1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Judge Dredd's Lawgiver is just around the corner . .

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by nalioth, Nov 16, 2009.

  1. nalioth

    nalioth Well-Known Member

    Original Article

    It is always interesting when fiction become fact.
  2. 50caliber123

    50caliber123 Well-Known Member

    The Feds will probably make us US citizens purchase these devices when the time comes for a national registration period. part of "keeping us safe"
  3. jnyork

    jnyork Well-Known Member

    Will be mandatory in California by Christmas. :banghead:
  4. rcmodel

    rcmodel Member in memoriam

    Oh great!

    Another useless combat do-dad that takes batteries to make it work.
    As if there aren't enough of those already!

  5. goon

    goon Well-Known Member

    I can see how it would make sense for the military as long as a malfunctioning unit doesn't result in a malfunctioning weapon.
  6. rbernie

    rbernie Well-Known Member

  7. kingpin008

    kingpin008 Well-Known Member

    Wow, second post! I think that beats the record for the tinfoil-hat brigade! Oops, gotta go - the sky is falling! :evil:
  8. Zoogster

    Zoogster Well-Known Member

    Most of which would be destroyed by an EMP.

    How many new electronic gizmos are shielded against EMP like they were during the Cold War?

    Could a high altitude nuke kill most of the military electronics of the nation like it could most civilian electronics?
    Now it may simply be passive, but any system which requires the electronics be utilized during operation is less reliable.

    Will they all be waterproof so when the gun ends up underwater the battery or circuit does not short out?

    Oh that is wonderful, a good hacker could turn off the guns of soldiers, police, or even civilian home owners!
    Such devices would become standard for SWAT teams and paramilitary teams around the world, like cell phone jammers are right now.

    That reminds me of the cars they equip with remote disabling systems.
    Can you see some individual driving around with a laptop turning people's engines off on the freeway?
    Or maybe even more sinister, some predator making someone's car not work, so they pull over on the side of the road thinking something broke?
    Can already be done by a good hacker. Many vehicles can be disabled remotely through the Onstar system or various lowjack type systems.

    Now maybe they can hack into thier concealed carry firearm and turn it off as well!

    Jamming cell phones is easy as well.

    So you could turn off someone's vehicle, jam thier cell phone, and with this new technology turn off thier gun as well!
    The things someone can do with a laptop these days.
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2009
  9. SDC

    SDC Well-Known Member

    "The things someone can do with a laptop these days."

    Laptop? That's the latest IPhone app. :)
  10. mljdeckard

    mljdeckard Well-Known Member

    Looks like a........SMART gun or something.

    How will it track the ID of the firer? If it tracks fingerprints, they could wear gloves. The only thing I can think of is that the firer will wear something like a ring or a tag that the gun recognizes. Which AGAIN, WILL ONLY TRACK PEOPLE IN THE SYSTEM. It will not track criminals at all.

    The idea of a gun that can be disabled by someone other than the user is absolutely unacceptable, PERIOD.
  11. Zoogster

    Zoogster Well-Known Member

    Still needs a laptop with something that operates on the right frequencies plugged in. IPhones and cell phones operate on a very limited frequency range that will by unlikely to overlap such devices.

    Look up the FCC band plan for just the basics of what frequencies electronics must operate on by law. You can open up almost any device and see what signal range it will operate in by what is on the circuit.

    Most electronic devices can only communicate within a limited signal range, and that is mandated by federal law. Some devices can be altered to work within a slightly larger range, or with more power than FCC regulations, but still are physically limited. The laws governing these things are so the limited available frequencies can be maximized, and so important frequencies like aircraft communications are not overpowered and receive interference from less important signals.
    But anyone with basic electronic skills can make something that transmits within any desired range. Then it is just a matter of software to make it do what is desired.

    Actually communicating with a device though requires some software. The easiest way to figure out what was required would be to reverse engineer the device intended to be targeted or intercept data being sent to it.
    Whether it is a lowjack or onstar system to remotely disable vehicles, or a firearm electronic system to turn off guns (or maybe even alter the stored data, bringing a Judge Dredd type conviction even closer to reality.)

    The expansion of remote control options on devices and increasing installation of electronics even in devices which do not need them is greatly expanding the potential for micromanagement of populations on an unbelievable scale.

    There is also have EMP weapons that can simply destroy unshielded electronics. They are easy to build. Look up a HERF gun. There is also microwave guns and other technology that can either interfere with or damage unshielded electronics.
    Any modern unshielded electronic can be fried with an easy to make directional gun.
    Parts from a few discarded appliances could be used to create a rather nasty directional item nearly for free. (If you don't know what you are doing screwing with something like a magnetron is a good way to go blind or radiate yourself.) Someone can even build a really powerful low tech cavity magnetron relatively cheap from scrap metal operating in a wide range of intended frequencies.
    Nevermind EMP grenades, such as flux compression generators which are no more complex than your typical shaped charge.
    Making the firearms of a military force vulnerable to EMP would be beyond stupid.

    Anything that depends on electronics to function is vulnerable. Even just a passive device which gives the ability to monitor could pose a danger. Do you really want savvy enemy to be able to monitor or communicate with electronic devices carried by soldiers?
    To check thier status?
    See how much ammo is in thier weapons? (Which of course would result in a need for counter intelligence devices being made, and intentional misinformation being given to those attempting to monitor them.)
    Or even just determine where they are based on the electronic's signal? Sounds like a good way for an enemy to determine where to send mortars.
    Of course as high tech as some military units already are, it wouldn't be the first device than enabled a tech savvy enemy to exploit such strengths as weaknesses.
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2009
  12. gunnutery

    gunnutery Well-Known Member

    I'm kinda disapointed in FN Herstal. What exactly is the underlying meaning on why they developed this in the first place? Is it distrust, or just a helping hand in understanding battlefield tendancies, or something else that I'm not thinking of?
  13. marine1

    marine1 Member

    This is called selling to government to get contracts. Marketing to government, and doing it well can pay off BIG time. That is really all this is. Government has become the largest spender the earth has ever known. Why not market stuff to the only entity that can make it's own "money" out of thin air. I see cops getting this eventually, and it will be helpful in getting to the truth after these "spray and pray" no knock raids. This black box has no real use for civilians (a.k.a. citizens), and can't do what government WISHES it could to do us. The "smart" gun, as portrayed in the movies, is never coming. Mandatory trigger locks and selective gun bans are more likely. Retrofitting 500 million+ guns with "smart" technology will never happen.
  14. RP88

    RP88 Well-Known Member

    ummm...so, so it doesn't really do anything useful at all?
  15. berettaprofessor

    berettaprofessor Well-Known Member

    Bring it on, my antique, unrecorded arms will just go up in value.
  16. HKUSP45C

    HKUSP45C Well-Known Member

    They probably wanted to do something crazy, like, I don't know, make money and stuff.

    Government agencies eat logistics schemes up, especially when they can get more data than is needed for the same price. FN recognizes a market and has entered it in, seemingly, an elegant and sophisticated manner. I say kudos to them, they shpould be able to make a small fortune on the EU police forces alone.
  17. jobu07

    jobu07 Well-Known Member

    Seems like this is why they want to "use" it initially. Another solution to a problem that doesn't exist. We use 2404's to record how many rounds you fire through a weapon each time you do maintenance to it. At least the end user is supposed to record how many rounds he put through it...
  18. MarineOne

    MarineOne Well-Known Member

    I could see how this would help with round count and maintenance, but the reality is you would need some kind of reader (think USB, BlueTooth, or RFID technology) to get the data out of the weapon. And it doesn't mention how difficult (or easy) it is to disable the device, i.e, pull the battery out as it looks like a single store bought Energizer AAA.

    It does, however, put us one step closer to what the Lawgiver pistol did in Judge Dredd .... tagging rounds with shooter identifiable information, whether DNA based or some kind of serial number, perhaps even your CCW license number.

    Of course technology like this could easily be hacked ..... almost like the movie.

  19. SuperNaut

    SuperNaut Well-Known Member

    Why doesn't the cycling of the firearm charge the battery? I think they missed a trick there...

    DAVIDSDIVAD member

    How would the shot counter account for tactical reloads etc...?

Share This Page