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.
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.
Bob Costas is NOT relevant in any sense of the word, the Olympics went off without a hitch despite his departure, perhaps it’s time for Costas to retire…
NO, they are actually retarded.
Hey Bob, how about we do this: You shut your pie hole regarding things you know nothing about and just announce the games, and I will continue legally owning my firearms without having to listen to your idiotic drivel. Then we’ll both be happy, and you’ll be able to sound halfway intelligent.
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”).
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.
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.
Who is Mike McDaniel?
We need an about page for these missing people like Mike and Florida Matt.
Smart guns, smart phones, smart bombs, smart cars, dumb people.
lol “only as smart as the dumb people who make them?”
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.
I don’t know if it’s possible for a place like NY to seek out their rights. Legal carry hasn’t existed in over 100 years, and DeBlasios election proves the majority have other priorities then legal concealed carry.
The way they culturally see it, self defense isn’t even an option. Crime and violence are considered a numbers game, and if you win the Bad Luck lottery, you’re supposed to take your licks-and potentially die- because only barbarians would harm someone else for any reason.
“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….
Sports and guns question….
I am sure there are other members of the AI and POTG that have kept up with this more than I have but did anyone else question the death of Steve McNair for several reasons? First, He was shot 4 times (twice in the head and twice in the chest). Does not that seem excessive for a murder/suicide? Second, Sahel Kazemi was shot in the right side of the head but there was powder residue on her left hand. How do you shoot yourself in the right side of the head with your left hand? It might just be me but I do not buy the murder/suicide theory.
where can you buy them at ? I live in Indiana,
Damn, hands sure are deadly. We need to ban hands ASAP. For the children.
Serpa Blackwahwk level 2 holster. Enough said.
Get ready for the pain that your comment will bring. Serpa haters abound and are vocal.
When i OC I use a retention holster, it’s a must and should be paired with good situational awareness, something that luckily comes naturally to me.
Not to be rude, but the statement, “something that luckily comes naturally to me”, is the first flaw in your situational awareness. Be careful with that assumption.
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?
Which is why, for most of us regular folks, open carry creates a tactical disadvantage.
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.
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.
“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….
Good analysis, thanks for some things to think about.
One other issue of note to think about when you are carrying open or concealed.
We should realize that carrying a gun is like having a child with you. You have to protect both yourself and the child/gun.
The big difference is that your gun, as in this instance, can be used against you.
There was an incident in Madison Wi, where I work, where the police arrived on a scene where a drunk became aggressive and attack the officer.
The officer broke away and pulled his gun. The man charged again but now the officer had to also protect himself from being disarmed, i.e. protect the gun.
The officer probably could have physically defeated the drunk, but with a fire arm out and vulnerable, the officer was forced to fire for the immediate protection of the gun.
Thus, for us citizen carriers, say in a robbery, once a gun is displayed, your wallet is no longer the priority and the gun becomes the focus of the opposing parties to protect or acquire. The asset can become liability.
If you don’t use a retention holster, keep a potential adversary at a distance because you may have to draw earlier to protect your gun and your life, in that order.
Blackhawk serpa cqc for me. I suspect most people that talk shit about them have never used them. There’s no way I could release the gun and have my finger on the trigger. The only place my finger can be is the frame above the trigger.
I was in NY city last week. Cops everywhere. And yet, strangely, I never felt safe.
I believe non violent Felons should have a mechanism to regain their 2A rights.
Brave man. My condolences to his fiance and his family. He died protecting his brothers (and sisters) in arms, unfortunately at home at the hands of a fellow soldier, not abroad while fighting America’s enemies. A worthy sacrifice, but a sacrifice that shouldn’t have been necessary. I bet he would’ve given anything to have an M9 in hand at that moment.
Someone should let them know they have a whole bunch of guns violating their posted signs down in the museum. Somebody could get hurt.
here is the skinny.
there are non violent convicted felons. they might have had things happen that were either beyond their control, or have had circumstances that may have driven them to make bad choices. I feel if they are not habitual felons (meaning more than one felony) why should they loose the right FOREVER?
When you give it proper thought there are many individuals out there who do not have a felony, but do have a sheet as long as their arm for misdemeanor battery or assault. and they can still go buy a rifle or shotgun with mo issues. kinda baffling…
Non violent felons should have their rights fully restored after their sentence or probation is completed. I am not comfortable with violent felons having their gun rights restored, same with habitual felons.
Comment moderated.
No flaming the website, its authors of fellow commentators.
Self-defense is a human right. Period. If a person is too dangerous to be trusted with that human right then they need to be kept in prison for the security of a free people.
Was there actually a threat? I have no inside info but it does resonate with some of the false rape and hate crime accusations that have come to light. Perhaps he was informed that public opinion had him slinging burgers after the next election and tried for an excuse that didnt leave him looking like Flipper. Now he just looks like a putz….but thats no bar to public office.
At least we are free, unlike those poor slobs in Syria.
Devils jerseys china With Paypal Payment
What’s up,I read your new stuff named “Are Smart Guns Actually Smart? – The Truth About Guns” on a regular basis.Your writing style is awesome, keep up the good work! And you can look our website about اغاني.