Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 08-09-2003, 12:36 PM   #1 (permalink)
Cracking the Whip
 
Lebell's Avatar
 
Location: Sexymama's arms...
Smart Guns: Dumb Idea (article)

I debated whether to put this in "Politics" or "Weaponry", but since there have been several TFP members extolling "smart guns", I decided "Politics" was appropriate.

Two Notes:

This article isn't from some far right magazine or group, (i.e. the Sons of Liberty or the NRA), but rather from that mainstay publication, Popular Mechanics.

Also, I would note that the NJ Police do NOT want smart guns, as they can fail to work when needed. So my question to the anti-gun crowd is, if you don't want the cop responding to your 911 call to have a gun that may not work 100% of the time, why are they ok for the rest of us?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LINK TO ARTICLE

'Smart' Guns: Dumb Idea!

BY CLIFF GROMER
Illustrations by Paul Dimare



Combining a handgun with a computer produces a firearm that, so far, has been less than 100 percent reliable.

At first blush it seems like a great idea. A gun that can determine if the person holding it is an authorized user. A smart gun that will fire only if it recognizes the shooter's thumbprint. Pretty neat. Homeowners would want it because it eliminates the danger of their kids or anyone else using it. The cops surely would want it, as it eliminates the danger of a bad guy getting ahold of their weapon and turning the tables. Then there's the problem of teenage suicides--most prevalent where there is easy access to guns, such as the homes of law officers. What's not to like?

New Jersey Gov. James McGreevey seems to like the idea. He signed bill S.573/890, which will ban the sale of dumb handguns--namely, all handguns that are currently available. The law goes into effect three years after "at least one manufacturer has delivered at least one production model of a personalized handgun to a registered or licensed wholesale or retail dealer in New Jersey or any other state." Exceptions to this sweeping legislation would be for antique and competition models. The law doesn't make for a total ban on handgun sales, but it comes pretty close. The law has a good chance of being a model for similar restrictions in other states.

But what about the benefits? What about all those kids who get killed as the result of firearms? The latest information available from the New Jersey Department of Health on this is for the years 1998 and 1999. The total number of children killed in firearms accidents? Zero. Even so, there are kids who are killed by guns, such as the 18-year-old ne'er-do-well who was shot while attempting to rob a liquor store. He was entered in the "child" category.

Well, at least the police would benefit from the new law. Or would they? The cops, as it turns out, want no part of the smart-gun law, and they raised such a fuss that the law was amended to exclude the guns used for official use by federal, state and local law enforcement officers and members of the armed forces and the National Guard serving in New Jersey. The reason was simple. The law enforcement folks didn't want to put their lives on the line for new, unproven technology. It seems that when you marry a firearm and a computer, the result is something that's less than 100 percent reliable. A handgun, with its shocks, vibrations and corrosive emissions, is not the best environment for a piece of sophisticated electronic hardware. In a life-or-death confrontation with a bad guy, a cop doesn't have the option of saying, "Timeout, I have to reboot." It's interesting that the group that smart guns were targeted for--law enforcement officers--is the one rejecting the concept.

Just how reliable is current smart-gun technology? According to research conducted by Sandia National Laboratories, user identification has to be accomplished within a quarter-second to be effective in a life-threatening situation. Sandia says there are no known available technologies that police would find acceptable.

During the Clinton administration, the U.S. Department of Justice's National Institute of Justice figured to spur smart-gun development by subsidizing a major firearms manufacturer tasked with inventing a workable system. Colt's Manufacturing Co. took on the project, which was sweetened by hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Justice Department. A workable system has yet to be found.

According to the New Jersey Institute of Technology, which used government grants to study personalized handgun technology, fingerprint recognition systems work only 80 percent of the time. But the New Jersey law goes into effect regardless of whether the guns are 100 percent--or 80 percent--reliable.

Cops protecting the New Jersey governor won't accept an 80 percent reliability factor. But the governor, by supporting this law, is saying that 80 percent is good enough for the homeowner trying to protect his family from an armed intruder. What's wrong with this picture?
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!
Lebell is offline  
Old 08-09-2003, 02:17 PM   #2 (permalink)
Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate
 
Location: Los Angeles
IMO the idea is good of preventing guns being put in the wrong hands BUT the thing is, its unproven technology which is stupid to be used. Unless it was proven to completely work, it shouldn't be used other than test purposes.
Zeld2.0 is offline  
Old 08-09-2003, 07:22 PM   #3 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Location: CA
great idea.

but i still like Chris Rock's idea. Make each bullet cost $5,000. People would spend their bullets much less, only on people they REALLY REALLY hate. it'd mean many less deaths.
Kabsnow is offline  
Old 08-09-2003, 07:40 PM   #4 (permalink)
The GrandDaddy of them all!
 
The_Dude's Avatar
 
Location: Austin, TX
i dont think it's somethin we can implement today, but when technology is perfect, we can.
__________________
"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal
The_Dude is offline  
Old 08-09-2003, 09:00 PM   #5 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Sydney, Australia
Saying that it is unproven NOW is no reason to suggest that it will never be proven. We put our lives in the hands of computers whenever we get on a plane nowdays, and I'm sure there were plenty of old pilots in previous decades who said they'd NEVER get in the cockpit of a newfangled computer plane. Having said this I fully concede that the invention of the 747 provided no good reason to ban cessnas and biplanes.

I know that when I call the cops nowdays, I have to accept that their current firearms may not work "100%" of the time because there is a chance of failure with mechanical firearms. I'm sure these reliability statistics come into play when police forces choose which mechanical weapons manufacturer to go with.

Last of all, us Aussies might just go and invent a better reason to "go electronic".

http://www.metalstorm.com/
Macheath is offline  
Old 08-09-2003, 09:37 PM   #6 (permalink)
Eh?
 
Stare At The Sun's Avatar
 
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Bullet control, . Honestly though, i see a gun like that having a BSOD at the wrong time, which would not be good. I also agree with macheath, i want the cops to be 100 percent functioning with the guns all the time...except if i ever run from them..
Stare At The Sun is offline  
Old 08-09-2003, 10:43 PM   #7 (permalink)
The Northern Ward
 
Location: Columbus, Ohio
I dub it: "Smart Gun XP"

This is so much more realistic.

<img src="http://mediaservice.photoisland.com/auction/Aug/2003892993678510189367.jpg">
__________________
"I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy
Phaenx is offline  
Old 08-09-2003, 10:51 PM   #8 (permalink)
What day is it?
 
Location: Downey, CA
Well I remember at one time they were playing with the idea of a radio controlled gun lock, essentially the officer wore a ring with a very short range radio transmitter, with a range measured in inches. If you don't wear the ring, the gun doesn't fire.

What I would like to see is something similar, but using an implant rather than a ring. They have been experimenting with implant identification for years and this would be a very practical use for it. Ultimately this boils down to a solenoid triggered safety, I have a version of this on my key chain that I use to get into my office.
Shagg is offline  
Old 08-10-2003, 09:01 PM   #9 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Location: CA
Quote:
Originally posted by UnlikedOne
Bullet control, . Honestly though, i see a gun like that having a BSOD at the wrong time, which would not be good. I also agree with macheath, i want the cops to be 100 percent functioning with the guns all the time...except if i ever run from them..
if ur gonna make a break for it, spit on their gun (aim for the part where they put their finger on for the print) in the holster and run!
Kabsnow is offline  
Old 08-10-2003, 09:24 PM   #10 (permalink)
Upright
 
Location: WA, CO
**First Post**

Solution to a non-existant problem.
CaesarI is offline  
Old 08-10-2003, 09:46 PM   #11 (permalink)
MSD
The sky calls to us ...
 
MSD's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: CT
This would be a great thing if it were 100% reliable, but it really would be a "fatal error" if one malfunctioned.

A more reliable device that I've heard of that could be implemented for police guns is a magnetic ring that is worn on the trigger finger and will allow the gun to fire when placed on the trigger.
MSD is offline  
Old 08-10-2003, 10:52 PM   #12 (permalink)
What day is it?
 
Location: Downey, CA
ok that must have been what I was thinking of, rather than radio controlled.
Shagg is offline  
Old 08-11-2003, 12:31 AM   #13 (permalink)
don't ignore this-->
 
bermuDa's Avatar
 
Location: CA
it's a good idea for new jersey... it means no more handguns on the streets till they perfect the technology...
__________________
I am the very model of a moderator gentleman.
bermuDa is offline  
Old 08-11-2003, 01:12 AM   #14 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Sydney, Australia
I don't know why people are going with those newfangled semi-automatic pistols. They're so complicated with all of those extra moving parts and spring loaded magazines; and I hear they jam a fair bit if you don't take real good care of them. Don't even get me started on the original M-16.

I'll stick with my revolver.

Oh wait, they're not 100% reliable either.

Better use a sword.

Oh shit, my sword just rusted away.

Um, anyone got a big rock I could use? I hear it has a 100% reliability factor.

(could someone please do a Linux photoshop for that photo up top?)
Macheath is offline  
Old 08-11-2003, 04:04 AM   #15 (permalink)
Insane
 
Location: ÉIRE
Quote:
Originally posted by Kabsnow
great idea.

but i still like Chris Rock's idea. Make each bullet cost $5,000. People would spend their bullets much less, only on people they REALLY REALLY hate. it'd mean many less deaths.
I can see it all now "this is a robbery...hand over your bullets"
__________________
its evolution baby
homerhop is offline  
Old 08-14-2003, 07:16 AM   #16 (permalink)
Cute and Cuddly
 
Location: Teegeeack.
I figure smart guns would be good if they needed one "log in" every day, and not more than that. One check in the morning, and then no problems.

The system would truly have to get perfected, though. But once it's up and running, it would be a good thing - if all normal guns were taken off the streets.
__________________
The above was written by a true prophet. Trust me.

"What doesn't kill you, makes you bitter and paranoid". - SB2000

XenuHubbard is offline  
Old 08-14-2003, 01:37 PM   #17 (permalink)
Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate
 
Location: Los Angeles
Well the entire argument of the system failing / "not 100% reliable" doesnt' really work considering even the best made guns in the world can malfuncion and jam. Think about the M16 jamming in a firefight in Vietnam - yeah, even worse.

The thing is, this system is also to prevent criminals from stealing the gun of the officer. These situations actually happen and they aren't too particularly rare.

The idea isn't bad (as the article says) - but it needs to be fixed to be nearly perfect (because nothing can truly be perfect.)
Zeld2.0 is offline  
Old 08-14-2003, 02:01 PM   #18 (permalink)
Cracking the Whip
 
Lebell's Avatar
 
Location: Sexymama's arms...
Quote:
Originally posted by Zeld2.0
Well the entire argument of the system failing / "not 100% reliable" doesnt' really work considering even the best made guns in the world can malfuncion and jam. Think about the M16 jamming in a firefight in Vietnam - yeah, even worse.

The thing is, this system is also to prevent criminals from stealing the gun of the officer. These situations actually happen and they aren't too particularly rare.

The idea isn't bad (as the article says) - but it needs to be fixed to be nearly perfect (because nothing can truly be perfect.)
I've put somewhere between a 1000 and 2000 rounds through my SIG P226 (a favorite police/military pistol) and I think I've had one problem.

That's a failure rate of less than 0.1%.

I doubt smart guns will ever get to this level of reliability, but if they do, I'll be first in line to get one.

(Also, the M16 had problems in Vietnam because soldiers weren't cleaning them properly. So this was a training problem, not a reliability problem.)
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!
Lebell is offline  
Old 08-14-2003, 02:53 PM   #19 (permalink)
We can't stop here! This is bat country!
 
chewybaca96's Avatar
 
Location: SL,UT
it is a good idea, just needs to be implemented so that it can be tested and proven. by implemented, i dont mean making it a law that its the only gun that can be purchased by civilians. it should be our choice. sure i'd buy one cuz i'm a gun fan and a computer geek, but when i'm packin, i'll have my Glock on me, not the computer, until i feel that it is reliable. dont make a law, let the people choose whether or not to purchase it.
__________________
Brian: “Ok, all we’ve gotta do is find the American Embassy, and they’ll help us get home”
Stewie: “Home? I have no intention of returning to that disgusting hovel with that intolerable woman, that fat slob, and that insufferable dog… Oh, you’re right here aren’t you? Oh well, I stand by it."
chewybaca96 is offline  
Old 08-14-2003, 03:23 PM   #20 (permalink)
Gentlemen Farmer
 
j8ear's Avatar
 
Location: Middle of nowhere, Jersey
Quote:
Originally posted by bermuDa
it's a good idea for new jersey... it means no more handguns on the streets till they perfect the technology...
Actually in Jersey, it was until a gun manufacturer offered one AT ALL at the consumer level. Has nothing to do with a reliability standard at all.

As soon as one became available for consumers, that's all Jersey citizens would be permitted to purchase.

Wait not all citizens...just the one's not on a law enforcment agency payroll. ~sigh~

At least that's my understanding of the legislation.

Anyway...I still fail to see what is being solved with this solution.

You think I'd ever trade my 'legacy' weapons in for one of these?

-bear
j8ear is offline  
Old 08-15-2003, 06:37 AM   #21 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: SE USA
The mechanical failure argument is bunk. Yes, we still take the chance of mechanical failure. With modern guns and proper maintainence, it is a small chance. Now, you compound that chance by adding electronics to the mix. You go from an incidence rate of less than 1% chance of stoppage to somewhere in the neighbourhood (by current publication) of 10-20% chance of stoppage. So every 5-10 times that the smartgun user pulls the trigger, nothing will occur, and every once in a while, it'll jam mechanically too. I don't like those odds. You tend to get one chance when things go ugly. I don't want my one chance to fail every fifth time statistically.
Moonduck is offline  
Old 08-15-2003, 06:37 PM   #22 (permalink)
Upright
 
Location: WA, CO
Quote:
Originally posted by Lebell
(Also, the M16 had problems in Vietnam because soldiers weren't cleaning them properly. So this was a training problem, not a reliability problem.) [/B]
::ahem:: not quite. There were many reasons why early M-16's failed in Vietnam. #1 lack of chrome plating. #2 different powder was used in development, and in the final product.

I know several Marines who served in Vietnam who will tell you their Marines' guns were clean enough to drink from.

Mr Dick Culver's well done article is here:
http://www.jouster.com/articles30m1/

The issue with these guns is as follows: Modern guns are more reliable than older guns. e.g. an original 1911 (not the 1911A1) cannot reliably feed any ammo other than ball (Full Metal Jacket) most modern 1911A1 clones can reliably feed modern defensive ammunition, as well as the once impossible to feed semi-wadcutters. Modern guns have become more reliable mechanically, and in fact, when properly maintained are so reliable it's quite astounding. The H&K USP series comes to mind, as does the Glock Mdl 17.

I, as a gun owner, see no need whatsoever for these little gizmos. My gun hasn't killed anyone that wasn't made out of paper. These devices are one more thing that could go wrong, I don't want, don't need, and will not pay for one more thing that could go wrong.

Ostensibly the justification is:

1. criminal steals my gun, kills me, uses my gun to kill others.
Anyone wanna guess how often that happens? You're wrong. About as often as I get drunk. (Police are a different story)

2. My gun is stolen from my house, and is used to kill someone.
This is somewhat more common (though not as common as some may think) but it has an easy solution. If my gun isn't under my pillow, it's in a safe. Lottsa luck gettin into the safe and not wakin' me up.


If this came about due to a demand in the market for these guns, I'd not care. The reality is this came about because of demands of government. They're foisting a product on the people that the people don't want. Imagine if they mandated we only buy American cars. Good, now you know how I feel.

-Morgan
CaesarI is offline  
Old 08-16-2003, 04:39 PM   #23 (permalink)
Upright
 
I think cops should be armed with non-lethal weapons as their primary weapon. The only catch is the non-lealth weapons would have more stopping power than the leathle weapons as far as icapasitaing a person.
Ie: instead of getting wounded by a 9mm and still being able to fight, the cops weapon would cause a complete and total nerological brake down and stop the offender from even moving for at least an hour. No more crappy one shot tasers but weapons that will just plainly stop the offender and scare/hurt him so bad that he will never ever commit another crime again.

evo
evo626 is offline  
Old 08-16-2003, 06:52 PM   #24 (permalink)
The Northern Ward
 
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Like the lightening gun from Quake.
__________________
"I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy
Phaenx is offline  
Old 08-16-2003, 08:13 PM   #25 (permalink)
Upright
 
exactly.... That would be some cool shit and nobody would have to die, they would just wish they were dead.
evo
evo626 is offline  
Old 08-16-2003, 08:22 PM   #26 (permalink)
Gentlemen Farmer
 
j8ear's Avatar
 
Location: Middle of nowhere, Jersey
Quote:
Originally posted by evo626
exactly.... That would be some cool shit and nobody would have to die, they would just wish they were dead.
evo
What's wrong with a few ~more~ dead?

Why do some people feel the need to keep people alive?

-bear
j8ear is offline  
Old 08-16-2003, 09:12 PM   #27 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Location: CA
Quote:
Originally posted by j8ear
What's wrong with a few ~more~ dead?

Why do some people feel the need to keep people alive?

-bear
because some people value life more than others...
Kabsnow is offline  
Old 08-17-2003, 12:53 PM   #28 (permalink)
Cracking the Whip
 
Lebell's Avatar
 
Location: Sexymama's arms...
CaesarI

Thanks for the link, very interesting.

My only comment is the data on the leathality of the 5.56 vs the 7.62.

What the author didn't mention or take into account is that the 5.56 derives much of it's leathality from fragmentation in the wound cavity. It has to, since size wise, it is essentially a .22 bullet.
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!
Lebell is offline  
Old 08-17-2003, 03:16 PM   #29 (permalink)
Crazy
 
snicka's Avatar
 
j8ear - exactly. We already save too many lives, overpopulation and the process of natural selection being corrupted is the result.

though of course, when it is you or I on the edge of death, I think things may look different.
snicka is offline  
Old 08-17-2003, 04:30 PM   #30 (permalink)
Upright
 
I'm just saying that in places like Denver the police have gotten a little out of hand with the unnessisary killing of citizens. The have been to many cases were police have killed incocent people because the officers responed to a situation uniformed. I would much rather be blasted by a non leathal weapon than murdered by a trigger happy cop.

As for overpopulation, were is darwins laws on that. Natural secltion is nolonger doing its job. We need to hire a new applicatant.
evo
evo626 is offline  
Old 08-17-2003, 07:02 PM   #31 (permalink)
WoW or Class...
 
BigGov's Avatar
 
Location: UWW
Because someone doesn't listen to a cop who's pointing a gun at them the cop is labeled trigger happy?
__________________
One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!"
BigGov is offline  
Old 08-17-2003, 08:47 PM   #32 (permalink)
Upright
 
Here in CO we have had quite a few non aggersive people shot. Many of these people were mentaly disabled. If shooting a man 56 times while he is holding a pair on nail clippers while his is begging for his life its called being trigger happy then I dont know what is.
evo
evo626 is offline  
 

Tags
article, dumb, guns, idea, smart

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:21 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360