Obama pushes for smart guns (with a twist)

[Dsc]

The only *smart gun* I'll ever own is the auto targeting 1,400 yard scope attachment.
http://tracking-point.com/

My eyes are getting old.

FBHO & FHRC

[Krause]

Since at its core guns don't require any digital components, wouldn't any underground illegal gun market just have those components stripped off/bypassed?

This would only help that super unlikely situation that someone gets a gun from a police officer and tries to use it immediately.

[Witchblade77]

I wouldn't want it in the civilian market just because I don't go shooting alone, and not being able to let a random friend (or a more regular person like my father) shoot my gun at a range would suck. I know Judge Dredd gave us lovely fantasies about guns that could only be fired by the owner, but the technology won't be that refined for a long, long time, and it will only serve to hinder the owner.

was pretty much about to post something very much like that.

while technology intrigues me, especially since (or so descriptions say) you can program it to accept more than one person (and make them programming temporary if one so wishes), even in judge dredd world it works a bit... differently from the way I'm reading this particular smart technology we have available at this time.

I think its a good idea... in concept. I just don't think its anywhere near ready to be put into actual police circulation, let alone make it mandatory

[TITAN308]

But who is going to fund that effort when they know they're up against the NRA who has already shut down an established company over this very issue?

Why would a company with proper capitol need funding?

Like I said, the right company just hasn't come along willing to put up their own money.

[chazus]

How would this improve things? It's the officer and owner of the gun that gets trigger happy. This could only cause problems at the worst times or prevent partners from giving each other guns.

I think you're misunderstanding the purpose here.

The problem isn't trigger happy people, the problem is guns getting stolen/used by the wrong people.

The officer conflict is a scarecrow tactic. Nobody said they wanted to issue them to officers as a testing ground, except the people worried about it. And even if they were going to do that, it's a good way to implement it in a more controlled environment first.

[Citizen T]

No, there's no law stopping Colt. Just an extremely powerful special interest group.

When that's true, there's nothing wrong with the government taking action to spur research into technology that could save lots of lives. I'd be in favor of government sponsoring research into autonomous vehicles too.

Companies that want to sell guns care what the old fat white NRA members think.

Well there's no law directly stopping Colt but there is a law that makes it against their own interests. This law was the reason the NRA lobbied against Colt's smart gun technology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Je...of_Handgun_Law because everything is for the children.

[Ghostpanther]

As if the gun situation in America will ever change. They seem to think the constitution still matter. A pretty hopeless situation.

I would hope the Constitution still matters. lol!

Another dumb political move by Obama. Not surprised.

[chazus]

People keep asking 'who is going to fund it'

5 Billion in research over 10 years is about $3 per person. Less if the research costs less, or is subsidized, or over a longer period.

[Reeve]

Why would a company with proper capitol need funding?

Like I said, the right company just hasn't come along willing to put up their own money.

That doesn't really happen in the startup world unless it's someone who's already independently wealthy (like a billionaire) doing it. Even then, startups generally grab outside funding anyway.

[Deleted]

I'm honestly not sure how this is a bad thing. Assuming the technology works, which I am also assuming they would test in labs etc before giving it to cops, it seems like a fantastic idea. ALL guns should have this. That would significantly cut down on violent crime AND accidental shootings.

They are afraid that their guns could be remotely deactivated so they can't defend garageland against the evil evil government when they park their Bradley tank in their garden.
I don't know how this would necessarily reduce violent crime and accidental shooting.
You can still commit crimes with your gun and you can still accidentaly shoot someone with your gun.

I would hope the Constitution still matters. lol!

Another dumb political move by Obama. Not surprised.

If they find a reason how smart guns prevent terrorist attacks "Muh ammendment" isn't worth a thing.

[Nynax]

I smart gun seems like something that should be a collaboration between a good Tech Company, like Apple or Google, and a gun manufacturer.

Apple has proven it's ability to make very reliable biometric tech. I mean, imagine if the fingerprint scanner to unlock the phone didn't work 1/4 of the time? The outcry against Apple would be huge (people literally can't function without their phone anymore).

[Reeve]

I smart gun seems like something that should be a collaboration between a good Tech Company, like Apple or Google, and a gun manufacturer.

Apple has proven it's ability to make very reliable biometric tech. I mean, imagine if the fingerprint scanner to unlock the phone didn't work 1/4 of the time? The outcry against Apple would be huge (people literally can't function without their phone anymore).

It's very good biometric tech, but it doesn't work when your fingers are damp or wet, and it fails outright like 2% of the time, which is unacceptable to people who may find themselves in a gunfight.

RFID is much more reliable.

[Citizen T]

I smart gun seems like something that should be a collaboration between a good Tech Company, like Apple or Google, and a gun manufacturer.

Apple has proven it's ability to make very reliable biometric tech. I mean, imagine if the fingerprint scanner to unlock the phone didn't work 1/4 of the time? The outcry against Apple would be huge (people literally can't function without their phone anymore).

Yes, there fingerprint tech is pretty good for what it is. It has been my experience that it takes more than one try about 1 in 8 or 10 times. This is pretty unacceptable when the loss of a second or two can be the difference between life and death. Even 1 in 100 is unacceptable. I fire enough rounds (at least 1000) of a specific ammunition through my guns to be sure of a lower failure rate than that before I carry that gun/ammo combination for defense purposes.

[Annoying]

You just hand your friend the ring or the bracelet or whatever. It's like letting your friend drive your car. They can still shoot the gun.

I was figuring something along the lines of handprint scan in the grip. If it was something like that (ring, watch, w/e else easily transferred, but hard to steal), it wouldn't be too bad, and I'd have no problem with it. Assuming it works well, and all.

[Glnger]

Since at its core guns don't require any digital components, wouldn't any underground illegal gun market just have those components stripped off/bypassed?

This would only help that super unlikely situation that someone gets a gun from a police officer and tries to use it immediately.

or the far more likely situation of a toddler shooting them self or someone else when they find a parents firearm, or prevent the scab of a person that breaks into your home and finds your gun then takes it and sells it and it winds up in the hands of a gang member who WILL use it to shoot at police or other people.

literally those two scenarios are playing out right this very second across the country.

[Damajin]

Did the the 2700 some odd guns that Obama handed the the murderous terrorist Mexican cartel members have "smart technology"?

And let me guess Obama has a few companies lined up ready to "develop" this technology.

...I'm sure none of those companies have board members close that have personal relationships with Obama.

...I'm sure no tax dollars will be funneled them via some hostile taxation.

..and I'm sure they wont go bankrupt months later having never produced a single product mysteriously burning through all the startup capital.

Funny isn't it?

We need smart technology to verify gun ownership but we don't need any verification for things like voting ...or collecting welfare ...or entering the country ...or ya know pretty much anything that translates to power for tyrants.

Man, talk about a scorched earth post, bravo.

[Gaexion Ramza Beoulve]

Wasn't there a movie where this was the premise? Stallone or Schwarzenegger.(ty google autocorrect?)

[Glnger]

Wasn't there a movie where this was the premise? Stallone or Schwarzenegger.(ty google autocorrect?)

judge dredd's hand gun also shot stun rounds, grenades, had a repel cord I think, and flares. oh, and the gun didn't just "not work" for the crim, it blew his fucking hand off.
gosh republicans, this is why we cant have nice things.

[Ghostpanther]

If they find a reason how smart guns prevent terrorist attacks "Muh ammendment" isn't worth a thing.

But they won't . How are they going to make terrorists pick only weapons which are smart ones?

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I'm not seeing the problem. He's not trying to force cops to test a gun that doesn't exist yet...and he'll be out of office long before any testing on such a weapon would begin. He's just saying.. "hey...what about the idea for this technology? Can we make it happen someday?"