I know this issue runs the gamut as far as opinions are concerned, but I wonder what many of you may think about "smart gun" technology. Do you think it will ever be reliable enough for use? Do you think it can solve any or many of the problems associated with misuse of firearms? Thoughts?
Smart gun technology
- Thread starter kwguy
- Start date
- Status
LOL, nice! (Judge Dredd). Not too far off from what I was wondering about, but mainly focusing of the aspect of 'gun coded to owner'. I remain skeptical, but they also say 'never say never', and so many things have improved technologically throughout history, that I wonder if that won't eventually get to the level of being commonplace as well...
Of course, we could only HOPE to have such cool styling in our clothing someday
Of course, we could only HOPE to have such cool styling in our clothing someday
Fast Frank
Member
Smart Gun?
You mean like one that will only fire for it's registered owner?
Pretty sure I don't want one. The whole registration thing rubs me wrong.
Tell me, can't the government just send out a signal from the cell phone towers and turn all those smart guns off?
That sounds like a double loser to me. No thanks.
You mean like one that will only fire for it's registered owner?
Pretty sure I don't want one. The whole registration thing rubs me wrong.
Tell me, can't the government just send out a signal from the cell phone towers and turn all those smart guns off?
That sounds like a double loser to me. No thanks.
WardenWolf
member
I think it may one day be possible to do, yes, via a biofeedback sensor on the gun's grip. There are two things preventing it from working well right now: bulk, and reliability. Reliability is relatively easy to fix if you design it right, but the current bulk of the required readers cannot fit in a normal handgun. Basically, for it to work right, you would need it to take a read from your fingers when you are gripping the gun normally. Because peoples' hand sizes differ, this sensor would have to have a rather large window, or be adjustable. Modern sensors can compensate for slight differences in finger orientation or positioning, so it would work reliably each time you used it assuming it was already set up to your hand.
Assuming new technology can shrink these readers or a new form can be developed (capacitive touch opens certain possibilities), yes, it can be made to work. I can definitely see a possibility of a gun's entire grip panel being a sensor that scans your hand for a match.
Assuming new technology can shrink these readers or a new form can be developed (capacitive touch opens certain possibilities), yes, it can be made to work. I can definitely see a possibility of a gun's entire grip panel being a sensor that scans your hand for a match.
That's really what I was thinking, something along those lines. No registration or anything. Just a firearm that is somehow 'coded' to some authorized user (like, the owner), and won't fire unless that person (or maybe another authorized user) is holding it. Kind of like those biometric safes that you use with your finger (I still don't trust THOSE for 100% reliability...), but I have to think that we may get there some day.
kyhunter
Member
My problem is what if you have a neightbor/relative/friend over housesitting or babysitting and they have a need to use the weapon or your buddys over and you get incapacitated and its the only firearm in the house? I know that would be a very rare possibility.
But remember if it saves even one life?
But remember if it saves even one life?
Texan Scott
Member
What if my wife needs it?
What if I want to use it to teach my son to shoot?
What if I want to sell it to my neighbor?
What if the government just let me be responsible for my own home and my own things, and quit meddling and left me the hockey sticks ALONE?
What about NO, I REFUSE?
What if I want to use it to teach my son to shoot?
What if I want to sell it to my neighbor?
What if the government just let me be responsible for my own home and my own things, and quit meddling and left me the hockey sticks ALONE?
What about NO, I REFUSE?
Twiki357
Member
A "Smart" gun uses a computer chip. A hackers dream for selling deactivating programs.
Or... It would be electronic. That means batteries. Batteries are removable.
Or... It would be electronic. That means batteries. Batteries are removable.
Deus Machina
Member
Oh, I'm sure it could be implemented in perfect functionality right now.
Just not small or reliable enough.
It would need a battery, and I can't think of any place to fit sensors and batteries on my favored guns. Also, I can't be bothered to change the batteries in my fire alarms until they're beeping every two minutes until I leave to go buy more batteries for them. A battery going dead in a sensor in a handgun would either beep and alert everyone, or simply not work when you really need it to.
Just not small or reliable enough.
It would need a battery, and I can't think of any place to fit sensors and batteries on my favored guns. Also, I can't be bothered to change the batteries in my fire alarms until they're beeping every two minutes until I leave to go buy more batteries for them. A battery going dead in a sensor in a handgun would either beep and alert everyone, or simply not work when you really need it to.
FAS1
Member
I had a punch clock that worked on a similar concept at a place I used to work. It requires you to hold your hand in the exact same position you did the first time you used it, and was probably over 95% effective by my estimation. Getting it to work was pretty easy in that situation, if these guns are at all similar I do have my doubts about being able to use one in a stressful situation.
The designs have been out for a while but there just isn't strong enough demand among the shooting community for this technology. So, it will stay on the shelf where it belongs.
As I see it, it's just one more thing that can go wrong on a tool that I may have to use to defend my life. I want it to be as simple as possible. Plus all of the arguments stated above about other people needing to use the firearm, etc.
As I see it, it's just one more thing that can go wrong on a tool that I may have to use to defend my life. I want it to be as simple as possible. Plus all of the arguments stated above about other people needing to use the firearm, etc.
I am an Electrical Engineer, and I don't think you are aware of how difficult what you are talking about is. Reliability is not relatively easy, it is incredibly difficult. If it were easy your Harbor Freight Bio safe would have the same repeatable performance as the combination lock you had on you locker in high school, and would cost the same too.
I'm not trying to flame you, it’s just that I do this kind of thing for a living and know for a fact that reliability is the hardest part of the whole shebang.
I would also like to add that since I am an EE, I want electronics in darn near everything. I want to be able to turn off my basement lights from the middle of the Atlantic. I want to know exactly what the moisture level in my basement is while on a hunting trip displayed on my safety glasses. I want to set my empty glass down on a coaster while watching TV, have a robot in the corner make me a fresh cocktail, and have a tiny drone helicopter bring it to me. I love electronics.
That being said, guns do not need electronics, EVER!!! I don't care how reliable that said electronics may be, they will inevitably fail. And when they do someone WILL get hurt/killed. It is an unnecessary risk with far too great a cost for the small perceived benefit.
allaroundhunter
Member
kwguy, Adam Lanza and the Aurora shooter both would have been authorized users of the weapons that they used. Would "smart guns" cut down on gun crime overall? Possibly, but the best solution would still be enforcing the gun laws that are already on the books and a better detection of mental illness.
And I don't want one on my guns, I want to be able to fire my gun without worrying about something electronic failing...
Sent from my HTC One X
And I don't want one on my guns, I want to be able to fire my gun without worrying about something electronic failing...
Sent from my HTC One X
Guys (and Gals)... I'm not saying it would be the end all, be all of every problem. Like Allaroundhunter said, that CT wacko and that other nut would have been 'authorized users'. I get that. I'm just wondering if you think we'll EVER get to where we rely on them. Tech is always getting better.
For instance, many folks didn't depend on red dot sights for many years, and for good reason. Those early versions were not the greatest. Some still don't, which is cool, but optics (be it ACOG's, Aimpoint's, etc) are totally depended upon now by many people, in nasty conditions. Because they have gotten better, and more reliable, etc. I have total faith in optics (the right ones), whereas some of my, ahem, more mature bretheren, are somewhat more skeptical (I do notice that tends to change as the diopters increase).
Remember the first laser used on a pistol? Those things were HUGE, and the batteries only lasted a few minutes, and they were unreliable. They are light years more advanced and reliable now.
Here's a little bit of a segue, but there was a time, not too long ago, when fuel injection 'would never be reliable or flexible enough' for motorcycles. Not any more.
I was wondering if some type of smart gun tech could be the same. I'm not saying now, or even a year from now, but eventually.
Personally, in my gut, I see it as something maybe reliable enough for the range or what have you, but not for any serious work. But that's my less than totally objective self talking.
Barring any political considerations, forced legislation, tracking, registration, or anything like that, strictly from a tech point, it seems like it really isn't too far of a leap, no?
For instance, many folks didn't depend on red dot sights for many years, and for good reason. Those early versions were not the greatest. Some still don't, which is cool, but optics (be it ACOG's, Aimpoint's, etc) are totally depended upon now by many people, in nasty conditions. Because they have gotten better, and more reliable, etc. I have total faith in optics (the right ones), whereas some of my, ahem, more mature bretheren, are somewhat more skeptical (I do notice that tends to change as the diopters increase
).Remember the first laser used on a pistol? Those things were HUGE, and the batteries only lasted a few minutes, and they were unreliable. They are light years more advanced and reliable now.
Here's a little bit of a segue, but there was a time, not too long ago, when fuel injection 'would never be reliable or flexible enough' for motorcycles. Not any more.
I was wondering if some type of smart gun tech could be the same. I'm not saying now, or even a year from now, but eventually.
Personally, in my gut, I see it as something maybe reliable enough for the range or what have you, but not for any serious work. But that's my less than totally objective self talking.
Barring any political considerations, forced legislation, tracking, registration, or anything like that, strictly from a tech point, it seems like it really isn't too far of a leap, no?
Neo-Luddite
Member
All it does for me is reduce the reliability of the weapon and so many other bad things. They exist in limited form and have for a while.
scaatylobo
Member
JIMBO 2032 - thanks
I am in total agreement with the above poster,and no I do not have a degree in anything.
I do not trust gimmicks & gadgets to do anything better than we are able to.
For instance,how about that AMAZING laser you have [ or not ] on your S/D pistol and that flashlight mounted along with it - do you have a plan for its FAILURE in the start or middle of a confrontation ?.
The fail might happen during your only moment of a SHTF situation and you will need to recover faster than a 'speeding bullet' ,so to speak.
Oh and an EMP [ electro mechanical Pulse ] caused by - OH say N.Korea launching a air bursting nuclear attack,what effect do you think that would have on the "gimmick" allowing your gun to work.
And then there are sun spots [ same as EMP only natural ] that might shut down your S/D tool in a SHTF moment.
I pass and rely on the sights and my abilitys.
I am in total agreement with the above poster,and no I do not have a degree in anything.
I do not trust gimmicks & gadgets to do anything better than we are able to.
For instance,how about that AMAZING laser you have [ or not ] on your S/D pistol and that flashlight mounted along with it - do you have a plan for its FAILURE in the start or middle of a confrontation ?.
The fail might happen during your only moment of a SHTF situation and you will need to recover faster than a 'speeding bullet' ,so to speak.
Oh and an EMP [ electro mechanical Pulse ] caused by - OH say N.Korea launching a air bursting nuclear attack,what effect do you think that would have on the "gimmick" allowing your gun to work.
And then there are sun spots [ same as EMP only natural ] that might shut down your S/D tool in a SHTF moment.
I pass and rely on the sights and my abilitys.
AlexanderA
Member
A gun has to be totally reliable. Such a gizmo would reduce reliability.
Main problem, though, is that it can't be applied to the millions and millions of guns already out there. This horse is already out of the barn.
Main problem, though, is that it can't be applied to the millions and millions of guns already out there. This horse is already out of the barn.
JustinJ
Member
You realize quite a few said that about guns when first invented? How's carrying that sword working out for ya?
Outlaw Man
Member
Do "smart guns" only shoot bad people? Who determines if they're bad? The same people who determine if the user is "good" enough to have one?
I can't see this technology helping things.
I can't see this technology helping things.
JustinJ
Member
How about in preventing police officers from being shot by their own guns when taken from them?
- Status
