February 23, 2014, 09:12 PM | #51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 361
|
I would not use this it would just be another way for someone other then me being able to control my gun for me in a good way and or the bad way!! If it has a chip in it it can have a tracking chip in it as well... I turn off all the tracking apps and programs on my smart phone all the time... I dont need to worry that I have to turn off the tracking on my gun too....
Im sure they will try to market it as its the new and cool high tech gun and target the new young gun owners just starting out.... |
February 24, 2014, 01:11 AM | #52 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 27, 2010
Posts: 553
|
Quote:
They are "gun control".
__________________
Regret for the things we did can be tempered by time; it is regret for the things we did not do that is inconsolable." -Sydney J. Harris |
|
February 24, 2014, 01:33 AM | #53 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 3, 2008
Posts: 3,057
|
I honestly just doubt it would ever get any main stream backing. Gun makers know enough that their clients don't want it, so why waste money on the technology and marketing just to make it flop. The consumers have spoken last year, enough so that our Presidents agenda got shut down.
|
February 24, 2014, 09:09 AM | #54 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 9, 2007
Posts: 3,101
|
Quote:
The governments of many countries want this. That's as "mainstream" as will be required. We need factual, effective arguments and reasons that this technology is flawed to the point that it raises risk, not lowers it, or this will eventually become mandatory, and those reasons and arguments must be logical and must be accepted by people- not just gun owners. You and I know this is dumb. Joe and Mary Sixpack don't. They want their kids safe at school and they will accept that this is the way. Their heartstrings will overcome logic. Keeping kids safe is correct and therefore this tech will get welded onto the notion of safety to children in particular, because right or wrong, that's the way to get adults behind safety in the 21st century, even if that safety is simply an illusion. |
|
February 24, 2014, 12:16 PM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 18, 2012
Location: West of the Rockies
Posts: 435
|
so these things become popular and now you can spot every gun carrier by looking at their wrist? no thanks. I dont even like having my gun print let alone announce to the world by the watch on my wrist that i'm carrying a firearm. besides my iphone 4s cant even work most of its apps without shutting off plus we will probably have to update the technology every year to keep it functional a defensive weapon shouldn't be this complicated.
__________________
He alone is my Rock and my Salvation, my Stronghold; I shall not be shaken! |
February 24, 2014, 12:37 PM | #56 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
IOW the concern that a "smart gun" technology is only 95% reliable rather than 99.999% reliable will fall on deaf ears in those countries, because armed self-defense isn't generally considered to be important. Worse yet, the fact that the technology DOESN'T work may actually be perceived as a BENEFIT.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak |
|
February 24, 2014, 12:45 PM | #57 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,617
|
Quote:
However, the problem is that the smart gun advocates do not care if it functions well (or even at all) as a defensive weapon. What they see is the "perfect" gun, one that cannot be used as an offensive weapon, and is still a gun, so the 2nd Amendment nuts will not have their precious right trampled. There are, of course some huge holes in that line of reasoning. But, again, they don't care. They are going to LIE, claim it works perfectly and having smart guns, and ONLY smart guns is the only way to keep all our babies safe! And the people who only know guns from bad personal experiences and/or the video screen will eat it up.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
February 24, 2014, 03:17 PM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 11, 2009
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 247
|
Maybe I should start investing in bows & arrows.
Or sharpened sticks. |
February 24, 2014, 03:56 PM | #59 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piWCBOsJr-w [I'm sorry, I just couldn't help myself.]
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak |
|
February 25, 2014, 07:16 AM | #60 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 11, 2009
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 247
|
Quote:
|
|
February 25, 2014, 08:01 AM | #61 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 7,172
|
I think I read somewhere that one of the provision of this bill (or similar) was to make the technology retroactive to ALL handguns.
Now how do you suppose that's gonna happen? I mean is there going to be a kit available for a pre-war Colt Woodsman or your Browning 1922? |
February 25, 2014, 10:38 AM | #62 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 7, 2012
Posts: 514
|
Quote:
Disclosure: I am ethnicnally German, born in Germany though my parents were US citizens. It is worth noting that German personal privacy laws are superior to those in the US -which for all intents has none since the 4th Amendment has been gutted to irrelevance. Angela Merckle was, by all reports, TRULY in high dudgeon having her calls intercepted by the NSA - this was just not political theater on her part. I think the lessons of WWI and WWII, along with the Marshall plan, truly changed the thinking of the people. |
|
February 25, 2014, 10:49 AM | #63 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 7, 2012
Posts: 514
|
What I have NOT seen in smart gun technology is anyone throwing out the idea of an implantable chip IN THE HUMAN. We chip dogs and horses all the time with no ill effects.
Key the weapon to the chip, then the only issue you have is actually making the thing work. This would be easier if guns were electrically-fired and not mechanically...but details, details... Yes, the goal of ALL smart gun discussions is to limit weapon access so politicians can feel good, but we WILL have a smart gun mandate at some point, so we may as well throw out concepts we can at least live with if not embrace. Oh, yeah, don't sell off your old-school dumb guns... |
February 25, 2014, 11:50 AM | #64 | |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,815
|
Quote:
No way, no how. I don't care if it can be done to dogs and horses. Besides, if the gun is keyed to my chip, what if my wife and daughter need my gun when I'm not home?
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|
February 25, 2014, 12:17 PM | #65 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 9, 2007
Posts: 3,101
|
Quote:
And it would have to do done by a smith. There's not exactly a glut of them And then there's the guns that would no longer be safe with this tech because of the retrofit. Hell, my State laws might be such that the retrofit is illegal, due to testing requirements. And then there's the fact that my collector items are devalued by it. But really, who cares about my personal property anyway. |
|
February 25, 2014, 07:57 PM | #66 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,135
|
Quote:
|
|
February 26, 2014, 10:00 AM | #67 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 9, 2010
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 541
|
Quote:
|
|
February 27, 2014, 02:44 AM | #68 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 2, 2005
Posts: 1,196
|
Since the gun will need power I wonder what happens when your battery goes dead? Or do you just put your gun in a charger?
|
February 27, 2014, 06:41 AM | #69 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 31, 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,076
|
Not sure if anyone has mentioned it, but the one thing I have learned in the last 20 years is that ANYTHING can be hacked...
And will be... |
February 27, 2014, 12:19 PM | #70 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,617
|
While not a perfect comparison, I think some things do apply:
No military vehicle designed for field use requires a key to operate. Now, just why do you think that is? (they may be secured under lock & key, but they don't need a key to start and run) Any kind of "authorized user only" system, be it "smart" or dumb (trigger lock) is a BAD idea in some circumstances. And I believe that those circumstances are much more common for most users than those situations where such a system is actually a good idea. And an "authorized user only" system that you cannot disable is the worst of all.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
February 27, 2014, 07:14 PM | #71 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 3, 2008
Posts: 3,057
|
We have had more than our fare share of customers come in with trigger locks that either got stuck or they lost the keys to, for us to drill them off.
I got into the habit of keeping a torsion wrench and "S" rake in one of m desk drawers, those little locks are pretty quick with a simple rake. |
February 27, 2014, 07:15 PM | #72 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2013
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 553
|
The more complicated techno junk you put in something the less reliable it will be. I have no interest in an over priced "smart" pistol.
|
March 1, 2014, 07:54 AM | #73 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 9, 2007
Posts: 3,101
|
Quote:
Think about this- even with fingerprint ID, somebody only has to have grips that fit your pistol and have them set up for their fingerprint. Doesn't even have to be hacked! It's like some old Chrysler cars- crooks went to junkyards, got ignition cylinders, broke into cars, installed their cylinder, turned their key that fit their cylinder, and drove your car away. |
|
March 2, 2014, 11:32 AM | #74 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Remember when Uncle Mike's was advertising a fingerprint recognition holster?
See any now? That's a hint. Interestingly, in A.E. Van Vogt's Weapon Shops of Isher series which promoted civilian energy weapons to resist tyranny, the guns sold were individualized. This was because they were far superior to goverment guns and they didn't want government agents to get the tech.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
March 2, 2014, 12:38 PM | #75 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,617
|
Since "smart guns" do border on science fiction, its fair to look at some in SF for ideas and examples.
First, in science fiction, they always seem to work. One interesting idea was used in the Lost in Space movie. In it, the guns were "voice activated". And the guns could be told who was authorized to use them. One part of the plot involves DR Smith (who wasn't on the list) convincing young Will to tell his gun to authorize "any" user, and so, the bad guy gets his hands on a gun that will work for him... So, here is the idea of voice print recognition, along with the gun being able to store a list of authorized users. This is head and shoulders above the fingerprint ID system in several ways. First, the multiple users ability, and second, not having to grip the gun in just the right way, being able to use gloves, etc., and its better than a watch or some other separate item that could be lost, damaged, or simply malfunction. Of course, there are drawbacks to that as well. So it would only be good sense to include a silent means of id for the gun, as well. Current and near future tech isn't reliable enough, but in 100 years? who knows?
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|