Smart Guns - is there a market?

[Dr. Who]

19-year-old MIT undergraduate developing a smart gun with a fingerprint reader, safety mechanism will allow only the gun owner to use the firearm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yy6LqoqACdA

There is other smart gun technology out there but it relies on receiving a signal from a special watch or ring, which makes it less than useful in an emergency situation, plus it appears it can be defeated by magnets. However, fingerprint technology is more useful. I could see police officers being outfitted with smart guns. If a criminal grabs their gun, it won't fire. It would also be useful in homes with small children. No chance that it will fire even if a child finds it. Ditto with theft.

Do you think that there is a viable market for this kind of technology?

[Peter1469]

There is no market for them among knowledgeable gun owners.

The sort of people who store their home defense side arm and ammo separately would probably buy one of these.

[resister]

The average person could not fire my guns, first they would need to find my bullet mold and ladle then know how to cast bullets, much less know how to load it.

Granted, I own guns that were made before the civil war (modern repros)

To much opportunity for a failure, the average cop would likely not want to stake his life on it not malfunctioning.

[jimmyz]

This may alleviate the guns use by thieves and people who take your gun off your person. I would have a limited effect on the problem you may be trying to address however.

[resister]

A device that can fail when you need it most, would like only appeal to parents unfamiliar with safe gun ownership, around children.

Gun use under stress is hard enough without complicating the weapons ability to come to bear.

Wont gain much traction unless the next democratic admin, mandates it.

[Dr. Who]

Why would fingerprint technology fail? If the fingerprint reader was located where your finger must go, then it should work. Assuming you don't allow the batteries in the gun to die, I don't see many issues other than the potential for the chip to malfunction. Then again guns can jam, so they are not 100% in any case.

[Dr. Who]

This may alleviate the guns use by thieves and people who take your gun off your person. I would have a limited effect on the problem you may be trying to address however.
If you consider the number of people shot by police because they may have been trying to reach for the officer's weapon, in the officer's opinion, this could be a solution.

[Doublejack]

As long as it's not mandatory I don't see a problem with people installing this into their own guns.

I'll take a pass though.

[Dr. Who]

There is no market for them among knowledgeable gun owners.

The sort of people who store their home defense side arm and ammo separately would probably buy one of these.
People with children in particular. You wouldn't need a gun safe if you had a fingerprint reader or any need to keep the weapon unloaded.

[jimmyz]

If you consider the number of people shot by police because they may have been trying to reach for the officer's weapon, in the officer's opinion, this could be a solution.

Agreed. Stolen weapons as well would be rendered useless. At least until there was a hack available on the internet.

[resister]

Why would fingerprint technology fail? If the fingerprint reader was located where your finger must go, then it should work. Assuming you don't allow the batteries in the gun to die, I don't see many issues other than the potential for the chip to malfunction. Then again guns can jam, so they are not 100% in any case.
Adding an unneeded complication to any machine, increases the possibility of failure. Not good when your life may depend on it.

And your right, guns can jam, why add another potential failure point?

[resister]

As long as it's not mandatory I don't see a problem with people installing this into their own guns.

I'll take a pass though.
Democrats will push to make it mandatory.

[Dr. Who]

Democrats will push to make it mandatory.

Democrats are also supporters of the 2nd Amendment, so I don't think that they would, or at least not in the near future. As technology changes and gets more sophisticated, who knows, but then it may not only be Democrats opting for a safer future.

[resister]

Democrats are also supporters of the 2nd Amendment, so I don't think that they would, or at least not in the near future. As technology changes and gets more sophisticated, who knows, but then it may not only be Democrats opting for a safer future.
Would they want my 1858 new model Army, so outfitted? How much must a user pay to slow their guns operation and increase the chance it will fail them in a time of need?

No thanks, feel free to go buy one.

[jimmyz]

Democrats are also supporters of the 2nd Amendment, so I don't think that they would, or at least not in the near future. As technology changes and gets more sophisticated, who knows, but then it may not only be Democrats opting for a safer future.

My safer future is based on my responsible gun ownership and storage as well as my prudent carry and discretion in my weapons use. It is the mob of detritus that is the problem. Universal gun restrictions will effect me and not them thus the push-back from people like me?

[resister]

Democrats are also supporters of the 2nd Amendment,
LOL, another one who denies the agenda.

[jimmyz]

LOL, another one who denies the agenda.

No really. All gun owners arent 100% Repub and the like. the Dems own guns but the nature of their politics and feelers think that a solution to gun deaths can be had. They have not yet realized that there is no solution to be had.

[Doublejack]

No really. All gun owners arent 100% Repub and the like. the Dems own guns but the nature of their politics and feelers think that a solution to gun deaths can be had. They have not yet realized that there is no solution to be had.

Their is a solution .. it's just not very politically correct.

[Cletus]

19-year-old MIT undergraduate developing a smart gun with a fingerprint reader, safety mechanism will allow only the gun owner to use the firearm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yy6LqoqACdA

There is other smart gun technology out there but it relies on receiving a signal from a special watch or ring, which makes it less than useful in an emergency situation, plus it appears it can be defeated by magnets. However, fingerprint technology is more useful. I could see police officers being outfitted with smart guns. If a criminal grabs their gun, it won't fire. It would also be useful in homes with small children. No chance that it will fire even if a child finds it. Ditto with theft.

Do you think that there is a viable market for this kind of technology?

Only among stupid people.

[Cletus]

http://www.gun-shots.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ladies-if-your-man-doesnt-know-how-to-fire-a-weapon.jpg

[HoneyBadger]

Why would fingerprint technology fail?

Seriously?

I have to be fingerprinted every year. My state requires digital prints... like you'd find on a fingerprint reader. The problem? It takes a week of putting solutions on my fingertips to get the ridged exposed enough for the digital reader to get an image. Even then, I've never had a full set of prints that passed the federal requirements for readability. They're able to get a close enough match since I've been in the databases for over 30 years but a firearm with a reader would be completely unusable for me. Fingerprint readers on doors and electronic devices don't work for me.

[Dr. Who]

Seriously?

I have to be fingerprinted every year. My state requires digital prints... like you'd find on a fingerprint reader. The problem? It takes a week of putting solutions on my fingertips to get the ridged exposed enough for the digital reader to get an image. Even then, I've never had a full set of prints that passed the federal requirements for readability. They're able to get a close enough match since I've been in the databases for over 30 years but a firearm with a reader would be completely unusable for me. Fingerprint readers on doors and electronic devices don't work for me.
Interesting because smart phone technology is using fingerprint tech instead of passwords.

[Cletus]

Interesting because smart phone technology is using fingerprint tech instead of passwords.

And they do not work for a lot of people.

Let's engage in a fantasy and say the technology was 100% reliable. What would happen if a situation occurred in which someone else had to use your gun? What would happen if your shooting hand was incapacitated and you had to use your support hand to fire or had to use a different finger to pull the trigger? What if you were wearing gloves? What happens if your power source fails or the reader itself fails? What happens if your hands are dirty or your fingerprints are otherwise obscured?

I had a student who was a pottery maker. Her fingerprints were so worn from the abrasives she used in her work that it took several tries to get a set of readable prints from her. Every time HB has to be printed, she has to apply lotion to her hands to raise the ridges on her fingers in order for the digital print reader to read her prints. The last time I renewed my PI and PPO Licenses, I had to do the same thing. That is not uncommon. Should everyone carry a bottle of lotion around with them and slap it on before they defend themselves so their gun will work? How long does it take for this "smart gun" technology to read a print... a second, two seconds, three?

That will make you dead.

[Peter1469]

Here is an OP Ed from the LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0117-stokes-smart-gun-problems-20160117-story.html) on smart guns and their flaws.


The bad news for anyone looking to the smart gun as a technological quick fix for gun violence is that, absent a government mandate requiring all guns to be “smart,” a robust market is unlikely to materialize. And even if new laws were to require that all new firearms include smart gun tech, many proposed smart systems would actually make us less safe.

The primary objection that American gun buyers have to smart guns is that any integrated electronic locking mechanism will necessarily decrease a gun's reliability by introducing more points of failure. Smart gun proponents are quick to dismiss these concerns as overblown, but they don't seem to understand how all-important reliability is to gun buyers, or how difficult it is for even premium gun makers to mass-produce weapons that will function smoothly under the most adverse conditions.




Also, many gun owners are preppers. And one thing we prep for is an event that will destroy the grid and all un- shielded electronics.


Why would fingerprint technology fail? If the fingerprint reader was located where your finger must go, then it should work. Assuming you don't allow the batteries in the gun to die, I don't see many issues other than the potential for the chip to malfunction. Then again guns can jam, so they are not 100% in any case.

[Peter1469]

If you consider the number of people shot by police because they may have been trying to reach for the officer's weapon, in the officer's opinion, this could be a solution.

I don't have a problem with police officers using them.

[Peter1469]

Adding an unneeded complication to any machine, increases the possibility of failure. Not good when your life may depend on it.

And your right, guns can jam, why add another potential failure point?

Ideally for home defense I would have a primary revolver. .357. Backup an pistol like a SIG P220. The revolver isn't going to fail.

[Peter1469]

Good points.

I fire left handed or right handed as needed based on cover and target position. Or just how I feel at the time if I am on a standard range.


And they do not work for a lot of people.

Let's engage in a fantasy and say the technology was 100% reliable. What would happen if a situation occurred in which someone else had to use your gun? What would happen if your shooting hand was incapacitated and you had to use your support hand to fire or had to use a different finger to pull the trigger? What if you were wearing gloves? What happens if your power source fails or the reader itself fails? What happens if your hands are dirty or your fingerprints are otherwise obscured?

I had a student who was a pottery maker. Her fingerprints were so worn from the abrasives she used in her work that it took several tries to get a set of readable prints from her. Every time HB has to be printed, she has to apply lotion to her hands to raise the ridges on her fingers in order for the digital print reader to read her prints. The last time I renewed my PI and PPO Licenses, I had to do the same thing. That is not uncommon. Should everyone carry a bottle of lotion around with them and slap it on before they defend themselves so their gun will work? How long does it take for this "smart gun" technology to read a print... a second, two seconds, three?

That will make you dead.