1911Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,084 Posts
It all depends how gunbuyers react to it. If they revolt ala the S&W deal then it won't be smart. If however they don't lose any sales, they stand a chance of greatly increasing their sales through actual firearms and also licensing their invention to other makers. If I understand these laws correctly they mandate that all new firearms have this "smart" feature once one is available. That would mean that Taurus would possibly be able to sell their technolgy to every company which wanted to sell in NJ. That's good business.

As for these types of laws themselves, and what it means for the gunowning public, as Judge Joe Brown says, "That's Taurus!" :) Sorry I couldn't resist. Gary
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,101 Posts
Gary, I do think there will be a backlash against Taurus for this. Any gun manufacturer that enables this law to take effect would be on my list.

The idea of a gun you have to grip perfectly in order for it to function is terrifying.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
3,034 Posts
I agree with MUS entirely.

The thing I am real curious about is how this works if your hand is injured or gloved and you still need to operate the pistol??

Does this law affect duty weapons also? I assume not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
134 Posts
Whos "smart gun" is Taurus going to copy?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
770 Posts
James said:
Does this law affect duty weapons also? I assume not.
Nope. LEO is exempt from 'smart gun' crap.

And this has been going on for quite awhile. Taurus and NJ started this thing about 2 years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
I own a Taurus M44 .44 mag that I really like. But I must admit, I like my guns "stupid" and intend to keep them that way. The gun is supposed to just lay there and do exactly what I want it to do. My job is to do the thinking. Those gun owners who don't do a good job of "thinking" will be eliminated from the gene pool. Seems like a good arrangement to me.

"Nah... I don't like this smart gun thing. I don't like it at all..."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
MUS wrote:
The idea of a gun you have to grip perfectly in order for it to function is terrifying.
I think we already have a gun like that: the 1911.

I think technology like this probably does have an aplication for certain users. I'm thinking of police and security guards who have to carry their gun as part of their job, and for whom being shot with their own weapon is a real risk.
unfortunately, some of these people are not as well trained as they should be in weapon retention and awareness, and general safe gun handling.

One scary thing is that the Governor of New Jersey gets to decide whether the technology is ready. How the hell does he know?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,128 Posts
Perhaps I just a paranoid cop, but this just sounds like a way to get a law abiding citizen trying to protect themselves killed. From a perspective of someone who carries a gun day in and day out, I don't like manual safeties or anything that can possible interfere with pulling the trigger when I have to. And with some of the information I've read, it would appear that the gun would fire if it is in proximinity to the ring or bracelet that enables the gun to fire. How does that prevent a bad guy from using my or anyones else gun if they take away from you and shoot you within point blank distance. The vast majority of shooting are measured in a few short feet and I've read of numerous shooting that involved people struggling over a firearm. I feel the same way about the Uncle Mike's Level 4 Retention Holster that uses a fingerprint to allow you to get the gun out of the holster, not a good idea for practical shooting.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
3,034 Posts
zveric said:
I think we already have a gun like that: the 1911.
Not hardly.

You can fire a 1911 so long as you properly grip it....it doesn't need to be perfect. You can fire it right handed, left handed, two finger grip, three finger grip, firm grip, light grip, gloved hands, bloodied hands, dirty hands, possibly broken or injured hands, and even with broken grips.

I doubt you'll get that same level of dependability with a gun containing tiny electronic sensors that determine if it is your particular hand holding the grip.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
I will never buy a Taurus nor will I ever spend one cent at any gun shop that sells Taurus products. There is no way to reverse this lifetime boycott (not that Taurus cares).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,457 Posts
When a "smart" gun reliably recognizes a "good" person's grip from a "bad" person's grip and doesn't need batteries or sunlight to work, then I'll think the technology has come of age.
Not before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
192 Posts
Rant on...

I'll play devil's advocate. I heard this discussion on Guntalk on Sunday.

One of the best reasons the president of Taurus gave, that I believe, better to have the industry experts designing than some bureaucrat in Washington.

If the government designs it, we'll have a firearm capable of only shooting 2 rounds, with no mass and no energy, makes a very loud noise, and costs $60,000 to flush... err shoot I mean.

To take what Sawbones said for a spin, if you never build it, it will never get there. At some point, someone has to do it. What does it cost the company: R &D, and some small lost sales of die hard shooters who are offended at the very notion. But if they design the only mousetrap, they will have created a market, be the only players in the market, and be ahead of their peers. This is called innovation, as opposed to M$ definition of innovation... but that's another rant.

I don't know about this preloaded barrel business. If I can't reload as fast as my slowest tactical reload, then I wouldn't buy it.

Do I like the idea, heck no!!! I'm a quasi-programmer. The more complex a system, the more likely to crash. KISS. Not to mention being in the frozen north, I wear gloves a lot when I shoot. And I don't plan on getting an RFID embedded in my hand so that I can make it work. Again, another rant...

Anywho...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
James wrote:
You can fire a 1911 so long as you properly grip it....it doesn't need to be perfect. You can fire it right handed, left handed, two finger grip, three finger grip, firm grip, light grip, gloved hands, bloodied hands, dirty hands, possibly broken or injured hands, and even with broken grips.
I concede that I didn't fully understand how this technology worked. I wnt back and read up some more, and it does sound a little like Bad Idea Jeans.
Also, I love the 1911. It is the gun I was taught defensive shooting on, for that reason, as well as it's basic ergonomic and aesthetic perfection, it is the gun I most enjoy shooting.

However, I stand by my original quip for the following reasons:

It has 2 external safeties which need to be managed as part of the grip to fire the gun reliably. The gun really does have to be held a certain way to fire reliably, and this grip needs to be trained and practiced. Whenever anyone on any of the brand forums has a problem with their new Kimber/Baer/Wilson/Colt etc. not cycling reliably, there are guaranteed to be a series of posts asking them about subtleties of their grip.

Contrast this with something like a Glock, which will almost always fire if you press the trigger with a round in the chamber.

Don't get me wrong. I love the 1911, but it is a more demanding mistress than some. Beautiful, sweet, and a little high maintenance.

I was not too smartly making the point that shooters have been dealing with the specific technological quirks of particular guns for as long as there have been guns. They will continue to do so. And if a system really sucks, the market will reject it. Of that we can be certain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Dwolf00, I think you hit the nail on the head.

Gun grabbers don't insist on these laws because they want to fix minor percieved flaws in weapons currently available. They want to be able to prove that guns are only good for crime and useless for self-defense (unless you are a "highly-trained" LEO or military user AKA the 507th). A gun that won't work when you need it to is useless for self-defense. Statistics shift their way, and then their is no rational basis not to ban them all.

Here in CA safe-storage laws have already cost the lives of children who might otherwise have been able to defend themselves from criminal attack. They don't care about the lives of children, or yours or mine. They care about banning guns. The safety argument is a trojan horse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,101 Posts
zveric said:
It has 2 external safeties which need to be managed as part of the grip to fire the gun reliably. The gun really does have to be held a certain way to fire reliably, and this grip needs to be trained and practiced. Whenever anyone on any of the brand forums has a problem with their new Kimber/Baer/Wilson/Colt etc. not cycling reliably, there are guaranteed to be a series of posts asking them about subtleties of their grip.
Im of the opinion that a properly functioning pistol will not malfunction due to limpwristing unless its VERY severe. If your gun works fine with a strong grip and chokes if you limpwrist my opinion is its a sign of a borderline gun that needs some tuning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,888 Posts
This is just the sort of thing that guns need not. Everyone is loving our computers, and they are trying to incorporate them into everything.

Think about this. Years from now, if these device make it, if your handgun and rifle has "chips" inside of it to control usage, the US goverment could design a device that would disable everything electronic. I think that they already have the option, the electronic countermeasures on the EA PROWLERS. Knock out the eletronics of a certain location. Quash a revolt, total control. No resistance, easy take over. It sounds crazy, but there is an option, now that microchips are here. Also, they could possibly know where all guns are at all times. This is just the start.

Keep electronics away from firearms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
I think it's absolutely true that there is a desire to put electronics in places where they don't belong/aren't required. What are microchips doing in my toaster?

On the other hand, The Metal Storm electronic fire control has the potential to be far more reliable than any 1911, Glock, Sig or anything else. Maybe more reliable than any revolver.
The reason? No moving parts at all. No springs, no slide, no case to eject. electronics usually add complexity to a system, and therefore reduce reliablity. If the electronics can take the place of the mechanical fire control systems that are prone to wear out and fail. There could be some real value and performance gains for certain applications.

One tempting benefit may be the ability to infinitely tune the break point, travel, over travel, weight, and smoothness of a trigger that is basically a switch. They will probably not do this, and will settle on a cheap feeling button or something.

This issue is totally removed from the issue of the grip recognition technology, which is more problematic. I wouldn't want anything to do with that personally.

It is usually important to try to prove out one new revolutionary technology at a time. Two or more in a single new product will get one into trouble.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
134 Posts
If the electronics can take the place of the mechanical fire control systems that are prone to wear out and fail. There could be some real value and performance gains for certain applications.
Caseless ammo and electronically fired guns have been around for a while now. There is absolutely nothing new about that. For some reason they've never gone mainstream.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top