It’s hardly a surprise that the legacy media, and its cable analog CNN, would know little or nothing about firearms and willingly leap on any passing anti-freedom bandwagon. Kieron Monks, however, takes the budding “smart gun” craze to new lows. For those aware of these issues, so-called smart guns are nothing new, nor is the fact that the state of their technology isn’t nearly ready for prime time. As I wrote on August 2, 2013 for PJ Media and more recently at my home blog Stately McDaniel Manor . . .

Smart guns are anything but smart and are not only non-viable in the free market, their technology isn’t nearly reliable enough to make them a reasonable alternative. They remain an ingenious solution to a non-existent problem. Still, Monks is undeterred:

As a teenager, Omer Kiyani was shot in the face with an unsecured firearm. He still struggles with the trauma. But the Detroit engineer now believes he has created a device that would have saved him and may save thousands of others.

He calls it ‘Identilock,’ and while it still needs final adjustments to the prototype and further investment, Kiyani expects to launch his smart gun technology in U.S. stores within a year, retailing for around $300.

The device attaches to the trigger of a handgun, which can then only be unlocked by biometric authentication, preventing any unauthorized user from firing the weapon. Drawing on breakthroughs in mobile technology, the trigger is released by similar fingerprint sensors to those used in Apple’s iPhone 5S. Those sensors are approved by the FBI, and widely found in security scanners.

‘The key is reliability,’ says Kiyani. ‘The sensor has proved itself in different sectors over the past few years and the market is aware of its capability.”

There are substantial differences in smart phones and firearms.  As observant readers can tell from the photo of the product, this is not a “smart gun,” at all but a very expensive trigger-locking device.  Kyani’s professed motivation is to develop a device that is very fast—ostensibly to make self-defense easier—and to prevent accidental shootings of children.

“The main point of firearms ownership is home defense, and home defense means quick access,’ says Kiyani. ‘But the other side of that is accidents.

The inventor believes his experience indicates an urgent and avoidable crisis and the statistics support him. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in 2010, 62 children aged one to 14 were killed in firearm accidents in the United States, and 785 from 1999 to 2010 — far higher death tolls than school shootings over the same period.

The death of any child is tragic, but these numbers are misleading. “Children” are normally considered to be older than infants or toddlers, but younger than teenagers. The younger the actual age group, the tinier the numbers of accidental deaths, and the yearly death rate from accidental shootings is at an all time low, and is nowhere near the top of the list. Comparing such things with school shootings is particularly pernicious as they are, while well-publicized, quite rare.

The facts tell a very different story:

The number of privately owned guns in the U.S. is at an all-time high, upwards of 300 million, and now rises by about 10 million per year.1 Meanwhile, the firearm accident death rate has fallen to an all-time low, 0.2 per 100,000 population, down 94% since the all-time high in 1904. Since 1930, the annual number of firearm accident deaths has decreased 81%, while the U.S. population has more than doubled and the number of firearms has quintupled. Among children, such deaths have decreased 89% since 1975. Today, the odds are more than a million to one, against a child in the U.S. dying in a firearm accident.

Firearms are involved in 0.5% of accidental deaths nationally, compared to motor vehicles (29%), poisoning (27%), falls (21%), suffocation (5%), drowning (3%), fires (2%), medical mistakes (1.7%), environmental factors (1.3%), and pedal cycles (0.6%). Among children: motor vehicles (34%), suffocation (27%), drowning (17%), fires (7%), environmental factors (2.3%), poisoning (2.2%), falls (1.5%), firearm (1.5), pedal cycles (1.4%), and medical mistakes (1.3%).

The article also mentions the Armatix iP1, a .22LR caliber smart gun relying on an accompanying watch/transmitter. For a supposedly ground-breaking product, the primary ground broken is in a lack of affordability, as the gun costs $1399 and the watch $399.  This is supposedly the vanguard of a veritable new technological flood:

There is now an increased appetite and funding for a field that had stalled since the earlier designs in the 1970s. The boldest statement is an open challenge from The Smart Tech Foundation. It was created by Silicon Valley angel investor Ron Conway and serial entrepreneur Jim Pitkow in response to the Sandy Hook shootings and is making $1 million in prizes available for development of the best ideas.”smart guns” save lives.

The Foundation claims to have received over 200 entrants after the first month of the submission period, everything from concept stage to working prototype. Designs include electronic ammunition, remote controls and RFID chips buried in the owner’s skin.

Researchers at the New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT) have been developing biometric designs since 1999. The leader of that program, Donald Sebastian, has seen many false dawns but is more confident than ever.

‘The difference now to a decade ago is that there are more types of technology and they are all much better. Biometric technology failed one time out of four then, now we aim for one in 10,000 failure rates’, says Sebastian. ‘The reliability of the safety needs to exceed that of the underlying firing mechanism, so there is never a discussion that the gun wouldn’t work because of the technology.

Sebastian has hit upon the most significant issue—outside of price and the restriction of liberty—inherent in smart guns. But Sebastian is painting a hopeful picture:

Sebastian’s view is borne out by 2013 research into gun safety technology from the National Institute of Justice (NIJ). The report tested reliability in a range of RFID and biometric designs against existing firearms, and gave several ratings of ‘Advanced Prototype or Production-Ready.’ ‘It is only recently that viable product designs have reached a commercializable or production-ready level of maturity,’ the report stated.

And what is the promising new technology?

NJIT remains at the vanguard, working with ‘Dynamic Grip Recognition,’ perhaps the most ambitious system in development. The design uses a battery of sensors to build a ‘movie’ of the user, learning the size and weight of their grip, and even their tics and manner with the gun to be sure of authorizing the correct user.

 As sensor technology continues to improve, the scope for progress is exponential, says Sebastian. A new prototype will be unveiled in June, promising to improve speed and accuracy, using an enhanced microprocessor that draws less power and needs less space.

This design is the result of collaboration with military partners Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey. Beyond their technical expertise, Sebastian recognizes what military involvement could do for public acceptance ahead of a commercial launch and manufacturing.

The technology we have developed is primarily for the civilian population, but to gain traction in those communities it needs to be used and endorsed by icons of gun ownership such as police and military,” says Sebastian.

Sebastian sees a substantial military market primarily due to the attacks on American troops in Afghanistan by indigenous forces.  Unfortunately, such shootings have little or nothing to do with unauthorized persons using someone’s weapon against them.  Sebastian’s hopes are based on a false premise.

And the more complex the system, the more likely it is to be unreliable.  A system that “learns” the “size and weight” of an owner’s grip, as well as their “tics and manner,” is obviously inherently unreliable to the experienced shooter.  How could such a system recognize the shooter’s left hand?  What if the shooter’s strong hand were injured, or if in moments of high stress, they gripped the weapon with unusual strength and/or patterns?  Such technology would seem, on its face, to be outsmarting itself.

Injecting a bit of reality, a recent National Shooting Sports Foundation poll indicated that only 14 of Americans might be willing to buy a smart gun, and most people reasonably believe them to be unreliable.

The major gun manufacturers have also been wary. Sebastian works with major gun manufacturers and believes their reluctance stems partly from fears that once the first smart guns are established, the technology will become mandatory. He sympathizes: ‘It would be better if the transformation came through market demand rather than regulatory pressure.’

Such fears may be justified. In 2002, New Jersey became the first U.S. state to legislate that new guns must be personalized within three years of the technology becoming available. The idea is also gaining currency across Europe.

Should such mandates be enacted, or if the new designs find a strong market, the drip-drip of smart gun innovation may well become a flood.

courtesy nextep-app.com

There is good reason indeed to believe that the goal of most proponents of smart guns is the restriction of liberty rather than public safety. Some pointed to Jame’s Bond’s “smart” Walther PPK in Skyfall, a gun that by never explicitly explained means, “read” his hand.  In one scene, that feature saved Bond’s life when a villain tried to shoot him with the gun. But even in fiction, reality intruded. In a subsequent scene, Bond was holding his Walther while wearing gloves—which would presumably render his weapon inert—and in another, Bond was able to seize a villain’s gun and shoot a brace of cutthroats. If that had been a smart gun, Bond would have been killed and the Bond franchise obliterated.

Implanting RIFD chips in people has an inherently creepy, tyrannical quality, and is hardly a solution.  Absent a far greater need and benefit than is promised by smart guns, few Americans are likely to willingly undergo such implantation. Police officers may have to use each other’s weapons, which is a primary reason the police have never been enthusiastic, and a handgun that a man’s wife or other family members can’t immediately and reliably use if necessary is a very expensive and potentially deadly weapon, not to attackers, but to the family.

There are now some 300 million firearms in citizen’s hands—far more than at any time in history–with some ten million more being added yearly, yet firearm accidents for all ages are at all time lows.  Avoidance of accidents is easily accomplished by simple and easily learned safety procedures such as muzzle awareness and keeping one’s trigger finger in register, outside the trigger guard, until milliseconds before pulling the trigger.

“If it saves even one life, it’s worth mandating,” demagogues cry.  No.  It’s dangerous and irresponsible to make public policy based on slogans.  If this were true, we’d be obligated to do away with motor vehicles, swimming pools, ladders and other potential dangers long before firearms.

Could “smart guns” be useful to some people in some ways? Certainly, but not at exorbitant prices, not if the mechanisms are at least as reliable as the weapons themselves in all possible environmental conditions, and never under the flood of governmental mandate. If government has to mandate them, one may be certain it has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with amassing power at the expense of individual rights.  When government is all-powerful, no citizen is safe.

68 Responses to Are Smart Guns Actually Smart?

    • +1
      I don’t mean I agree,
      I mean I’m stopping by Gander Mountain tonight to pick up my new RAR .22 that came in.
      So make that at least 10,000,001

  1. Well, at least Sebastian agrees that before this kind of stuff is foisted upon the population at large, it should be accepted for use by the police and military. Someone needs to propose an amendment–I mean just propose it–to that NJ law that will require “smart guns only”, that it will apply to NJ police too. Of course it would fail–but the discussion would be most instructive.

    • All gun laws should apply to the police- restrictions on magazine capacities, weapon types, sighting systems, etc. For both their duty and their personal weapons. There is no logical reason for asserting that the equipment deemed necessary for a police officer to defend his life has different requirements than those of any other civilian. Indeed, the argument could be made that due to police officers’ training, their operating in teams, and their having back-up immediately available that any restrictions on weapons represent less of burden on a police officer than on other civilians. Who don’t operate in teams, who don’t have back-up immediately available (I’ll avoid the training issue).

      High capacity mags combined with operating in teams by police are contributory to the shootings where large number of rounds are fired with little effect or vastly disproportionate to the number required. Like at two women delivering newspapers early in the morning….

  2. I heard a sound… Grab the gun… Crap, I didn’t replace the battery…

    Forgetful Gun Owner of the Day

  3. Does it actually matter? Would you say, its ok to force all political speech into newspapers because the internet makes it too easy for child pornographers and terrorists? Would you say, all religious expression has to happen in churches (or synagogues), because having it in public places makes it too easy for religiously motivated hate speech to incite a riot? Conversely, would you say right wing Aryian Nation groups have to keep their rallies indoors, away from people they offend, to prevent riots?

    Does not matter how smart the guns are, if forcing people to buy the guns substantially burdens rights.

    • The sad thing is that, yes, Progressives would happily agree to all those propositions (including the idea that Nazis are “right-wing”).

  4. Nice to see your own by line here at TTAG Mike. Another good analysis.

    Hopefully these products go the way of the Pinto. They will kill people…because they will fail.

    Criminals will just continue to keep pulling the trigger…no batteries required.

    • Alternatively, regardless of any statutory prohibitions or penalties forbidding it, criminals will find ways to disable these devices on THIER guns, and quite possibly ways to defeat the protections on YOUR gun, although I suspect they will in most cases bring their own.

      That is in addition to the major problems alluded to in the article: 1) If the government attempts to mandate the inclusion of these devices on every gun, where does “…shall not be infringed.” fit that scenario, and 2) There are over 300,000,000 (million) firearms in civilian (non-LEO/military) possession and I can guarantee the majority of those will NEVER be retro-fitted, no matter how many laws are passed.

      More Liberal/Progressive fantasies. I say let them waste their time and resources on it since it is THEIR distraction, not ours and may prevent them taking more onerous actions elsewhere.

    • not to mention there is NO goal to shield from interference from defeating devices. like a blue tooth jammer that blocks the signal from wrist piece to gun.

      or a localized emp device. or local electrical surge charge.(getting hit with taser for example while holding smart gun.)

      What happens when the dreaded super solar storm occurs that NASA warning us about? that knocks out chips?

      What happens, god forbid nuclear or neutron weapons goes off? rendering all that smart tech as so much junk.

      The old saying goes hand in hand here. “Keep it simple, stupid.” When it comes to self defense.

  5. The simple retort is if smart guns are such a great idea, why don’t you make the police go first? Bad guys do go for officers’ guns, I believe one just happened recently.

    As the excuses fly as to why this shouldn’t forced on the police first, you have your answer as to why it is just as bad for civilians. Maybe someday, through natural market based development and product evolution, they will be viable, but we are likely decades at best from that day.

    • Never. I still look for and buy cars with manual door locks and roll up windows. Less stuff to fail in the long run. I will not introduce possible failure points in a far more critical piece of equipment.

      Technology can be truly wonderful. GPS navigation is really cool, but if it fails it’s not critical. The line above summed it up quite nicely- “They remain an ingenious solution to a non-existent problem.” IMHO- they will always be so.

    • “Now a real killer, when he picked up the ZF1, would have immediately asked about the little red button on the bottom of the gun.”

  6. As the gentleman from Tavor said in yesterday’s video, the U.S. private market for firearms is larger than the entire world’s army and law enforcement markets put together. These anti nimrods are born of the same socialist-day-dreaming-never-worked-at-a-real-world-job-that-requires-real-world-productivity-in-order-to-earn-a-living cloth. They think that the firearms manufacturers are going to flood the market with these devices. They won’t. Even if they are legally required to do so, they won’t. They saw what happened to S&W, and if the American firearms enthusiast don’t want any of it, they sure as heck are not going to push for it. Did you see what happened to the range that facilitated Armatix’s shenanigans in California. Seppuku my friends. Manufacturers want none of it.

  7. Any halfway intelligent gun owner can foresee the problems with any of this “technology.”

    I believe those with a libertarian ideology should do two things:
    1) Let manufacturers make what they want to make, and gun shops sell what they want to sell. The people have their choice and the market will decide what’s commercially viable.
    2) Do everything in our power to prevent governments from interfering with #1.

    My approach to self-defense is to keep it simple. I want a gun that delivers lead when I pull the trigger. Still, if there are people who would buy this “technology” because of some misguided belief that it’s the only thing safe enough for his/her family, well, it’s better than no gun at all.

    The day will come when a “smart gun” is used in a DGU, and the libs will be all over it.

  8. Hey, free market and all that. Invent it, develop it, market it, sell it. Make it or break it on the product’s merit.

    Just don’t force anyone to buy it.

    • Obamacare, anyone?

      All they have to do is pretend it’s actually a tax on your firearm and SCOTUS will be okay with them forcing you to purchase it.

  9. “If it saves one life, it’s worth mandating” is always their cry.

    But what about “If it costs one life…” because it didn’t work right?

    No problem? Cost of the greater good? Who’s to say who’s life is worth more to society? A kid who gets shot by their friend playing with a gun they found, or mine if my gun doesn’t work right in a DGU? I bet I know the answer….

  10. The Smart Guns should be made mandatory for all federal/state police department/agencies/detectives, FBI, Secret Service, CIA, Border Patrol, Homeland Security agencies, SWAT teams, ect., to set a fine example for use all to follow.

  11. “The device attaches to the trigger of a handgun, which can then only be unlocked by biometric authentication, DELAYING any unauthorized user from firing the weapon.” At a minimum the trigger guard could be cut off by a lazy crook and the device removed.

  12. I’d like to meet these 14 Americans that are willing to buy a smart gun so I can talk some sense into them.

    (I assume that was a typo for 14%. Yikes, that’s a lot)

    • Sounds to me that 14% is a result from a poll asking a question like “Would you like to see the number of firearms-related accidents go down?”

  13. The NRA-ILA needs to fix the paragraph about accidental death. They say “(f)irearms are involved in 0.5% of accidental deaths nationally”, but towards the end of the list they contrast that with is “firearm (1.5)”. Does anyone know the real story there?

    • “Firearm” deaths include homicides, suicides, and accidental discharges. There are probably more children killed in drive-by and gang-/drug-related shootings in gun-free Chicago than there are children killed by accidental discharges throughout the entire country.

      • which is why FBI and ATF warned not to lump gang related shooting, when talking about gun violence, in that gang related violence is NOT Representative of the general population and disproportionately misrepresents real empirical evidence when looking at statistics.

        Same with suicides. suicide is not really about violence its abut ending pain. Different motive.

        Unless mass shooting is the goal before suicide. then in this case it is gun violence.

        but groups like brady don’t want anyone to understand the difference, and deliberately generalizes and lumps everything under the header gun violence. 30,000 the magic number. the reason is is they want a law that disarms everyone no exception.

        Problem is the the difference determines what policies would work best for that situation.
        policies of mass shootings have no relevance to suicides or gangs. vice versa.

        how many people who try to commit suicide give any forewarning? so how do you know who to take guns away from? they will just use a different tool to get the job done.

        But what drives the underlying need to keep them in their own category? human behavior.

        The lumping all in one group makes it easier to blame the tool as being the cause. when the deaths will still continue even if removal of tools is achieved.

        Its a case of taking the batteries out of the smoke detector, but doing nothing to put out the actual fire.

  14. You know what’s caused me to hate the idea of smart guns? Video games.

    Hear me out, I’m going somewhere with this. As many of you may know, the most recent generation of video game systems come with wireless controllers as standard equiment. Like all wireless electronics, they run on battery power. Well, I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been in the middle of a close match and gotten that “Your Controller Battery Is Low” warning light. Then I have to go searching for the charging cable and by the time I’ve got everything ready again I’ve usually lost. The batteries always seem to peter out at the worst possible time.

    And I can’t think of a worse time for a battery to fail than when I need it to fire a gun when my life is on the line.

    • I’m sure it comes with a warning to replace the battery every 14 days when not in use, and any failure to do so voids the warranty.

      • that gets down right expensive. especially if your using a reliable battery, which is not cheap, wasting resources while not using it and wasting money on continuous basis. If it is not standardized battery, then they will be real expensive.

  15. If they are such a great thing, why not outfit every/ all LEO capacity alphabet agency and the military with smart guns to prove how great they are?

  16. If it fails “only” 1 time in 10,000 that translates to 65 to 250 potential failures per year during a DGU. Compare this to 62 child deaths per year. How many adult deaths are equal to one child death? And what about the times an adult is defending a child and the smart gun fails?

  17. There are a lot of parallels to this silliness in the lack of SawStop being mandated on table saws. The system mostly works and mostly reduces injury, but neither are a 100%. Steven Gass thought the mfgrs of table saws would be forced into paying him huge royalties because the CPSC would mandate the system’s use. That never happened and he invented the stuff more than 10 years ago. He was forced to mfgr it on his own. People did buy it, just like some people would buy smart guns. It will just never become the standard, because the market has no interest, and if the market has no interest, neither do the mainstream mfgrs.

  18. These people want to grant me the privilege of spending 1800 of my hard-earned dollars on a 22lr pistol that may not even work when I need it to, and when it does, still fires a 22lr round? Thank you, benevolent overlords, for your compassion, but I think i’ll keep my dumb old 45.

    • yikes not much stopping power in 22lr for self defense purposes. How many rounds you think it would take a panicked shooter to bring down a drugged crazed attacker? especially in center of mass?

      my guess is the reason its 22lr, is reduced coil to prevent damage to circuitry.

  19. This is a conversation that needs to be brought up with fellow gun owners at gatherings, family events, at the range. I’ve talked 3 people out of this smart gun bs so far. One was so into the tech I had to wait for her I-phone to die 20 minutes later to show her that battery powered tech does not belong on a defensive weapon.

  20. “…and while it still needs final adjustments…”

    Translation: More vapor-ware that doesn’t really work, but will get politicians to write stupid laws because they watch a James Bond movie.

    I watch James Bond movies. Where is my submarine car? I was promised submarine cars. 😉

    • another example “war games” inspired the infamous “Computer fraud and abuse act” that played a major roll in arron swartz’s suicide.

      irony is there was no public internet at the time “war games” aired.

      point is when politicians listen to “only” lobbyist, they believe anything they tell them. seem to be a very gullible crowd.

  21. Doesn’t take a lot of digging to see the connections here:

    SMART GUNS FOUNDATION – doesnt list its board members, and you wont find its first filing of IRS required form for another 14 months or so- but heres a start, from its own webpage-

    “Famed Silicon Valley investor and gun reform advocate Ron Conway is spearheading a new $1 million prize for gun safety technology. The prize, which was announced last fall, is now taking applications”.

    Journalist Rob Cox promoted as starting “Sandy Hook Promise”
    http://www2.sandyhookpromise.org/

    Touting education on gun safety education and mental health, sounds good right…until you see goal number one and two: mental health via— background checks. Build community…ie names collections and databases.

    CNN is pushing the meme that smart-gun technology could save lives…
    citing sources like: Ladd Everitt, communications director of the Washington D.C.-based Coalition to Stop Gun Violence.

    Remember CNN is that “news” organization that STILL hasnt run a story on the “Second Most Influential California Democrat” Sen (D) Leland Yee, who just happened to be one of the key anti-gun legislators who got caught up in GUN-RUNNING VIA ISLAMIC terrorists and Chinese gangs.

    So, yes, there is a quiet, well-funded, national collaboration underway, and we who believe in 2A rights need to stay engaged, be informed, and pass the word. Most important- vote, contribute to groups that support us, and give money and time to the politicians who support personal liberty, rather than top-down, progressive behind the scenes “community organizers”.

    We all see how well solar power and electric cars when directed top down by Federal subsidies has worked out- can anyone here remember A123 (funded by major US taxpayer grants, and bk just before going to the Chinese – now named “b234”. How about Solyndra, Tesla, – I could go on like this all day…

    Remember- more laws wont force the lawbreakers to stop using guns. Making guns MORE expensive and hard to obtain by regular folks, will only disarm the legal gun owners, and put them at risk. Proof being the CA Roster of Guns, and this latest nitwittery- “smart guns”.

    • Ok, so remember when I wrote there is obvious collusion and collaboration to force smart-gun technology, despite the fact that it doesnt work, as that “executive action” in itself will be a form of gun control? Examples being California, and MA, and others being considered?

      Read this- more taxpayer money being wasted- to CREATE JUNK SCIENCE and lets wonder WHO gets the grant money.

      http://freebeacon.com/issues/holder-we-want-to-explore-gun-tracking-bracelets/

    • you know what your post reminds me of?

      your anti-gun advocate that has NEVER seen a real firearm in their entire lives and no actual understanding of their mechanisms. Giving advice on what kind of gun laws work or don’t work.

      Is like me who is NO doctor, giving advice to a heart surgeon of 30 years, on how to prevent cardiac death during surgery.

  22. “If it saves even one life, it’s worth mandating”

    Lets just make a list of things we could ban that would save one child’s life; I’ll start with small things:

    Carrots
    Magnets
    Window Blinds
    Marbles
    Peanut butter
    Sushi

    That is just a small stream-of-though of things that kill “at least” one child a year. That is not even getting in to big items like Pools, Cars, Liberals….

  23. Hideo Kojima spent the plot of one of his most famous games (Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots) explaining, in exquisite detail, exactly why smart guns are such a phenomenally bad idea. And unlike in that story, I don’t think we’ll be getting a geriatric superspy to come save the day if we implement it.

  24. ““If it saves even one life, it’s worth mandating,” demagogues cry”…if they TRULY believed this, then gun ownership would be mandated. Again they want to restrict our freedoms more and more every day.

  25. Don’t Taurus, Smith&Wesson and other gun companies have “dumb” trigger locks that effectively render said weapon inoperable? A simple turn of a key & presto it can’t be fired. Wow I just thought of a “smart gun solution”. BTW I never call sarcasm or irony on a post. Figure it out.

  26. And how handy would it be for law enforcement to say, hey that guy has an armatix watch on, he must be carrying a pistol.

    • Write all your state and federal representatives and demand that Law Enforcement Organizations be mandated to use nothing but smart weapons. Point out it will save lives if the officer loses control of their weapon, or leaves it/loses it somewhere that a child might find it, will keep a criminal from being able to use it if stolen (ok, that kind of a lie, pretty sure criminals would figure out how to modify the system to fire in a ‘dumb’ mode). That the department could possibly ‘turn off’ the gun of a rogue cop via an RFID signal or jammer. Or could better control their officer’s from firing prematurely in a hostage situation via similar methods….

      If it saves just one life, right? Let the LEOs and their unions make all the arguments pointing out how stupid these things are in reality.

  27. PS: if you want to do something- just put out the word.

    Remember Armatix, the ones who snuck into the gunstore in LA? Same folks who went to Europe with Rabbit Joel to label gun makers there as part of the problem, and infer they were Nazi’s if they didnt agree.

    Remember Bill Ruger supporting gun control under Clinton. That didnt work out so well, and Ruger learned.
    Same for Smitth and Wesson.

    Now Glock and Smith and Wesson are not selling guns to CA, in protest of the microstamping tech imposed top-down, despite proof it doesnt work, by AG Kamala Harris.

    New Jersey is considering mandating smart gun technology for the plebes.

    Time to tell ALL the non-smart gun makers to refuse to sell to states that disarm the law abiding, by refusing to make guns that wont work, and further- to refuse to sell guns that will, to the state.

    Let the NYPD and LAPD and New Jersey State Police be armed with smart guns, and see how it works out, fighting criminals.

    Money talks, and you know what walks.
    If an LGS offers an Armatix I wont be buying there, ver. That includes the chains, like Turners, Big Five, and Cabelas. I hope they are listening.

  28. Next requirement – Hooking an Interlock device up to the trigger… From Half-Assed But Not Half-Bad Industries, Inc., A wholly-owned subsidiary of Friggemall Corporation.

  29. I’ll take the “dumb” gun! No chip to fail, no battery to run down prematurely, no wires to fray. Is your life worth the risk, however small?

  30. I don’t know if anyone else has made the point yet but has anyone been able to get a hold of one of these to play with it? More to the point to see just how hard it is to HACK one of these. I can’t imagine any system that would make it impossible to either jam the RFID signal or to even just flat out strip the ID system out.

  31. “As a teenager, Omer Kiyani was shot in the face with an unsecured firearm. ”

    Shit, if guns are jumping up and trying to murder teenagers all on their own aren’t they smart enough already?

  32. I propose a required phase-in method for all laws that violate the second amendment:

    1) POTUS Secret Service detail
    2) Government officials and their security details
    3) Federal, State, and Local law enforcement
    4) Private security details
    5) General population

  33. I thought that the article did a poor job of explaining exactly what Identilock is, so I did a quick Google search to learn more. From what I saw, it didn’t look like that bad of an idea. It would seem that all it really is, is an expensive, hi-tech alternative to an under the bed gun safe. Assuming that the battery on the thing lasts as long as the battery in a small gun safe, and assuming that it works 100% of the time, I actually think it could be a good idea to put one of these on a pistol for home defense that you keep under your bed. Is there some detail that I’m missing.

  34. “the firearm accident death rate has fallen to an all-time low, 0.2 per 100,000 population”
    “now we aim for one in 10,000 failure rates”

    I’m just doing the math in my head, but I think that adds up to 50x more people dying when their “smart” gun won’t work in a DGU than we have currently dying from “accidental discharges.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *