Jump to content

Will Smart Guns Hit Their Target This Time?


mauserme

Recommended Posts

https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2020/06/us-smart-gun-tech-start-ups-to-bring-personalised-weapons-to-market/

 

 

 

Will smart guns hit their target this time?

 

By Ben Heubl

Published Friday, June 5, 2020

 

...

Politically, there is new hope, too. Joe Biden, the official 2020 presidential candidate for the Democrats, pitched his smart-gun policy last year, and 2020 could change the course of a two-decade struggle. “If the Democrats take control of the government in 2021, yes, we may see an increase in financial support for smart guns,” says David Hemenway, professor at the Harvard School of Public Health. It would pick up where President Barack Obama left off. Obama supported research, saying gun manufacturers need urgent support to make them safer and to bring smart guns to market.

 

Margot Hirsch, president of the Smart Tech Challenges Foundation (STCF), an organisation that helps personalised gun start-ups, says a new President could put R&D funding behind smart gun development. “(The Trump) administration has not. It could be a game changer.”

...

How well smart gun tech firms can weather demand will depend on military and law-enforcement services. The military likes personalised guns as it prevents them ending up in the hands of the enemy. As more military bases are abandoned, it’s feasible there is interest, Stevenson believes. If the Democrats make it into office, the odds are good for the military to buy in. The commander-in-chief of the US military will have sufficient power to motivate adoption via a side-arm officers carry.

...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are numerous reasons why smart guns should never be mandated.

 

"The military likes personalised guns as it prevents them ending up in the hands of the enemy."

 

And when PFC John Doe can't use his dead buddy's "personalised" (I see you, non-American author) rifle because his own has malfunctioned during a firefight, PFC Doe ends up dead, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I favor equal market opportunity and choice.

 

If you want to buy a smart gun, go for it.

 

If you want to by a dumb gun, go for it.

 

Will a smart gun have facial recognition software? Will it recognize me with a mask?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll buy one. I'll videotape the thrashing it takes alongside a Beretta or Glock and post it to YouTube. We'll see if it's worthy. I have preconceived notions that it won't survive the sand test or the swimming test, but a product has yet to be available so we'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is FAR easier to disrupt an electronic system than it is to get it to function properly.

 

Wartime opponents and criminals benefit from a gun that will not function.

 

At best, proponents have helium in their heads, at worst they are traitors to the country.

 

AND HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT THE SMART GUNS (OR THEIR PARTS) MANUFACTURED IN CHINA WON'T HAVE A HIDDEN "BACK DOOR" TO SHUT THEM DOWN AT WILL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know what happened to this

https://youtu.be/gzfQFRzZXPw

But it looked promising.

 

Also wouldve liked to see more development of Remingtons EtronX electric primers

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/electric-cartridge-primers-gone-but-not-lamented/

 

The problem with smart gun development is theyre going about it backwards. You need to reliably develop and prove electronic firing systems that go bang everytime you pull the trigger before incorporating any lockout technology. At that point everyone knows the tech well enough to be comfortable with it, gains other advantages (maybe caseless ammo one day soon), where adding the lockout would just be one more feature like active or passive safeties are now.

 

Remember how long it took for police to replace their revolvers with automatics? I dont fear new gun technology as long as it proves itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remingtons major mistake was putting Etronx in a Fudd gun. Twice the price, scarce expensive ammo, had a key and lock, but no appeal beyond that.

 

Most gun people have a few guns that are strictly range toys, thats where the initial market is for any electronic gun. With electronic primers and triggers you could do a pull/release mode that could fire the primer as soon as the gun detected lockup. Just bounce the trigger like on an electronic paintball gun. No worries about outrunning the bolt and sear like with mechanical binary triggers. All in it would still be cheaper than a NFA registerable M16 lower.

 

Heres another example of an electronic lower, this has a selectable mechanical mode. Uses a traditional semi auto sear, but has a selectable mode that uses a solenoid to fire it.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_zy4ryWnXZU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smart guns = dumb idea.

 

File it in the trash bin along with microstamping.

 

The amount of issues that would need to be overcome to make a truly "safe" smart gun that works every time you would need to pull the trigger is near insurmountable.

 

A gun is a tool that needs to work very close to 100% reliable every time you pull the trigger means that you need to remove all issues and concepts that would prevent that from happening. "smart" gun technology would have to work in all weathers, under water, through gloves, and without any electronics involved. If someone can come up with a technology that can do that, great... but we'd be better off working on cold fusion or a space elevator, because those things are more likely to be solved before "smart" guns are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what guns people who say that they only want guns that work 100% of the time are buying.

Over the years, I have experienced or read about failures to feed, misfires, broken springs, broken firing pins, faulty safety, etc..

Please lets know what gun model you own that no one has ever had a problem with it not functioning.

 

I am not jumping on the safe-gun bandwagon. I want to see proof of its practicality. I do not want legislation forcing its use.

 

Technology does advance. Maybe it will involve something other then sending a projectile at a target.

I doubt that anyone in 1720 would have envisioned a rifle capable of firing several hundred rounds a minute, or laser sights, or a pistol that holds 15 rounds.

When was the last time you worried about keeping your powder dry?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the challenge is to restrict access to the firearm it's my belief that the place to innovate for police/military would be with the holster. Imagine a smart holster that restricted access to a traditional gun. Command would be able to authorize lethal force/ROE and remotely lock/unlock holsters on the officer/soldier. So long as lethal force was authorized the gun itself works as it would today.

I don't really see a civilian version of this. We already have bio-metric/quick access safes for home/car use and the legal system restricts misuse of the firearms when carried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another gun that uses electronics and batteries in the fire control system. Being marketed at small arms contracts, so people will be trusting their lives to them.

https://youtu.be/UdGueKkjQlk

 

The metalstorm also uses electronic ignition on caseless ammo

https://youtu.be/AEu9LLQpOF8

 

You Fudds can stick with your ball and muskets, but Id embrace electronic guns if they perfect and prove the tech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another gun that uses electronics and batteries in the fire control system. Being marketed at small arms contracts, so people will be trusting their lives to them.

 

The metalstorm also uses electronic ignition on caseless ammo

 

You Fudds can stick with your ball and muskets, but Id embrace electronic guns if they perfect and prove the tech.

Electronic guns are not the same as "smart" guns. Electric Gatling guns have been around for over a century, Richard Gatling himself patented the first one in 1983

 

The basic concept of a "smart gun," as the term is commonly used and understood, is one that can detect an authorized user and only function for that user

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Electronic guns are not the same as "smart" guns. Electric Gatling guns have been around for over a century, Richard Gatling himself patented the first one in 1983

 

The basic concept of a "smart gun," as the term is commonly used and understood, is one that can detect an authorized user and only function for that user

I realize the technocrat liberal’s holy grail is a gun they can remotely disable. To be able to reliably do that you need to replace the mechanical components of a gun with electronic components. If the antigun community wants to fund that leap in technology rather than funding obnoxious suburban moms I say let them.

 

The infosec community is a huge part of the gun community. Any tech that allows for remote disable could be killed and replaced with hidden full auto programs. That community is also the reason that any half assed attempt to bring a smart gun to market gets killed off in prototype stage because they show how easy it is to defeat when based on mechanical systems.

https://youtu.be/ANllOmgJH9Y

 

Smart aiming tech could be another suite of smart gun tech, while that double edged sword could prevent you from accidentally shooting a family member it can also provide better aim. Here’s another example of the infosec community evaluating and hacking a trackingpoint smart targeting system to hit the wrong target.

https://youtu.be/BJPCYdjrNWs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And no doubt the software would be proprietary and repairs forbidden except by the manufacturer, and they will disable it remotely for violating the ToS.

And if the manufacturer puts in a remote kill switch, you can be assured that the cops will have those codes as well. They don't want to be shot while doing a "no knock" search.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And no doubt the software would be proprietary and repairs forbidden except by the manufacturer, and they will disable it remotely for violating the ToS.

And if the manufacturer puts in a remote kill switch, you can be assured that the cops will have those codes as well. They don't want to be shot while doing a "no knock" search.

 

Hmm, aiming it anyone not broadcasting the right bluetooth signal locks the trigger. So that's how those Westworld guns worked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Electronic guns are not the same as "smart" guns. Electric Gatling guns have been around for over a century, Richard Gatling himself patented the first one in 1983

 

The basic concept of a "smart gun," as the term is commonly used and understood, is one that can detect an authorized user and only function for that user

I realize the technocrat liberal’s holy grail is a gun they can remotely disable. To be able to reliably do that you need to replace the mechanical components of a gun with electronic components. If the antigun community wants to fund that leap in technology rather than funding obnoxious suburban moms I say let them.

 

Not necessarily, you can accomplish what they want with little more than a solenoid that engages an internal safety in an otherwise "dumb" gun. And if you look at the guns that have been brought to the civilian market, that is what you see

 

 

The infosec community is a huge part of the gun community. Any tech that allows for remote disable could be killed and replaced with hidden full auto programs.

And that is the reason fully electronic guns are non-starters, at least for civilians. They meet the definition of "can be readily restored to shoot, automatically" per 26 U.S.C. § 5845( b ) right out of the gate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what guns people who say that they only want guns that work 100% of the time are buying.

Over the years, I have experienced or read about failures to feed, misfires, broken springs, broken firing pins, faulty safety, etc..

Please lets know what gun model you own that no one has ever had a problem with it not functioning.

 

I am not jumping on the safe-gun bandwagon. I want to see proof of its practicality. I do not want legislation forcing its use.

 

Technology does advance. Maybe it will involve something other then sending a projectile at a target.

I doubt that anyone in 1720 would have envisioned a rifle capable of firing several hundred rounds a minute, or laser sights, or a pistol that holds 15 rounds.

When was the last time you worried about keeping your powder dry?

Personally, I've got a Beretta 96 Centurion I've had for about 17 years now. Probably 20000+ rounds through it and not a single failure. I feed it whatever happens to be on sale and it eats it all. That one sits on my "Never Sell" list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...