Smart Glock-style guns that can only be fire by a verified user... available in the US this year

Status
Not open for further replies.
The article said that the NSSF survey found that only a small number would be interested in the gun. That was a 2019 survey. I recall but don't have that during the first wave of smart gun interest way back, there was an industry survey that found a substantial number of potential new owners for the gun who liked the idea of something safe around the house. Thus, there was a possible new market outside of the current gun culture.This was seen as a problem for antigun folks who didn't want more guns out there. A nut could buy and still rampage. An angry spouse could key in and open fire. So the appeal of these guns if they were easily available was problematic.

Taurus, Colt and SW pursued them but they never worked. They all saw more sales, esp, if mandates came in with the guns.

The free market suggests that if a product could be made and sold, that is just business. The problem was mandating them to be the only new sold guns and perhaps even demanding old gun replacement (fat chance). Police were dead set against them and feared a mandate.

There is a Reuters story also on the gun. https://www.reuters.com/technology/...-seeking-shake-up-firearms-market-2022-01-11/

BTW, the PIN is set to 1234. How many folks will change it?
 
Last edited:
This is one of those technologies that has very valid and useful applications (if small and niche) but anti-gun groups have turned the technology into a poison pill with legislation that requires smart gun technology once it become a viable product. This make the technology toxic for most gun companies to develop despite some legitimate potential uses.
 
Blue Jays said:
With as unpredictably moody as my fingerprint-actuated smartphone gets at inopportune times?
There ain't no way no how that I will embrace similar technology on an otherwise simple device.
Click to expand...
Right... that is nuts... sometimes I have to punch in my credit card number and fill in all kinds of spaces to buy something cause my fingerprint could not be verified and I used up all my attempts. lol So 1 second turns into minutes.
 
I don't understand the hate these get. While I'm not interested, we should be welcoming to new technology for anyone who is interested. This is just one more layer of safety for a parent of small children so I'm all for it.

Trying to get this stuff banned is like trying to ban handgun safes or manual safeties.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcb
Banning is ridiculous. It's a free market but mandates are the problem. We have mandates for safety all over so is this acceptable for a mandate? Not for me. Interesting debate.

Again the paradox, the existence of the smart gun assumes that you will sell the guns to the public and allow their carry. If people want them, not a problem if they are not the only option.

Look at the unchambered folks who surface every once in awhile. We don't ban them or mandate unchambered carry.

So how does the sale of the safe gun impact the market and gun availability.

How does that work for total gun banners? Just the police market? When the guns runs $800 to $2000 each and you have a many thousand officer department - that's a large expense and then add support and training. If if you are Mayberry, will Mayor and Council want the expense?

The needed intense FOF which might have prevented some of the bad shoots we have seen lately is not funded.
 
Jim Watson said:
Nope, AGEs (Armed Government Employees) are one group that will definitely NOT be a market. The statists always carve out exemptions for their minions.
Click to expand...

But think about a prison setting. The control of access to weapons is a huge headache for prison guards. If the guard had a weapon only they could fire this would greatly reduce the risk and consequences of a prisoner overpowering a guard for his weapon. It would have to be very reliable but in this setting a very minor loss of reliability would probably be acceptable given the control benefits for some jobs/situations. And the best way to make this technology more reliable is to get it out into the field being used and that will drive improvements.

I don't want to see this technology banned or required. Keep the politics off the technology in either direction and it will mature and find its niche uses and will be an asset not a liability for the most part.
 
bassjam said:
I don't understand the hate these get. While I'm not interested, we should be welcoming to new technology for anyone who is interested. This is just one more layer of safety for a parent of small children so I'm all for it.

Trying to get this stuff banned is like trying to ban handgun safes or manual safeties.
Click to expand...

Because many have seen these little attempts before at baiting us into a trap.
 
GEM said:
The problem was mandating them to be the only new sold guns and perhaps even demanding old gun replacement (fat chance).
Click to expand...
Even if "smart guns" were mandated (and were the only things available commercially), few people would buy them. America is already awash with guns. The main effects of such a plan would be to drive up the prices of used guns, and increase the number of informal transfers, bypassing the FFL system. So, in the end, this would be counterproductive for the antigun agenda.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

bersaguy
  • Locked
Smart Guns....Are We Doing this Again?
Replies
9
Views
370
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
C
  • Locked
Smart Gun News
Replies
6
Views
521
starfuryzeta
S
P
  • Locked
PM says: "Smart guns - dumb idea!"
Replies
18
Views
1K
Brick
B
N
  • Locked
Metal Storm developing "smart" gun with NIJ
Replies
15
Views
1K
Diesle
D
C
  • Locked
Jamaica: "A 'smart gun' that only authorised users can fire!"
Replies
0
Views
390
cuchulainn
C
Back
Top