Executive Order Hiding James Bond Biometric Boondoggle

James Bond Walther PPK palm print safety sytem (courtesy itowit.com)

Watching MSNBC, I heard two commie commentators praise New York Times columnist Joe Nocera’s plea for a “smart” gun. Clearly, the left-leaning media mavens didn’t read TTAG’s dissection of “safety” technology that A) no one, save the gun grabbers, wants and B) wouldn’t work. But don’t get to thinking that built-in biometric gun locks—the thin end of the government-shaped “we’ll tell you what a gun is” wedge—are still-born. Nope. You remember those seemingly innocuous firearms-related Executive Orders Mr. Obama signed in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook slaughter. Well check this out from thehill.com. . .

In another administrative move, Obama directed the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to examine the efficacy of existing gun trigger locks and firearm safe standards to determine if they need to be improved. The CPSC has partnered with the American Society for Testing and Materials International, but does not have a firm timeline for when its examination will be finished, according to a spokesman.

Just so you know, wikipedia tells us that “the CPSC is generally headed by three commissioners nominated by the President of the United States and confirmed by the Senate for staggered seven-year terms.” And before this executive order the CPSC was forbidden from fiddling with firearms . . .

Products not under jurisdiction of the CPSC include those specifically named by law as under the jurisdiction of other federal agencies; for example, automobiles are regulated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, guns are regulated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, and drugs are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration.

So why change the law to unleash the CPSC on guns? D’uh. The move represents a clear and present danger to American gun rights, as this commission is hardly going to leave well enough alone. What’s the bet they move from “trigger locks” to biometric trigger locks? Or from gun safe standards to mandatory gun safe standards that drive the price of gun ownership through the roof?

Civilian disarmament isn’t just federal assault weapons ban bills. It’s also a death from a thousand cuts. We can’t let our guards down for one minute. As Neil Young sang, rust never sleeps.

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

36 Responses to Executive Order Hiding James Bond Biometric Boondoggle

  1. avatarWatchmen lewis says:

    gun safety’s don’t need to be improved there heads need improvement

  2. avatarWilliam Burke says:

    Gun locks tied to one person only. What could POSSIBLY go wrong? Never mind – it’s about “protecting” the innocent children! (Swoons)

  3. avatarReally Want to Keep it Private says:

    I’ll tell you what… You sell me a handgun which is as reliable as any of my Glocks, costs about as much as a Glock, has a “biometric lock” as reliable as the rest of the gun, which requires no batteries, withstands cleaning solvents, can be programmed by me to work for the shooters I choose, and as many of them as I choose, and which is as quick and easy to operate as my Glocks are, and I will consider it.

    And then I will promptly buy myself a $100 ticket to Mars for a quick vacation.

    “Smart guns” are pure science fiction. With emphasis on the “fiction” part.

  4. avatarDave says:

    As soon as the technology is mature enough that the police are willing to stake their lives on biometric sidearms, the rest of us can take a look too. Not before then.

  5. avatarExMonk says:

    It wasn’t so much the “existing locks and safeties” item that caught my attention in the executive orders. The order to “(d)irect the attorney general to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun-safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies” was more attention-grabbing on the subject.

    As a plot device in a spy thriller, biometric safeties are awesome. As a real thing in the real world we really live in, they’re a disaster that should never be considered.

    And for the people that say it could be engineered to be reliable and never fail, I’d ask if any of them have used any technology more advanced than a shovel. It could be very well designed, and very reliable, but perfect? Never. And anything less than perfect is absolutely wrong.

    Clearing a malfunction is bad enough. Having an electronics failure on a firearm is unacceptable.

    • avatarAccur81 says:

      Not to mention the possibility of being remotely disabled by radio, cell, EMP, interference, etc.

      • avatarDuffman313 says:

        Accur81 maybe playing to much COD running around with EMP grenades i see

        • avatarBen says:

          Accur81 actually has a point. I don’t play COD, but I do know that you can buy a device that blocks cell phone signals for under $100. Furthermore, the US government does have EMP technology, it has been demonstrated stopping a car engine. How hard would it be to make that technology HUMVEE mobile, to aid in confiscation? And finally, upper atmosphere nuclear detonations cause massive EMPs. Now, I don’t expect that last one to occur, but still, prepare for the unexpected.

  6. avatarAcram Jr says:

    Let me enlighten you on a subject, they are making a global shift, i am a collector and marksman in Brazil. In 2006 we had a election poll for a ban on all firearms in the country, we won with a devastating 62% of the population (it is mandatory to vote in Brazil) and they still passed a Law that’s named “disarmament statute”, now i have to pay for each gun that i own annually and from 3 to 3 years i have to take a psych, shoot and background check. Don’t let this happen to USA. They are trying to pass new bills to ban guns in here again, and if the US falls we fall.

    Lets all fight for our right to own and bear arms in the whole world. If you do not like guns, don’t buy them…
    Fight on Fellas!

  7. avatarSoccerchainsaw says:

    Hey, hey, my, my….

  8. avatarPro Gun Brit says:

    These pols love to p**s people off. When is the civil war against these control freaks going to kick off? It should have been done years ago before these progressive b*****d’s took office.

  9. avatarCasey T says:

    Biometric locks violate that 2nd amendment. It makes it increasingly difficult to fight if only you can use a weapon. In the middle of a gun fight, one of your buddies takes one in the head and your gun jams, you’re picking up his weapon and continuing. With biometric trigger locks, you are both dead. It’s just a stupid idea promulgated by ignorant people.

    • avatarRuss Bixby says:

      The only nearly acceptable (albeit impossible) device would be six nines reliable and prevent the firearm from working were the bearer intending to do wrong.

      Six nines (that’s 99.999999% reliable) is enough, as a mechanical failure is far more likely.

      Unfortunately, it wouldn’t work on a madman, and might not work if the user is conflicted – say by the need to shoot a relative on PCP.

      So… no. Not just no, but Hell no.

  10. avatarHidden Hills says:

    .

  11. avatarFred says:

    So apparently no one shoots with gloves to these people. I don’t know how these “smart locks” would work, but if it really is based on biometric technology today set to a somewhat affordable scale (under $1000/unit) requiring biometric locks as a federal measure would effectively deactivate every firearm. That’s not even considering a lockout feature that could be implemented, so the gov hits enter and transform civvie guns into paperweights.

  12. avatarmountocean says:

    I didn’t see anything in the EO (source article) about Biometric interlocks.

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but since Trigger Locks (bad idea) and Gun Safes aren’t firearms they wouldn’t be under the BATF’s perview. If BATF doesn’t look at them what’s wrong with CPSC making sure the products actually provide the security they advertise.

    Sure this is a required step to enforce mandated “safe storage”, and I’ve always been a Caveat Emptor (buyer beware) guy, but in and of itself I don’t see a problem with some standards for locks.

    • avatarChuckN says:

      It’s not the bio metric locks per say that people have
      a problem with. It’s that the government will find a
      way to make an unsafe product mandatory.

  13. avatarJoe says:

    Biometric locks are like electric cars – sound good, but don’t work that well in real life. Try anything with a fingerprint reader and see how many swipes it takes.

  14. avatarRuss Bixby says:

    Y’know, every weapon I own is either C&R or I made it.

    I’ll use biometrics on a gun when “they” force itinto my cold, dead hands.

  15. avatarSouthern Cross says:

    What a useless and pointless effort. In IT parlance, a WOMBAT job (Waste Of Money, Brains, And Time). If I want to stop someone from using one of my rifles, I’ll use a long-shank padlock in the receiver bridge. Cheap. Simple. And effective.

  16. You created some decent points there. I looked on the net for the issue and discovered most people will go together with with your web site.

    newest christian louboutin shoes

    http://redbottomshoes4salea.66ghz.com

  17. avatar505markf says:

    OMG! The first gun writer I’ve ever read who quoted Neil Young. This site is simple the coolest, ever. Yeah, shallow comment, but WTF, everyone else delivered the substance.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.