US Government Releases Official Guidelines For Smart Guns

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,003
Recommended guidelines defining the minimum technical requirements law enforcement agencies expect from smart guns have now been finalized. As suggested by the draft released in July, smart guns (obviously) should be designed only to fire when held by an authorized person, and security features must be a permanent part of the weapon.

…most of the guidelines are about what smart gun security features can't do -- impair operation or increase time needed to draw, holster or fire the weapon. If a firearm's security features are malfunctioning, they also need to default to unlocking the weapon. If that sounds pretty lax, it's supposed to be: the department says the project is designed to spur the growth of gun safety technology without limiting innovation by choosing a standard too soon. As nice as it is to see these guidelines developed, it's important to remember that they're optional: this is a voluntary list of specifications.
 
Eventually humans will be unable to make ANY of his own decisions.

I predict 3 of these will be sold before something goes wrong. And that something will be someone getting killed because the gun wouldn't fire for the victim because BSOD or something.

Point. Click. That is as smart as the gun needs to be.

F___ing morons.
 
It made a great movie prop.
1c9ce83925b82699d9d8016d49c73bc6.jpg
 
"Smart" guns aren't smart to use. They cannot not impair function under all conditions. More absurdity coming from a ridiculous "Justice" Dept.
 
Last edited:
DrLobotomy said:
Eventually humans will be unable to make ANY of his own decisions.

I predict 3 of these will be sold before something goes wrong. And that something will be someone getting killed because the gun wouldn't fire for the victim because BSOD or something.

Point. Click. That is as smart as the gun needs to be.

F___ing morons.
Click to expand...


I bet there are parents out there who would have loved technology like this on their own guns. You act like its a bad idea, yet there are plenty of scenarios where it would be a good thing to have.
 
Briguyatx said:
I bet there are parents out there who would have loved technology like this on their own guns. You act like its a bad idea, yet there are plenty of scenarios where it would be a good thing to have.
Click to expand...
Maybe in fantasyland. Reality says this is stupid.

What parents? You mean the irresponsible ones that left guns out for little childrens to kill themselves with? Yea..No.
 
The main problem with these smart gun specs is the parent who will think their 'smart' guns are now safe to leave around small kids since the tech will protect them. Which it may for a while. But by the specs, the fail mode is for the gun to revert to fire for anyone mode, including the small kids who by now will have played with said gun several times. Then we will have a wailing parent cussing the evil smart gun company for not keeping little John or Jane safe.
 
DrLobotomy said:
Eventually humans will be unable to make ANY of his own decisions.

I predict 3 of these will be sold before something goes wrong. And that something will be someone getting killed because the gun wouldn't fire for the victim because BSOD or something.

Point. Click. That is as smart as the gun needs to be.

F___ing morons.
Click to expand...

Did you get beyond the title of the thread before posting?
 
DrLobotomy said:
Maybe in fantasyland. Reality says this is stupid.

What parents? You mean the irresponsible ones that left guns out for little childrens to kill themselves with? Yea..No.
Click to expand...

Ah, to be young again. And also not very smart.
 
blkt said:
It made a great movie prop.
1c9ce83925b82699d9d8016d49c73bc6.jpg
Click to expand...
Funnily enough, that fingerprint scanner works using movie magic!
mp_SF-dents-gloves_movie1.jpg



EDIT: I also suspect most existing gunowners will not appreciate more government mandated intrusion into firearms, especially into firearms design. Over in Europe and other foriegn lands (California), the people are already used to it. The primary issue in some of those areas (NJ), is if ONE smart gun is sold, all future guns sold are mandated to be "smart guns."
 
I'm all for getting these for law enforcement so we stop getting those "suspect grabbed my gun so we had to shoot him" excuses.

However I'm far less enthusiastic about forcing them on the general public.
 
Tweak42 said:
I'm all for getting these for law enforcement so we stop getting those "suspect grabbed my gun so we had to shoot him" excuses.
Click to expand...
All the videos I've seen, the suspect really does go for the gun, and in the cases where a police officer was killed by gunshot, estimates show as high as 10% are using the officer's own firearm.

IMO, fighting a cop for no good reason is cause enough to get shot. I'll never understand these idiots I see in liveleak and the like that have ten cops around them, and then still get all stabby or assault one of the cops, as if there is any chance that could improve their situation.

As was said though, the most important aspect of any firearm is its reliability, and if a safety device impedes reliability then that's a deal breaker. The idea of a safety device that upon failure still allows the firearm to fire is smart though, but I'd be curious to see how that was implemented and hopefully it doesn't add too much bulk and weight.
 
Despotes said:
"Smart" guns aren't smart to use. They cannot not impair function under all conditions. More absurdity coming from a ridiculous "Justice" Dept.
Click to expand...

Our Attorney General of 6 years saying the Electoral College should be abolished. This guy was supposed to be the lead lawyer in America.

 
The only "smart gun" I like the idea of is the one from the AvP games. It Just tracks your enemy. You still have control of the trigger.
 
These will be fun to hack.

On another note these will never be mainstream, yeah sure a few tree huggers might pick one up feeling safe until they are dead due to smart gun failure. To many people can make quality safe custom guns with out big brand names, this is not a winnable war and I will not be giving up my firearms. Main reason is because we have people in this country that still think it's ok to vote for someone like a clinton and our second best option was a trump.
 
There are several problems with this right off the bat. For one, you are adding a battery powered electronic lock that has to be controlled wirelessly. That is going to add a degree of latency or outright failure.

Relays and switches stick all the time, especially when they get wet/dirty/etc.

Another thing is you are adding weight and bulk to the guns.

You are also adding an easily identifiable control device (the token ring/bracely/watch/whatever) that makes it obvious you are carrying. There is a reason open carry is stupid....

You are also adding cost to your guns...
 
westrock2000 said:
Our Attorney General of 6 years saying the Electoral College should be abolished. This guy was supposed to be the lead lawyer in America.
Click to expand...

So they allow 11-25+ million illegal aliens to flood into the USA that will only ever vote Democrat, while continuously calling voter ID's racist, and then try to dismantle the Electoral College. Yup, they're definitely not trying to ruin America, of course not. /s

Evil treasonous fucks is what they are at this point.
The race card has expired too, the end.
 
I think smart guns would be cool. A nice addition to the arsenal. Not mandatory. Not required on all guns. But, have a few for sale. It'd be a neat little thing. Not my 'go to' when life depends on it. But, a cool little range gun. :)
 
The fingerprint scanner on my smart phone works pretty good.

Not good enough for a defense weapon though.
 
Fuck all this, i'm not buying one of those pieces of shit.

I'll keep my "dumb gun" for use.
 
To reply to most of the posts in this thread, the final version of the guidelines agrees with you.

"Also like the draft, most of the guidelines are about what smart gun security features can't do -- impair operation or increase time needed to draw, holster or fire the weapon. If a firearm's security features are malfunctioning, they also need to default to unlocking the weapon."

This is the US Government in total agreement with you about what a smart gun must not do.
 
Tweak42 said:
I'm all for getting these for law enforcement so we stop getting those "suspect grabbed my gun so we had to shoot him" excuses.

However I'm far less enthusiastic about forcing them on the general public.
Click to expand...

And there we go... you had to go there. Let's just assume cops can't be trusted but the general public is better.

CLOSE THIS THREAD. LOL
 
Genious! why couldn't they think of this in the past. Hopefully they are not hackable cause that could become a problem.
 
This points out more about what they cannot do. They cannot impair function of the gun if the failsafe system faults. They also are not allowed to create a lag from de-holster to fire. They also are optional.

I feel like 3 people read the article...

I am more worried about the false sense of security people will get from this. Parents that leave guns where their kids can get them could be more likely to leave it around figuring "they cant shoot it anyways" etc etc. I dunno, as long as said things are optional at the end user, I am okay. If it were to get forced, then it gets weird.

But as I am a owner of firearms I feel compelled to scream and yell things about 2nd amendment violations and gubment control or something (throws his pocket constitution at the monitor). MURICA!!!
 
zomby said:
Genious! why couldn't they think of this in the past. Hopefully they are not hackable cause that could become a problem.
Click to expand...

It was not doable in the past, and I don't think it's doable now. Give identity tech another 10, 20, 30 years and we may have something seriously good enough for smart guns, but not now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top