
Smart guns finally poised to change U.S. gun market? - prostoalex
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/smart-guns-finally-poised-to-change-u-s-gun-market/
======
67726e
I don't think I would ever purchase one of these things...

> Smart weapons recognize their owners' fingerprints or hand grip, or unlock
> when they wirelessly interact with a special watch or ring worn by the
> shooter.

So what happens if I'm wearing gloves? What happens if I lose the ring or it
comes off while I'm drawing? What happens if my girlfriend needs to grab my
handgun out of my nightstand while I'm in the shower? There are so many ways
for this to fail, I would never purchase it over a regular firearm.

~~~
t0mk
IMO it's more important to make sure that a firearm is shot by whoever's
authorized to do so, rather than making it convenient to shoot them per se.

It might not apply for an average american shopping guns in Walmart, but
hopefully it will be important for defense forces, police, etc.

edit - typo

~~~
baakss
Reliability is a huge, huge concern with guns. That's why a weapon like an
AK-47 is so popular. It shoots if it's muddy, sandy, you name it.

A failed fingerprint recognition (even due to the conditions listed above)
when you intend to use a gun means you're probably dead.

Edit: I listed wet as a condition an AK would fire under, but I don't believe
that's accurate. The original point is still true though, the AK is touted for
it's reliability.

~~~
67726e
Ultimately, when it comes to firearms, you really don't want a lot of failure
modes. This piece of technology adds way to many. Something I didn't see in
the article, but how is this device getting power? What happens if my battery
dies?

~~~
ceejayoz
Most people manage to keep their phones/laptops charged. A smart gun should
have less ongoing drain and surely you could hook it up to charge in your gun
safe. Never going to happen if people start issuing death threats to anyone
trying to market one, though.

Meanwhile, more attention to the "shoots curious kids" failure mode seems
appropriate.

~~~
monochromatic
> more attention to the "shoots curious kids" failure mode seems appropriate

This is a solved problem. The negligent parents who store guns in the open
without securing them (and who don't teach their kids to be safe with guns)
are abhorrent. But they're also not likely to be buying "smart guns."

~~~
Frondo
The laws that charge adults with negligence for kids having access to their
guns are almost never enforced.

When those start being enforced, then we can examine whether it's a solved
problem.

~~~
monochromatic
I don't mean it's solved in that it never happens. I mean it's solved in that
a solution is available to those willing to bother.

------
13thLetter
Conway is certainly welcome to try to sell these guns, but given their
unpopularity it's unclear what the market is -- unless he's relying on the
government to require them by law. In which case the statement "for technology
and innovation, we have to ignore politics," is not an accurate description of
what he's doing.

~~~
AdamFernandez
The market could be for families with children in the house who want self
defense, but haven't yet taken the plunge for safety reasons. I'm not sure how
large this market would be.

~~~
monochromatic
Families who can't be bothered to buy a gunvault?

~~~
AdamFernandez
Keeping guns stored in a vault with children present is generally a good idea
if you have one or more weapons that you occasionally use. However for self
defense purposes, you typically don't want to be fiddling around with a vault
if someone is invading your home. I'm not commenting on the likelihood of that
scenario, but it is something people consider when they own firearms.

~~~
VLM
A surprising number of people like the idea of fingerprint scanning, biometric
sensing, bluetooth bracelet detecting ... gun vaults. Inside of which is a
100% reliable non-smart firearm.

~~~
monochromatic
Everything is a tradeoff. When I have kids, I'll probably have a small bedside
safe of some kind... and just be willing to accept that it makes it a little
slower to get the gun out.

------
presidentender
The people who purchase guns do not want to purchase these guns.

The people who want these guns to be sold are not the people who would buy
them.

~~~
_yosefk
Why wouldn't someone who wants to buy a gun want one that only he can fire?
It's cool and it might reduce one's chances to get hit from behind by someone
wishing to take the gun. (An honest question from someone who never wanted to
own a gun.)

~~~
monochromatic
A gun is a tool of absolute last resort. They are simple, mechanical devices,
and that's a good thing. I have no interest in adding complications and
additional points of failure.

~~~
jrs235
"I have no interest in adding complications and additional points of failure."

This is also how I feel about my clothes washer and dryer. Simple dials and
minimal buttons. I want to be able to repair and replace a part at minimal
expense.

~~~
monochromatic
I agree, and I hate the trend toward more complication. But for the washer and
dryer, anyway, my life doesn't depend on them operating 100% reliably. (Which
is good, because they don't.)

------
15charlimit
Oh look, this story again.

Call me when this type of technology has been in mandatory use by 100% of law
enforcement and military for 10 years without a greater failure rate than
traditional safety systems.

I won't hold my breath.

------
valine
The problem with smart guns is that they add an additional point of failure to
an otherwise reliable piece of technology. In the unlikely situation where I
need to defend myself I need to know that my gun will go off when I pull the
trigger. The finger print technology on my iPhone is maybe 90% reliable. On a
firearm that would be unacceptable. Until smart guns are reliable enough that
they are adopted by law enforcement I'm not interested.

------
chroma
I noticed pg linked to this.[1] I don't know his opinions on the matter, but I
doubt smart guns will take off. I own several firearms, and I find smart guns
completely unappealing. The technology adds cost, increases complexity,
reduces reliability, and makes it impossible for me to maintain the weapon
myself. If the electronics go haywire, I'd have to ship it back to the
manufacturer. That's no fun.

It's unclear what problem smart guns are trying to solve. Is the point to
replace gun safes? Is it to prevent the weapon from being used against you if
taken from you in a fight? Is it to deter gun theft? Is it to stop children
from firing the weapon if they discover it? The latter scenario seems
particularly silly to me. If you're dumb enough to leave a loaded weapon out
in a house with children, you're probably not going to have the sense to get a
smart gun.

Even if the cost and reliability issues are addressed, smart guns still won't
help much. First, the majority of guns used in crimes are obtained through
corrupt dealers and straw purchases. Only 10-15% of firearms used in crimes
are stolen.[2] Second, this will do nothing to help secure the 350 million
guns already in the US.

It seems to me that a much more effective way to reduce theft and accidental
gun deaths is to make better safes. Right now, the best safes on the market
are mechanical lock boxes.[3] They use no batteries or electronics, and they
can make a gun available in seconds. Still, they're less than ideal. Many are
hard to program, causing users to leave them on the default combination.
Almost all of them have small buttons which are hard to press if your
adrenaline is going. I'd love to get something better.

1\.
[https://twitter.com/paulg/status/660920179904266240](https://twitter.com/paulg/status/660920179904266240)

2\.
[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/gu...](http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/guns.html)

3\.
[http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000T24OFG](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000T24OFG)

------
monochromatic
What parent out there is so concerned about his child's safety that he'd buy
one of these, and yet so _unconcerned_ that he wouldn't just buy a regular gun
and a safe?

------
autobahn
There's no market for smart guns.

------
jndsn402
As a parent of small children, if I were ever to buy a gun I would want to
have a smart gun.

Seems to me the real obstacle is the NJ law that would restrict regular gun
sales once smart guns are sold, which should be revised ASAP as it gives the
NRA a semi-legitimate reason to oppose the sale of smart guns.

~~~
monochromatic
> the NJ law that would restrict regular gun sales once smart guns are sold,
> which should be revised ASAP as it gives the NRA a semi-legitimate reason to
> oppose the sale of smart guns

Even if that particular law is revised or repealed, gun rights advocates will
_always_ argue (correctly, I believe) that such legislation is in the pipeline
once these devices become more common/workable.

------
bnolsen
weapons are supposed to work. that means making them simple. of course these
"smart guns" won't sell.

~~~
stormcrowsx
You need to keep them simple unless you're improving their ability to kill, in
which case this is the latest in super complex death machines
[http://tracking-point.com/precision-guided-
firearms/precisio...](http://tracking-point.com/precision-guided-
firearms/precision-guided-semi-auto-556). Takes care of all your "herd
management" and "homestead defense" needs.

~~~
monochromatic
Stop fearmongering.

------
megaman22
So this is going to have some kind of electronic interlock to prevent firing.
Nope. Give me something that works reliably despite blood, sweat, mud, dirt,
and wild temperature variations, not to mention the repeated shock of
thousands of firings necessary for proper training. In an emergency situation,
you don't want to pull the trigger and realize the batteries are dead...

Anything that needs a wireless connection is an absolute non-starter. A gun
can jam mechanically, but having a simple weapon be disabled by active ECM is
just stupid.

------
joesmo
It's already illegal to possess a gun outside your home or business in New
Jersey (with very few exceptions for rifles and shotguns) yet Trenton, Camden,
and Newark still have a whole ton of gun violence and are basically giant
ghettos. A gadget like this won't make any difference whatsoever. Let's not
even get into the reliability nightmare and the terrible designs like having
an additional ring to wear.

~~~
jndsn402
Just because a smart gun won't solve the problem of gang violence doesn't mean
they should not exist.

~~~
joesmo
I'm saying all the laws currently banning every single type of gun outside
ones home/business on books currently aren't doing shit to stop gun violence
and this won't either, not that smart guns shouldn't exist.

------
ceejayoz
> Another basic argument Sanetti makes is that Americans like guns the way
> they were. "Guns of the Old West, they like them the way Davy Crockett used
> them...years ago," he says.

I'd be fine with capping weapons tech at 1830s flintlocks if it means giving
up smart guns. I'm guessing Sanetti has something a little more modern.

------
johngalt
It's hard to imagine 100 years from now that guns won't be smart. The only
question is when and how they are implemented. IMHO: 'smart' guns will be
first about improving their effectiveness not safety. Similar to things like
tracking point.

~~~
logfromblammo
Primers and firing pins replaced by magnetoelectric ignition. Trigger used to
designate targets, while the smart electronics use gyros and lasers to fire
only when the loaded ammunition is most likely to hit the designated target.

The safety lock might possibly be disengaged by numeric PIN or capacitative
gesture recognition (like playing a certain sequence of notes on a theremin).
Biometrics and proximity-based authorization tokens will have been discarded
as untenable long before.

------
rbobby
Will smart guns introduce new and unfamiliar failure modes? Absolutely yes.

However I think the real question that needs to be examined is whether or not
the adoption of smart guns would lead to fewer accidental injuries/fatalities
on a national basis.

Requiring that a smart gun introduce absolutely no new failure modes misses
the bigger picture... that too many accidental injuries/fatalities are
happening right now (presumably... it would be nice to see research on this
but researching gun deaths is too controversial get funding).

No one wants to be injured or killed because of a smart gun failure, and the
same is true for an accidental gun injury or death. Who wants their kid to
accidentally shoot them? Who wants their smart gun to fail in the face of an
armed intruder? The answer in both cases is no one and these questions miss
the point, much like the 'seat-belts cause injuries' advocates of yesteryear.

It really is all about reducing the total number of accidental gun
injuries/deaths.

~~~
monochromatic
> It really is all about reducing the total number of accidental gun
> injuries/deaths.

This is a noble sentiment, but it really isn't. It's about gun control, plain
and simple.

------
monochromatic
"Investor hypes product" would be a more accurate title. Also,
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines)

------
smacktoward
_> But times are changing, says Conway. He believes a new generation of tech-
savvy people, especially young parents, will embrace the hi-tech smart guns
eventually, even overcoming the politics currently holding them back. "You
cannot stop innovation. And this is an area where innovation is taking
over...for technology and innovation, we have to ignore politics," he tells
Stahl._

This seems like an awfully hand-wavy plan for taking on the most powerful
special interest lobby in American politics, which happens to hate "smart
guns" like poison.

~~~
jff
Most powerful in terms of money spent? Because they don't even make the top
30. CVS, the pharmacy chain, spends more money on lobbying.

Or do you mean more powerful because they're backed up by the huge percentage
of gun owners in this country? How big does a group represented have to be
before you stop calling them a "special interest lobby"? There are more gun
owners than there are teachers, but the teachers spend more on lobbying.

~~~
jndsn402
They are very powerful in that almost no politician is willing to act against
their interests. Please correct me if that impression is wrong.

~~~
jff
You're right, nobody is attempting to act against them. All the (ludicrous,
unworkable, unenforceable, sometimes blatantly unconstitutional) bills that
get drafted (and sometimes passed) in California, NY, Illinois, and Washington
DC, those are just figments of gun-addled imaginations.

------
jkot
What is price and reliability difference compared to regular guns? How hard is
it to bypass finger print locker with some tools?

~~~
monochromatic
These are all open questions, since these don't really exist in any meaningful
way yet. But the answers are likely to be

1\. Significantly more expensive, at least in the short to medium term.

2\. They can _only_ reduce reliability, and they probably will.

3\. Easier than the manufacturers would have you believe.

------
polartx
This article gave me a fantastic idea for a new invention--Smart Parachutes!!

A battery operated sensor on the ripcord will analyze the operators
fingerprint and pulling position to computer whether the chute will or will
not actually be deployed!! No more stolen parachutes or accidental premature
deployments!

We'll make millions, guys! BRB gotta find some non-sky divers to invest.

------
Shivetya
I am all for smart guns being required for use BY POLICE.

For individuals, no.

------
trhway
smartness of a gun is still a very small o(dumb owner).

------
hellbanner
In the Metal Gear Solid 4 videogame, these were used by mercenaries to fight
wars. Interesting seeing speculation & innovation.

------
VLM
A core belief on both sides of the discussion is the assumption that this will
be the first bug free software ever written, which is somewhat comical.

You're somewhat likely to have guns randomly firing in peoples pockets or when
a high power trucker CB transmits or not work at all when the battery is dead
or in the rain or when a police officers own radio is nearby transmitting.
Hold on while I reboot my service pistol, its "patch tuesday" time to rob the
bank with our non-smart guns, etc.

Also there is the assumption that this won't be DRMed to hell and back to
screw owners over, when of course it will be. Sure you can add your wife to
the list of authorized users, just submit .gov paperwork and licenses and
it'll only be $500 to unlock 2 users.

