The First Smart Gun Comes to America

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Sure to set off a controversy of its own, a German gun manufacturer has introduced the country’s first smart gun. The weapon can only be fired when wearing the accompanying watch that controls electronic components allowing the gun to fire.

The technology is a dream of gun-control advocates who say that smart guns will reduce gun violence, suicides, and accidental shootings by ensuring that guns can only be used by their owner.
Click to expand...
 
Uhm. There've already been "smart guns" with things like palm print readers and the like before this thing.

Most of these things don't sell real well (if at all). They're nasty kludges that only reduce the reliability of the gun's mechanism.

And a gun that requires a specific control device (other than the human brain) is still inadequately controlled.

A device like the wrist strap control in the watch can be rather easily stolen and/or damaged. If stolen, the thieves have the potential to essentially "own" your gun. If damaged, the gun that's supposed to keep you safe is now a paperweight.
 
forcefed said:
Family sues german gun manufacturer after its smart gun failed to sync with the watch and the owner was eaten by a bear.
Click to expand...

anybody fending off a bear with a .22 is going to get eaten anyway
 
Once upon a time guns were considered expensive and unreliable compared to swords and bows. Progress has to start somewhere, one day people might be wondering why this was ever controversial.
 
Could have sworn I saw this on one of those Discovery channel shows a decade plus ago, R&D took that long to make it work?

IMO, while the thought is nice the execution is not. Those who are unwilling to have a gun in their house for the dangers involved probably still won't get it, and those who are willing to have a gun in their house would rather not have to wear a watch all the time in case they want to use it. Gun safe, best protection against having your gun used against you, if an intruder disarms you chances are he'll simply beat you to death with your own gun.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Could have sworn I saw this on one of those Discovery channel shows a decade plus ago, R&D took that long to make it work?

IMO, while the thought is nice the execution is not. Those who are unwilling to have a gun in their house for the dangers involved probably still won't get it, and those who are willing to have a gun in their house would rather not have to wear a watch all the time in case they want to use it. Gun safe, best protection against having your gun used against you, if an intruder disarms you chances are he'll simply beat you to death with your own gun.
Click to expand...

20+ years ago there was a pistol that came with a ring that you had to be wearing to fire it.
 
that watch is really, really ugly, biometric would be much better.
 
Holy crap, I just checked out the article and wonder if they could make the watch any bigger or uglier?
 
Don't most people wear their watch on the left wrist? Would this paperweight still function if a right handed person wore the watch on their left wrist while firing with their right hand?

Another thing, the weapon model is the Armatix iP1. The iP1? Really? I guess iP is what will happen when a person finds themselves in a self-defense type of situation with their expensive .22 caliber paperweight.
 
How can it possibly be controversial to add an option to the market? It's a bad option that costs too much to make any sense. Why would that even become a significant thing?

Oh wait, jack booted thugs, oppression, the king of England coming back, I'm a one man revolution, muh freadumz, all that. I keep forgetting how hyper-aggressive the gun lobby is all over the world.
 
Twisted Kidney said:
How can it possibly be controversial to add an option to the market? It's a bad option that costs too much to make any sense. Why would that even become a significant thing?

Oh wait, jack booted thugs, oppression, the king of England coming back, I'm a one man revolution, muh freadumz, all that. I keep forgetting how hyper-aggressive the gun lobby is all over the world.
Click to expand...

Every time I hear gun idiots talking like that, I just want to ask them where have they been for the last 14 years. If you guys haven't started your revolution by now, I think it's time to STFU and give up the Rambo daydreams.
 
This would be more acceptable IF it allowed for the legal storage of loaded weapons instead of having to separate everything. Sync time would have to be instantaneous though. It also need some sort of secure emergency bypass system. The new motto would be "keep your powder dry and your batteries charged".
 
Any competent firearms instructor will tell you that a mechanical safety is never a substitute for proper training and handling. The same goes for this electronic stuff. Safety is a mindset, not a mechanism. How about a few hypothetical, but very probably scenarios where this could go very wrong?

Scenario 1: At 3AM someone kicks your door in or breaks your window. You get out of bed and grab the gun. You're scared, worried, and groggy. The drug-crazed intruder sees you and advances toward you with a large knife, and *Click.* You forgot to grab the watch. Now what do you do?

Scenario 2: The gun is at home. You're not at home but you're wearing the watch, or the watch is stored separate from the gun. Your loved ones hear someone kick the door in, as in the above scenario, go to get the gun for protection, and don't have the watch or know where it is.

Scenario 3: You really, really need the gun to work and the batteries are dead.

It may sound like a great idea on paper - keep unauthorized people from picking up the gun and causing an accident - but in reality Murphy's Law is going to rear its ugly head. Anything that makes it harder for someone else to misuse is going to make it harder for you to use for its intended purpose. Not only does this mechanism make it harder for you to use the weapon quickly, it prevents a friendly such as a family member or good samaritan using it to come to your aid if you're somehow incapacitated and separated from the weapon during an altercation. Sure, those are hypothetical situations I bring up, but when it comes to personal or home defense they instruct you to expect the worst scenario possible and assess from there so as to not be caught off guard as you may only have one chance to get things right.

That being said, there may be a proper place for this kind of mechanism. I can see one with a slight modification - Law enforcement service pistols could be tied into a watch that the trooper is wearing. The ideal situation would be that any trooper's watch would activate any trooper's pistol, so that any police officer could use any department-issued weapon, but anyone that is not police would not be able to use the weapon. That would prevent an assailant from using a trooper's weapon against him yet not prevent a backup officer from picking up the weapon and using it. That could also work with special weapons such as shotguns or rifles. To me this would be a more logical use for this technology as opposed to the civilian market.
 
This is not new people have been laughing at this thing for the past two years. Only idiots will buy this. There are so many ways to make this firearm stop working for the owner of the guy, it would never have made it out a pipe dream if there were not clueless people who think the criminals will turn into fluffy teddy bears if they take the guns from law abiding citizens.
 
Phoenix333 said:
Any competent firearms instructor will tell you that a mechanical safety is never a substitute for proper training and handling. The same goes for this electronic stuff. Safety is a mindset, not a mechanism. How about a few hypothetical, but very probably scenarios where this could go very wrong?

Scenario 1: At 3AM someone kicks your door in or breaks your window. You get out of bed and grab the gun. You're scared, worried, and groggy. The drug-crazed intruder sees you and advances toward you with a large knife, and *Click.* You forgot to grab the watch. Now what do you do?

Scenario 2: The gun is at home. You're not at home but you're wearing the watch, or the watch is stored separate from the gun. Your loved ones hear someone kick the door in, as in the above scenario, go to get the gun for protection, and don't have the watch or know where it is.

Scenario 3: You really, really need the gun to work and the batteries are dead.

It may sound like a great idea on paper - keep unauthorized people from picking up the gun and causing an accident - but in reality Murphy's Law is going to rear its ugly head. Anything that makes it harder for someone else to misuse is going to make it harder for you to use for its intended purpose. Not only does this mechanism make it harder for you to use the weapon quickly, it prevents a friendly such as a family member or good samaritan using it to come to your aid if you're somehow incapacitated and separated from the weapon during an altercation. Sure, those are hypothetical situations I bring up, but when it comes to personal or home defense they instruct you to expect the worst scenario possible and assess from there so as to not be caught off guard as you may only have one chance to get things right.

That being said, there may be a proper place for this kind of mechanism. I can see one with a slight modification - Law enforcement service pistols could be tied into a watch that the trooper is wearing. The ideal situation would be that any trooper's watch would activate any trooper's pistol, so that any police officer could use any department-issued weapon, but anyone that is not police would not be able to use the weapon. That would prevent an assailant from using a trooper's weapon against him yet not prevent a backup officer from picking up the weapon and using it. That could also work with special weapons such as shotguns or rifles. To me this would be a more logical use for this technology as opposed to the civilian market.
Click to expand...

Agreed. There are too many ways for this to fail when you will need the weapon to simply fire.

Some other things.....Solar Flares ;) Bluetooth interference, etc.

I noticed this comment in the article:

"The technology is a dream of gun-control advocates who say that smart guns will reduce gun violence, suicides, and accidental shootings by ensuring that guns can only be used by their owner."

Gun violence? How will it do that? If someone has the gun and the watch...they can shoot it.

Reduce Suicides? Most people who commit suicide with a firearm OWN the firearm. Do the sights have a shut off mode if you put it to your head or insert the barrel in your mouth? Nope.

Accidental shooting? Most accidental shootings occur when the gun owner is careless. This "technology" will not eliminate stupid. It may stop a child from getting the gun and shooting it, but those are but a small percentage of accidental shootings.

The same folks that claim this is a good thing, also think restrictive gun laws are a good thing. Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the country. They also have an extremely high rate of gun violence.

The most overlooked thing is that NO ONE is going to buy a .22 pistol for $1800 (gun + watch) when they can other pistols for much much less.
 
Wouldn't a smart gun be a self-targeting gun?

I guess this might reduce incidents of children shooting themselves or others... BUT SO WOULD LOCKING UP YOUR GUNS PROPERLY!!!! How about stopping burglars from shooting you with your own gun? Ok, that's actually a good one but you could also solve that with locking your guns up properly...

I know, this is useful in very limited cases. Law enforcement officers, particularly in places with strong gun control. So, useful in the civilized world but not useful in Gunmerica.
 
Congratulations New Jersey, now you are seriously farked.

For those that don't know... New Jersey passed a law a few years back that once a functional smart-gun was commercially available anywhere in the US it would be the only handgun legal to sell in NJ. There is a three year period to implement, so by 2018 you won't be able buy any other handgun in NJ. I am not sure, but this may include private sales as well.
 
Haven't they been making a .50 smart sniper rifle in Texas for a while now? Doesn't that equal a smart gun?
 
Phoenix333 said:
Any competent firearms instructor will tell you that a mechanical safety is never a substitute for proper training and handling. The same goes for this electronic stuff. Safety is a mindset, not a mechanism. How about a few hypothetical, but very probably scenarios where this could go very wrong?

Scenario 1: At 3AM someone kicks your door in or breaks your window. You get out of bed and grab the gun. You're scared, worried, and groggy. The drug-crazed intruder sees you and advances toward you with a large knife, and *Click.* You forgot to grab the watch. Now what do you do?

Scenario 2: The gun is at home. You're not at home but you're wearing the watch, or the watch is stored separate from the gun. Your loved ones hear someone kick the door in, as in the above scenario, go to get the gun for protection, and don't have the watch or know where it is.

Scenario 3: You really, really need the gun to work and the batteries are dead.

It may sound like a great idea on paper - keep unauthorized people from picking up the gun and causing an accident - but in reality Murphy's Law is going to rear its ugly head. Anything that makes it harder for someone else to misuse is going to make it harder for you to use for its intended purpose. Not only does this mechanism make it harder for you to use the weapon quickly, it prevents a friendly such as a family member or good samaritan using it to come to your aid if you're somehow incapacitated and separated from the weapon during an altercation. Sure, those are hypothetical situations I bring up, but when it comes to personal or home defense they instruct you to expect the worst scenario possible and assess from there so as to not be caught off guard as you may only have one chance to get things right.

That being said, there may be a proper place for this kind of mechanism. I can see one with a slight modification - Law enforcement service pistols could be tied into a watch that the trooper is wearing. The ideal situation would be that any trooper's watch would activate any trooper's pistol, so that any police officer could use any department-issued weapon, but anyone that is not police would not be able to use the weapon. That would prevent an assailant from using a trooper's weapon against him yet not prevent a backup officer from picking up the weapon and using it. That could also work with special weapons such as shotguns or rifles. To me this would be a more logical use for this technology as opposed to the civilian market.
Click to expand...

Yup. This gun is going to be a huge commercial failure here in the US. I do not live in a good neighborhood, and I can tell you right now that noone will have time to strap on a watch in the middle of the night to fire a gun. I will stick to my Colt .357 hollowpoints. If someone is high on meth or something, a .22 caliber will not be enough.
 
I figured a smart gun would be a gun that can make phone calls and take pictures. They should make that. :D
 
Actually, instead of a watch why not just make it require a 2 digit combo code? Easy enough to do if you know the number, but if you don't know the number, 99 tries is still going to take a long time and give time for the victim to escale. It could be a toggle wheel like a bike lock. Fully mechanical and does not rely on electronics, which can fail.
 
HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHA...what a stupid gun/idea/price/caliber/watch..


The entire article made me laugh..:D
 
Red Squirrel said:
Actually, instead of a watch why not just make it require a 2 digit combo code? Easy enough to do if you know the number, but if you don't know the number, 99 tries is still going to take a long time and give time for the victim to escale. It could be a toggle wheel like a bike lock. Fully mechanical and does not rely on electronics, which can fail.
Click to expand...

That's not a half bad idea, maybe 3 digit just to make it more secure. I use a mechanical trigger lock (3 digit) because having to find a damn key is not good when I keep my keyring in the kitchen and my gun in the bedroom.
 
Liberal anti-Constitution states like Kalifornia and New York are going to mandate these guns, just watch!
 
I don't want a criminal to be able to break into a home and arm himself, nor do we want kids playing with guns without supervision, which I think is something that liberals and conservatives can both agree on.

However, I am not convinced that the weapon couldn't simply be modified slightly if someone has enough time to make it fire without (guns aren't that complicated, you just need a hammer to smack a cartridge and barrel for the lead bullet), and that such a safety mechanism wouldn't just end up reducing the reliability of the weapon and also requiring the owner to wear an advertisement he has a firearm on his person 24x7 (can't leave it with the pistol, or you just defeated the purpose).

Smart guns are fine with me, but this implementation is not.
 
More parts means more chances of something breaking rending it useless.
Watch breaks it's useless so I see plenty of fail.

Do you think Jack Bauer would have this toy?
I'll stick to my HK P2000 .40, tried and true.
 
I think the worst part is that if people adopt these and trust them, they'll eventually start thinking it's okay to leave them laying around with kids in the house, which in turn will lead the kids to think it's no big deal to pick up a random gun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top