[dukeofurl]

Doing some brain picking here...

Would any of you consider purchasing safes with fingerprint based locking mechanisms?

I only ask because I was given one of them about a month ago and I wanted to know how receptive the gun owning community is to them.

[strambo]

I think they are a good idea. The ones I saw were small lock boxes like the gunvault series and stored up to 30 different prints in memory. Access was fast and there was a key backup. It cost about $300, but I would consider one. It seems like at least as good a solution as the keypad type.

What do you think of the one you have? Details?

[Preacherman]

As long as there's a key backup or override, I don't have any problem with them. However, difficulties could arise if there's no key backup, and your batteries run down, or you have a power failure.

[AJ Dual]

Will it work if you scramble up to one in an emergency with bloody or otherwise wet hands? Such as after being cut on the palm or the arm by a home invader, wiping at a bloody nose or having to jump out of the shower? Does the safe have the ability like the more sophisticated scanners do to tell if the finger is "alive"? i.e. still attached to it's owners hand...

Biometrics has the potential to someday be better than even the four finger Gunvault brand lockbox for speed, but not yet. Even a 99% success rate in first attempt read on a finger print is not acceptable.

Granted, I could screw up my Gunvault combination under stress, but in that case, at least the fault lies with me, not the box.

I will wait until the technology has matured a bit more, and also uses some different and redundant measures in combination, so an incomplete read on any one of them will not preclude access. Perhaps a combination of fingerprint on multiple fingers, palm print, and comparitive finger length measurments working simultaneously would work better.

If you want a secure lockbox for convenient and quick access uner non-emergency conditions, and the convenience of a single fingerprint scan is worth the price, go for it. But I wouldn't consider a biometric safe for the "go to gun" that you absolutely have to be able to access in an emergency.

[sturmruger]

There is a company in the Twin Cities that does testing on these types of machines. They were at the computer show a while go asking people to help them test these devices. I think they had a little survey asking what we thought about the technology. I would buy one, but right now they are still a little overpriced in my opinion.

[Series 70]

I talked with the inventor of one such box at a local gunshow a few months ago. He had a demo unit there, and would let you program your fingerprint and test it. The fingerprint reader itself was a commercial item that is probably used in other gunboxes.

My son programmed his and tested it some. It took up to four seconds to validate the print and failed about 25% of the time. Even the inventor's print failed 25% of the time.

If you're not in a hurry, it's not an issue. But if your life is at stake, I'd say the technology is not ready yet. I keep my defense weapons in a GunVault and have no plans to move to anything else.

[Guy B. Meredith]

Uh, how about making things even easier and just transfer the lock to your gun?

[Chipperman]

I concur. For non-emergency use, fine.
For emergency use, go with the most reliable thing you can.

[Pendragon]

I don't like the idea.

I have worked on a biometric installation project that put fingerprint readers on PCs to replace the usual username/password combo.

Nobody is able to be recognized 100% of the time.

Many people are in the 40%-60% range.

I was probably in the 95-98% range because I have clear prints and had to do it a lot.

The most common print readers have a fairly narrow spectrum where they will operate. Lotion, sweat, or any other substance on your fingers will change your recognizability. Some women found they were recognized better WITH lotion, some found that when they went to the bathroom and washed their hands, they had trouble (solution: rub your finger behind your ear to "re-oil" it)

There are some good reasons to use biometrics for identity authentication in a bank:

1. You cannot "tell" your fingerprint to another person like you can your password. Nor can it be overheard.

2. It is more important that people are authenticated with an extreme degree of certainty than it is that they are authenicated immediately.

3. When people use the system several times per day, they can be coached and helped to develop the right technique for maximum recognition.

4. There is an infrastructure in place to deal with those who are unable to use the finger print readers at all (just under 1% of the people could NEVER get consistent reads) In this case, an alternative method can be used to authenticate these people (smart card, or facial recognition).

As secure as this system seemed, I saw that it was only as secure as the people who administer it.

Everyone had 4 fingers "enrolled" to the system - we usually encouraged people to use the finger that worked best for them.

It would have been pretty easy to simply enroll my finger over one of the enrolled fingers of a manager or other person with privlidged access. Of course, if I just did this without reason, the logs would show it - but people were always being re-enrolled and checked so I could have waited until they came to be helped, enrolled thrie fingers and sent them away - if I know they use their right index finger, I could just enroll my finger over their left middle finger in the system.

Now, anytime I want, I can log in as them and nobody can really tell.

Sorry to go a bit OT - but biometrics is a solution that is appropriate in only in very specific, well controlled envoronments.

it is not appropriate to use biometrics for arbitrating access to emergency or life saving equipment.

[Preacherman]

I think we may be missing a point here. Those objecting to biometrics on the grounds that they may be too slow or unreliable if you need to access a weapon in a hurry - well, guess what? Keys and combination dials are just as slow! Your "go-to gun(s)" should be OUT of the safe and ready and available at all times!!! The only time all my guns are locked in the safe is when I'm not at home - and then I have one (or more) on my person. When I come home, the gun(s) I may need for home defence are immediately removed from the safe and placed where I can get to them in a hurry: one will normally be on my person. Those that are locked in the safe can stay there - I won't need them for immediate self-defence.

[AJ Dual]

Preacherman,

I agree whole heartedly, "Lock it, or wear it, or leave it at your bedside" is the best solution. However, there are those who live in states with safe storage laws etc. which makes "open storage" illegal. And to wearing it on your person when not secured, did you know that here in WI, up untill last summer when the Supreme Court ruled in our favor, that wearing a concealed handgun was technically illegal even in your own home?

As unbelievable and disgusting as it is, I kid you not. :(

The test case that was decided last summer, and provided imeptus to our own CCW push in the legislature, was for an inner-city storekeeper who was arrested for illegal CCW when being interviewed by police for other activity in his neighborhood, or some other matter not directly involving him.

Luckily sanity prevailed, but it still took all the way to the WI supreme court for sanity to rule.

I don't know, but there may well be people in the other "No Issue" and "May Issue" states who's laws put them in the same boat. Now within the realm of reality, I'd sincerely hope that if the police encounter an otherwise law-abiding person carrying concealed in their own home, reasonableness would prevail and they'd not arrest you, but it certainly happened to that poor shopkeeper.

[c_yeager]

I agree with preacherman. The guns i need arent in a safe at all. The guns i don't need arent in any hurry to get out, so they sit in a nice heavu 'regular' combination safe.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Biometric readers, particularly those using fingerprints as a means of identification are not ready for prime time with regards to firearm use. Even the ones used to control access to sensitive areas often have difficulties and access in those cases is not time sensitive and the occasional failure to grant access to an authorized person is considered acceptable.

One problem with biometric units, particularly the cheap biometric units available in the $300 range, is that they are extremely sensitive. Static electricity will fry the chip that reads the fingerprints.

You know how you occasionally get a little zap touching something metal after walking around? That is enough to fry a lot of these biometric readers several times over. A static electricity charge so small that you don't even notice will do the job after several repetitions.

Another thing to consider besides the immaturity of the technology is that it is expensive. A bad fingerprint reader that will die at the first zap of static electricity will easily run $200 at wholesale pricing. This means either substantial additional cost to the consumer for questionable benefit or you cut costs by reducing the security of the container so that the product remains cost competitive.

Look at this thread for an example of the implications of this:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=46936&perpage=25&highlight=fingerprint%20reader&pagenumber=2

What is the point of a $200 lock on a 12ga steel box that you can easily defeat even if the lock does work as advertised?

[geekWithA.45]

Knives and Spoons are the biggest argument against biometric ID.

Knives remove fingers.
Spoons scoop out eyes.

Why on EARTH would we create a motive to be dismembered?

[Guy B. Meredith]

Soooo... Is OPEN carry legal in one's home where concealed is not? Any guests that worry about brandishing could be asked not to stop by.

I most certainly do not bother with concealed carry in my home if I feel carrying is necessary.

[cidirkona]

I always concealed carry when I'm at home, it's more out of the way when tucked in the IWB... it'd be more of a hassle to not. It's either on me or under my pillow. Anything else is locked in the safes.

-Colin