frosty.

That still doesn't address the image problem of NRA promoting a safe using a technology that it's decrying.

[Iain]

One of the first things they worked out when developing fingerprint scanners and retinal scanners was to get around the problem of the said body part being dead and/or detached as far as I have heard.

[mtnbkr]

I've done some work with biometric identification for network/system security apps. It works well enough for a non-critical (unlike your life!) application, but it fails just enough for me to NOT put it on a gunsafe or gunlock.

As for the "cutting your thumb off" argument, decent scanners check for pulse and/or body heat.

Chris

[goalie]

Well, I guess I will weigh in. I work at a hospital that recently went to biometric fingerprint scanners on the Pyxis machines where all of the medications are stored in an effort to eliminate stolen passwords turning into stolen narcotics. It works decent enough for a non-critical ID method, but some machines have had a failure rate of almost 40 percent on the first try, and none of the machines are over 86% reliable on the first try according to our pharmacy who does the tracking of who logs in, and we do have the "good" technology, not the cheaper, less reliable ID scanners that you would be putting on a safe. If I am unable to log into the Pyxis machines that cost over a million dollars each on the first try with fingerprint ID technology, then there is no way I am going to buy a 500 dollar safe for my handgun and trust it to work quickly and reliably when someone is breaking through my door. No way, no how. I will stick to my little puch-button mechanical handgun box.

[JohnBT]

"...it's image that matters, not substance."

Now there's a soundbite for you.

But back to the safe. I don't see the NRA 'pushing' anything. Taking a kickback from sales maybe, but not pushing. And I see a great deal a difference between a gizmo safe sitting in a closet(or wherever) and a gizmo gun subjected to recoil and the elements.

Maybe we should stop advocating the use of safety glasses and hearing protection - it draws attention to fact that guns are dangerous.

John

[Ewok]

I don't see the NRA 'pushing' anything.OK, they don't push it. They just offer, endorse, promote, and publicize it. :rolleyes:

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I actually have some professional experience with biometric readers - including palm prints, retinal scan, and fingerprint readers. I will qualify this by saying that my experience is limited to a few items of each type as most of the market cannot afford the high-quality devices and doesn't trust the lower-end offerings (usually with good reason)

I've only used two types of fingerprint readers costing less than $2,000 wholesale. These two readers were the only products deemed worthy of even investigating further by our engineering team.

Here are some issues I've seen recently with those two products:

1) Breathing on reader activates scanner (temperature) and causes it to read latent fingerprint of last person granted access. Reader grants access to whoever breathed on it.

2) Minor static electricity build up on person discharges into sensitive chip of fingerprint reader. Reader is now broken and access for everyone is disabled.

3) No reader that provided acceptable performance in denying unauthorized access lasted more than a week in routine use.

4) To date, we have had to return every single fingerprint reader (at any price) we have purchased and several replacement readers as well. We no longer use such product unless the customer demands it.

Biometrics does have a place in controlling access to certain areas; but reliable biometric technology is not cheap. There are a lot more hurdles to its use than many people anticipate (including the people manufacturing it).

I am particularly skeptical of this offering because it has been my experience that even offering a reliable reader at that retail price would be a considerable challenge. Further the warnings in their manual (Do not store a loaded gun in Bio-Vault?) concerning temperature sensitivity and power issues (The limited warranty does not cover probles that result from static electric discharge) make me think it suffers from many common issues with biometric readers I am familiar with.

Finally, there is the "common sense" test - why are you spending $600 on whiz-bang technology to secure a 12ga steel box that any idiot with $50 worth of tools can open in 30 seconds?

[revlar]

My $70 combination/key (uses both a number combination dial and a security key to open) floor safe works just fine thank you very much. When I'm home (and not already carrying) I keep the combination unlocked and the key on me at all times. Low cost, high security, immediate access and no batteries.
As for NRA endorsements - I take ANYbody's endorsement of anyTHING with a grain of salt.

[Mike Irwin]

""...it's image that matters, not substance."

Now there's a soundbite for you."

Especially when, as you have done, John, break the contextual reference. That's a trick that the anti-gunners like to use, and have used it very effectively.


"Maybe we should stop advocating the use of safety glasses and hearing protection - it draws attention to fact that guns are dangerous."

Hum...

Nice non-sequitor.

Given that NRA is the ONLY organization that teaches gun safety on a national level, and has done so for more than 50 years, and even states that in untrained hands a gun can be dangerous (as can any other device), the emphasis on safety aids is not only reasonable, it's logical, and is well within keeping with a consistent message that NRA has delivered for decades.

Promoting a biometric safe on its website WHILE questioning the efficacy of such devices when attached to firearms?

Where's the consistency in THAT, John?