1911Forum banner

Smart Guns for sale in US

7K views 165 replies 43 participants last post by  James 
#1 ·
#4 ·
The more complicated you make a thing, the more problems you introduce. Firearms by their very nature require being fairly simple, because the last thing anyone wants is something unreliable that spends more time in the shop than it does in operational order. Or something that can be hacked and prevented from functioning when needed. I feel like 'smart' guns are what happens when people that don't own or use guns decide they know enough to 'improve' the product. I suppose we'll have to watch and see how well they sell...I imagine many of them will just be taking up space on shelves and collecting dust.
 
#5 · (Edited)
Making money with a small business— any business for that matter — is tough enough when you have a good product/service to sell.

And here, we do not have a good product. The only people touting this product are those who don’t buy the product in the first place; they just like to tell others what to do, as in “rules for thee, but not for me”.

There will be some initial sales to collectors of curio firearms, maybe also curio tech devices.

Hopefully, none of these folks, many ignorant of basic firearms safety rules, will shoot themselves or others trying to test the device; now that would be really bad advertising for a supposed “smart gun”.

Beyond the curio sales, future bankruptcy is predictable. Business School Intro. 101.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Levian
#7 ·
Making money with a small business— any business for that matter — is tough enough when you have a good product/service to sell.

And here, we do not have a good product. The only people touting this product are those who don’t buy the product in the first place; they just like to tell others what to do, as in “rules for thee, not for me”.

There will be some initial sales to collectors of curio firearms.

Beyond that, future bankruptcy is predictable.
No, no there won't. I collect firearms - like the HK P7M13/M8, vintage Colt Python, Walther P38, etc. and there's nothing novel, curious, historical, or even remotely interesting about "smart guns." They're a liability not a curio. For someone that finds stupid, failed guns to be of interest, they might be interested in wasting their money on these items which will never accrue in value. As an example, no collector finds the S&W Hillary Hole revolvers to be of any interest at all.
 
#6 ·
No thanks. A hard pass for me. Too many things to go wrong. There has to be some kind of electronics and probably a battery, for this technology to work. That's just too much that can and will fail. Especially during the middle of a life/death incident. Not only that, but, I seriously doubt that these new smart guns will be high quality guns that will compare with guns that I buy like my Dan Wesson 1911's or my vintage Colt Python, HK P7M13 pistols, etc. Even if they did, like the S&W Hillary Hole lock on their revolvers, I wouldn't want one.
 
#10 ·
Predictable responses. Nothing good can come out of this, eh?

Someone I know has Magna-triggers installed in revolvers set for his wife. His wife a petite woman. They both have agreed that in case of a perp getting close enough to her she is more likely to lose the control over the gun. Magna trigger is a very simple magnetic device and has been on the market for a long time. No bankruptcy etc.

Technology will eventually get to where reliability of these devices will not be an issue. Thoughtful and open minded users will find applications for them. As long as attempts to use smart tech for gun control are defeated, they will be just another tool in a toolbox.
 
#16 ·
It's not you who has to trust it. Driverless big rigs are in-testing now and will be on the roads within a year or so (LIDAR and such can easily be defeated by external bad actors)! Toxic lithium was a choice for eV's. It's not a matter of what you think, it's a matter of what idiot lawmakers think.

Does this "smart" technology require a battery?
 
#12 ·
Yet again, Ive been able to read your message. So the electronic crap you typed it on has gone 2 for 2 to convey your distrust.

Just curious, do you avoid air travel?
 
#17 ·
Thank to air travel, we have lots and lots of data that proves autonomous systems have nasty fail rates when placed into very dynamic operating environments. Vehicles on the ground will have similar fate. US military for some reason will not adopt autonomous drones/robots as a weapon for the arsenal toolbox. Enhancing bi-directional user feedback seems to be the norm.
 
#18 · (Edited)
^^^
Indeed so.

Probably most critical electronic devices are backed-up by duplicate devices. Pretty standard architecture for core router/switch installations in corporate/government/hospital environs. Pretty standard in aircraft manufacture, where there’s often not just one backup system, but two.

Reason is simple. These devices are not 100% reliable.

How about the “check engine” light on many autos? How reliable is it, especially 10-15 years down the road.

Now, when that smart gun fails when needed, what’s the backup? Probably the Coroner? And will anyone ever know?



Aside from all this, it’s a weak solution in circumstances where the problem is a malfunctioning human brain. The condition of Stupidity has always been difficult to overcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 45ofcourse
#25 ·
Probably most critical electronic devices are backed-up by duplicate devices. Pretty standard architecture for core router/switch installations in corporate/government/hospital environs. Pretty standard in aircraft manufacture, where there’s often not just one backup system, but two.

Reason is simple. These devices are not 100% reliable.
HA (high availability) is a solution to a problem, a problem where devices fail on their own (bad sensors, bad hard drive, bad psu in a router).

If I attack an HA system, it's the system, not just one component. The one exemption is a heterogeneous web that's made up of countless interconnected HA points, aka "the internet". Unforntunatley, you cannot shrink the internet model down into a gun, a car, or even a large airplane.
 
#22 ·
I have no problem with smart guns if anyone choose to get one then good for them.

I will have a problem when government bureaucrats decide that we can only own smart guns that they will be able to remotely shut down and all other guns are banned.
Bingo. If has electronics (which requires code to run), it will be subject to attacks from many angles.
Localized small magnetic impulses (which can easily be made from old transformer cores) can disable/destroy nearby electronics. Think of it like a pocket-book sized emp machine.
I laugh every time I see those Ring or ADT or Simplisafe TV ads. Their reliance on WiFi is laughable. With a $20 wifi "jammer" those systems become 100% useless.

But flip the question, will law enforcement at fed/state/local level adopt such technology? Likely not.
 
#21 ·
When people on gun forums say “no way”, only a Dem would say in reply: “oh, try it and you’ll like it”.

Or worse, “we’re not giving you a choice, because we know what’s best for you.”👿👿👿

Anyone who thinks a virtually 100% “No way” response by gun people on gun forums means anything other than “No” is simply clueless about gun owners.
 
#26 ·
Smart people would be a better idea than smart guns. That ship has sailed long ago sadly. Theres lots of products that I cant believe people find a need for. I am 100% capitalist. Build it, sell it, I really could care less. It becomes a problem to me when I'm told to how to live my life according to ideals of otfers. Thats is where this tech is headed. Want to cut crime and the need to defend yourself? Governments need to stop dividing people through fear. Fear creates hate.
 
#31 ·
Smart people would be a better idea than smart guns. That ship has sailed long ago sadly. Theres lots of products that I cant believe people find a need for. I am 100% capitalist. Build it, sell it, I really could care less. It becomes a problem to me when I'm told to how to live my life according to ideals of others. Thats is where this tech is headed. Want to cut crime and the need to defend yourself? Governments need to stop dividing people through fear. Fear creates hate.
2A makes no reference to smart or dumb people.

Lawmakers in DC (if you are in US) have been dictating our lives for past ~200yrs. ;)
 
#28 ·
I think that Alec Baldwin has one of those smart guns. It went off of it's own accord.
 
#32 ·
Just had another thought. My 2018 f350 has way to many sensors and circuits. My hood-ajar micro switch sensor failed. Caused issues with remote start and the worthless alarm. Electronics are a when not if it will fail item. To be fair, most things fall into the same category. However a gun used for defense needs to be as reliable as possible. Simple is best.
 
#34 ·
I strongly suspect that investors in this technology believe that Government will mandate soon enough, that only new Smart Guns will be legal to sell. And they will push for state and Federal legislation to accomplish this goal. The big investors in such technology are not "gun guys", and could care less about practicality, reliability, esthetics, collectibility, etc. Witness California's requirement that any new guns introduced for sale in the state imprint the firearm serial number in two places on expended cases. The state has effectively shut down the probability that any new semi-auto firearms will be available for sale to shooters in that market. All it takes is one state or Federal law to implement such draconian restrictions, potentially affecting millions of shooters, depending on whether legislation is enacted at state or Federal level........
 
#35 ·
I've had "Smart" guns for years. They are so smart they have never shot anyone even accidentally; no children have ever been harmed by them, no co-workers have been harmed, no accidental discharges, and they refuse to vote democratic. Seems darn smart to me.

Grumpy
 
#40 ·
Quote from the article:
"The fingerprint reader unlocks the gun in microseconds, but since it may not work when wet or in other adverse conditions, the PIN pad is there as a backup. LodeStar did not demonstrate the near-field communication signal, but it would act as a secondary backup, enabling the gun as quickly as users can open the app on their phones."

What could go wrong here?

Wait Mr. Bad guy! Don't kill me yet, let me get my iPhone out and unlock it. Damn, now where is my phone charger?

No thank you! K.I.S.S.
 
#41 · (Edited)
Neither my iPad nor my iPhone recognizes my fingerprint more than 20% of the time. IOW, an 80% failure rate. This despite the device acknowledging that I completed the set-up routine...and sometimes it does work…20% of the time.

The only biometric ID device I’ve seen that worked more than 75% of the time was a pre-approved foreign visitors retinal eye scan device at London’s Heathrow airport. And the Brits gave up on that device about 10 years ago…because it failed and required maintenance so many times.

Now, these “smart gun” guys think their tech is that much better than Apple’s…or high end retinal scan devices? It’s preposterous BS.
 
#48 ·
My china made Huawei phone from 6yrs ago has a rear print pad, never failed me once.
That said, my phone is not an item I trust my life with.

Outside of hacking the crap (easily done), the fail rate of the tech may perhaps be on-par with a bad primer or a squib. But if I add up the possible fails (risk) why would I choose to add another?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top