'Smart guns' = dumb idea

[Dave Workman]

Majority say ‘smart guns’ a dumb idea, NSSF survey suggests

An overwhelming majority of Americans believe so-called “smart guns” is kind of a dumb idea, at least with existing technology, a National Shooting Sports Foundation survey released yesterday suggests.

<broken link removed>


Answer to a problem that doesn't exist....

Read More

 

[GuyBMeredith]

SOMETHING WE REALLY NEED TO GET OUT THERE--"smart guns" ARE NOT VIABLE!

ALL that depend on reading finger/palm prints, sensing rings, etc. can be defeated by a 12 year-old with basic elementary school science knowledge of electricity and mechanics.

They require an electric to mechanical actuator. In some cases it may be enough to jam the mechanical link, otherwise just remove the nasty decision making electronics and rewire or wire around it to actuate the link.

Or we may get to direct electrical ignition which is even easier to circumvent.

I'm betting that within a week after the first production models are released, detailed instructions to get around the lock will be all over the internet.

Additional note. Those that depend on fingerprints are worthless for many of us. Many senior citizens and people who frequently have their hands in water for their occupation have no fingerprints. I don't and can't even use airport lockers which depend on this.

 

[Certaindeaf]

I think they're really bucking for a communist party card swipe unlocking device.

 

[GuyBMeredith]

Card swipes can be circumvented just as easily as any other electric/electronic lock.

I was amused to see that all the testing being done per the Dept of Justice is whether the input works correctly in emergency--nothing to test security of the mechanism.

I was also amused to see the first reaction by gunnies was to hack the computer. So much easier to just cut the Gordian knot.

 

[GuyBMeredith]

Oh, and direct response to Dave. Not only does the problem not exist, the answer is invalid.

 

[Sun195]

Well, it works great for iPhone, so why not guns? Er....whoops....maybe not...

German group claims to have hacked Apple iPhone fingerprint scanner | Reuters

 

[GuyBMeredith]

It's a waste of time hacking a "smart" gun. You don't need the electronics so why fool with it? Just rip it out and rewire the gun to work the correct way.

 

[coop44]

I will feel safer if the cops have them, they need something to bump up a few IQ points.

 

[simon99]

Every one of my guns is a smart gun. They only fire when my finger pulls the trigger. Nuff said.

 

[xymotic]

I have mixed feelings on this.

Of all of the things in the world I want simple and to 'just work' it's a gun.

OTOH, Facts don't lie. A lot of cops in this country die when they lose their own guns in a struggle. The instictive reaction would be "that will never happen to me" but being honest I'm not so sure.

There's NO WAY I want it legislated, but if a company had one that worked reasonably well I think that a lot of people SHOULD consider them, Families with kids & especially cops who are carrying openly and targets anyway.

If conceled I think the threat of having your gun turned against you SHOULD be lower...

 

[simon99]

I have mixed feelings on this.

Of all of the things in the world I want simple and to 'just work' it's a gun.

OTOH, Facts don't lie. A lot of cops in this country die when they lose their own guns in a struggle. The instictive reaction would be "that will never happen to me" but being honest I'm not so sure.

There's NO WAY I want it legislated, but if a company had one that worked reasonably well I think that a lot of people SHOULD consider them, Families with kids & especially cops who are carrying openly and targets anyway.

If conceled I think the threat of having your gun turned against you SHOULD be lower...

Those are good points.
I'm just speculating though that police officers are probably more at risk to lose their weapon to an attacker merely due to the fact that they are in such close proximity ( i.e - handcuffing, breathalyzer, etc) though I have zero scientific evidence to back that claim up.

 

[xymotic]

Those are good points.
I'm just speculating though that police officers are probably more at risk to lose their weapon to an attacker merely due to the fact that they are in such close proximity ( i.e - handcuffing, breathalyzer, etc) though I have zero scientific evidence to back that claim up.

No I think that's very likely. I mean a 'stuggle' kinda of implies up close and personal

There was just a case where a single female bailiff was escorting a rape suspect to court, unshackled, and he took her gun and killed 4 people.

A chip would have helped, of course so too would it have helped if the people running that court weren't morons... but I digress

 

[GuyBMeredith]

Some people may benefit and it is wonderful if they have the option. But there is no justification to saddling everyone with the technology.

Forget about kids being safe unless they are under 10 years of age or unusually stupid or lacking in curiosity.

No benefit at all with stolen guns or those inquisitive children have in their possession for about 30 minutes. Best to lock the gun up rather than depend on an easily defeated fantasy trinket.

Of course, the extra cost is of benefit if you want to discriminate based on affluence and make sure only the elite can afford firearms. That is the only guaranteed result of mandating "smart" guns for everyone.