Finally: The “smart” gun

posted at 2:41 pm on February 19, 2014 by Allahpundit

The centerpiece of today’s WaPo story, the Armatix iP1, isn’t new but the fact that it’s now on sale in the U.S. — at a lone gun store in California — is.

Am I right in assuming that serious gun aficionados hate this concept?

The arrival of smart-gun technology comes amid a flurry of interest in the concept from investors who think the country — after the killings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., and the brutal legislative battles that followed — is ready for new, innovative gun-control ideas. Last month, Ron Conway, a Silicon Valley titan and early investor in Google and Facebook, launched a $1 million X Prize-like contest for smart-gun technology

A variety of approaches are in development. Armatix, the German company behind the iP1, uses RFID chips, which can be found on anti-theft tags attached to expensive clothing. Trigger­Smart, an Irish company, also uses RFID chips, though with a ring instead of a watch. The company also has technology that would render guns inoperable if they approached electronic markers — for instance, near a school.

The New Jersey Institute of Technology is using sensors to recognize users’ grips and grasping behaviors. Kodiak Arms, a Utah company, is taking ­pre-orders for its Intelligun, which is unlocked with fingerprints. Other companies are using voice recognition. Yardarm, a California start-up, uses a smartphone app to notify gun owners of a weapon’s movement. Users can even remotely disable their weapons…

Teret and other smart-gun proponents point to a 1997 survey showing that 71 percent of Americans — and 59 percent of gun owners — favored personalization of all new handguns. Gun rights advocates, including the National Shooting Sports Foundation, cite a survey the group commissioned last year showing that only 14 percent of Americans would consider buying a smart gun.

Here’s the webpage for the iP1, which not only won’t fire if it’s not paired with the accompanying smartwatch but can be programmed not to fire if you’re aiming away from a designated target. (The clip below, which is a few years old, shows what happens when you try to fire with the watch disabled and then enabled.) If you’re a parent who wants something for home protection and also wants to be 200 percent sure your kid can’t stumble upon your gun and have an accident — and if you also don’t mind sleeping with a watch on every night — then maybe this is for you. Or maybe not: The most obvious problem is that, if you ever did face a threat requiring you to pull, there’s a chance the signal from the watch would fail and you’d be dunzo. To paraphrase an old saying, when seconds count, a new smartwatch battery is just minutes away.

But that’s a practical problem. There are two theoretical problems for gun-rights advocates, I take it. One: The more mainstream smart guns become, the easier it’ll be for gun-grabbers to call for banning everything but smart guns as a “compromise” position. They’ve always had trouble selling the assault-weapons ban because the definition of “assault weapon” is hazy and assault weapons are used in only a small fraction of gun crimes. A ban on “dumb guns,” including handguns, would be clearer and more ambitious. If you want to protect your right to a “dumb gun,” maybe the smart guns need to be marginalized. Two: If the point of the Second Amendment is self-defense, including the right to defend yourself against a violently oppressive government, why would you want to embed a technology in your weapon that could probably be disabled remotely by the government? At the very least, seems like it’d be easy for the feds to create a gun registry if we stuck a tiny electronic beacon in every weapon. (That’d make it easier to solve gun crimes too, but then policing does tend to be easier in a police state.) Which is to say, all the privacy concerns about the “Internet of things” would apply to smart guns too, except in this case they might have life-and-death consequences.

Am I missing something? Gun-rights supporters might be more open to smart guns as a compromise if gun-control fans had the momentum on policy, but they don’t. Just the opposite.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

NotCoach on February 19, 2014 at 3:29 PM

Holy anachronism Batman! All those musket carrying 18th century heroes sure do make a lot of sense today. Get them Federals!

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:33 PM

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:33 PM

Diakookoo, is that you?

CurtZHP on February 19, 2014 at 3:34 PM

OK, a few questions that were not addressed in the original article. Are the watches specific to a particular firearm? And can you get multiple watches for each gun? In the first case, you need to get what amounts to a gunsmith/locksmith to replace a busted watch. If the second case is correct, then all adult-types in the house could have a watch. But you know what’s gonna happen? People are just going to wrap the watchband around the grip and smart gun becomes an electronic dumb gun. Also, a lot of people (including me!) would buy the watches, even without the guns. Can you imagine being the poor cop who sees hundreds of people a day wearing the Watch O’ Death? Their poor heads would explode.

Another point – how the heck does this thing work? OK, signal goes to gun, and a safety goes to off? That’s a hell of a lot of mechanical work – better fuel it with D-cells.

Surellin on February 19, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Otherwise, no one would even consider this a feasible business opportunity — or even a political one.

calbear on February 19, 2014 at 3:28 PM

Feasibility, economics, and practicality are rarely high on the list of requirements when folks evaluate ‘political opportunity’, nor even ‘business opportunity’ undertaken with political motivation.

Shall we make a list? There are a great many things that *only* happen because of ‘political opportunity’ and taxpayer funding that would *never* happen out of a strict ‘business opportunity’.

Midas on February 19, 2014 at 3:36 PM

“Please restart your weapon.”

Akzed on February 19, 2014 at 3:38 PM

Midas on February 19, 2014 at 3:33 PM

I’m always available for you to call names. And I won’t even respond in kind. So have at. Let’s talk about me. That’s what we’re here to do.

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:38 PM

I guess all Dem politician bodyguards (and Secret Service) would have to be Republicans or independents – heh heh.

Marcola on February 19, 2014 at 3:31 PM

.
Politicians and celebrities ONLY have Republican/Independent bodyguards …

… any Democrat oriented “bodyguard” is just someone paid to follow you around until “sh1t gets real” at which point they will take an unexpected “leave of absence”.

;->

PolAgnostic on February 19, 2014 at 3:38 PM

I’ll be sure to buy one right after it gains universal adoption by the police and military.

Spade on February 19, 2014 at 3:40 PM

Holy anachronism Batman! All those musket carrying 18th century heroes sure do make a lot of sense today. Get them Federals!

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:33 PM

Let me ask you something there, MJ (are you Spiderman’s boyfriend?). Who’s advice am I more readily going to accept: A group of men who actually fought for their freedom, gave us liberty, and established one of the most successful forms of government ever (all this while being incredibly well read and intelligent), or you?

NotCoach on February 19, 2014 at 3:41 PM

I’m always available for you to call names. And I won’t even respond in kind. So have at. Let’s talk about me. That’s what we’re here to do.

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:38 PM

Like the following?

Holy anachronism Batman! All those musket carrying 18th century heroes sure do make a lot of sense today. Get them Federals!

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:33 PM

With rebuttal like that who needs clowns?

NotCoach on February 19, 2014 at 3:42 PM

NotCoach on February 19, 2014 at 3:41 PM

Wait, let me check my calendar





Me, of course!

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:42 PM

NotCoach on February 19, 2014 at 3:42 PM

Are you saying that you discovered a personal insult in that post? Did you have to play the message backwards to hear it?

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:43 PM

I’ll be sure to buy one right after it gains universal adoption by the police and military.

Spade on February 19, 2014 at 3:40 PM

Followed by the criminals outside the government.

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 3:43 PM

Wait, let me check my calendar





Me, of course!

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:42 PM

Aren’t clowns supposed to be entertaining?

NotCoach on February 19, 2014 at 3:44 PM

Interestingly this has been done before in a superior and cheaper way. Tarnhelm and several other custom gunsmiths can convert Ruger or S&W revolvers to a Magna-Trigger that requires a magnetic ring to be worn by the shooter. This has been available since 1976.

They are quite reliable, the safety mechanism is purely mechanical rather than electronic, and the conversion plus the gun is still only a bit more than half the cost of this new gizmo.

Madcap_Magician on February 19, 2014 at 3:45 PM

I’m always available for you to call names. And I won’t even respond in kind. So have at. Let’s talk about me. That’s what we’re here to do.

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:38 PM

Excellent! And I have an ample supply of colorful and appropriately tuned ones for you!

Now, I did use an adjective that could be considered ‘unkind’, perhaps. And for that, I would apologize, were it not so desperately deserved.

But make no mistake – I didn’t call you a name at all. A ‘douchebag’ is a useful and well-valued object – embrace it; wear the moniker proudly – you’ve worked diligently, and have unquestionably earned it!

Midas on February 19, 2014 at 3:46 PM

Simpler, older technologies give the illusion of control.

calbear on February 19, 2014 at 3:28 PM

What a stupid statement.

I carry my H&K USP .40 Compact because it’s more convenient. But if I’m at home, my first choice of handgun for self-defense is gonna be my “simpler, older” S&W .357 Magnum because I don’t just have the “illusion” of control over reliability, I really do have control over reliability in my choice of weapons.

UnstChem on February 19, 2014 at 3:46 PM

Are you saying that you discovered a personal insult in that post? Did you have to play the message backwards to hear it?

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:43 PM

Geez louise, your slow. Since time apparently makes all universal truths void to you maybe tomorrow you’ll get it after aging that noggin of yours for one more day.

NotCoach on February 19, 2014 at 3:46 PM

Midas on February 19, 2014 at 3:46 PM

No worries here. Apathy is the best armor.

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:47 PM

The more complex the mechanism, the greater the chance something will go wrong.

ajacksonian on February 19, 2014 at 3:48 PM

There are a great many things that *only* happen because of ‘political opportunity’ and taxpayer funding that would *never* happen out of a strict ‘business opportunity’. Midas on February 19, 2014 at 3:36 PM

0b00ba donor lobbies congress to force govt agencies to buy 100k of these guns.

0b00ba gives donor startup money to make them. Donor’s only business product prior to this was cakes for lesbian weddings.

Once in production, govt offers huge subsidies when you trade in a “dumb gun” when you buy a “smart gun.”

A seventeen year-old hacker starts selling radio device that disables the new gun from 75 feet.

NY newspaper publishes the names and addresses of new gun owners.

Manufacturer declares bankruptcy, returns to making cakes for lesbian weddings.

Akzed on February 19, 2014 at 3:49 PM

OK, a few questions that were not addressed in the original article.

Surellin on February 19, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Ok one very germane question that you didn’t address. Would you buy one of these things?

Oldnuke on February 19, 2014 at 3:50 PM

This is, without a doubt, one of the stupidest things I’ve ever seen. And I’ve watched Rainbow Conspiracy.

Set aside for the moment reliability issues and consider how easily RFID can be hacked, or bypassed mechanically. Say these things make it to the broader market – how long before some guy defeats it with a few parts from Radio Shack? Or, how long before someone turns an Arduino into a signal jammer, preventing police from being able to use their duty weapons?

Allahpundit points out the obvious issue of giving the government the ability to arbitrarily render weapons moot (like say, during some kind of insurrection). But imagine these things being mainstream 30 years from now. What stops future James Holmes from bypassing the electronics on a number of personal weapons and making some kind of signal jammer? He could storm a movie theater or mall, killing indiscriminately. Meanwhile law-abiding CCW holders (if they still exist), police, SWAT, etc, have firearms rendered inoperable by the shooter’s illegal jammer? Wouldn’t that be a measurably worse situation than what we face today?

I, for one, will not buy one of these even as a novelty, for fear of encouraging further development. I’m not a Luddite by any means, but this has trouble written all over it.

NathanHale on February 19, 2014 at 3:50 PM

Holy anachronism Batman! All those musket carrying 18th century heroes sure do make a lot of sense today. Get them Federals!

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:33 PM

Good point. Let’s eliminate all constitutional text up through 1799, since sound governing principles apparently have an expiration date.

The Schaef on February 19, 2014 at 3:51 PM

With rebuttal like that who needs clowns?
NotCoach on February 19, 2014 at 3:42 PM

Drudge had a story up about a tragic clown shortage these days. Don’t discourage him.

Akzed on February 19, 2014 at 3:52 PM

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:33 PM

I take it you have a real problem with the Commonsense Civil Right of Armed Self-Defense ?[CASD]

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 3:53 PM

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 3:53 PM

PBHO loves to use the phrase, “common sense” willy nilly too. I’m sure you find him very convincing.

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:53 PM

How much fecal matter needs to be mixed in with someones brain tissue to come up with an idea this stupid?

meci on February 19, 2014 at 3:55 PM

This is a sort of pointless invention.
Most shootings happen when two guys have an argument, and one of them pulls out his gun and shoots the other. The guys are usually young and drunk and the argument is usually stupid. The chance of you getting shot by your own gun is much much smaller than the already small chance you have of being shot at all.

This is just another way to squeeze extra money from the customers for no good reason, like a fridge that dispenses hot water.

BubbaHoTep on February 19, 2014 at 3:55 PM

Holy anachronism Batman! All those musket carrying 18th century heroes sure do make a lot of sense today. Get them Federals! MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:33 PM

Hey genius, why was congress empowered to grant “letters of marque and reprisal” if private citizens were not as well armed as any foreign forces they might encounter – on land or sea?

Akzed on February 19, 2014 at 3:56 PM

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 3:53 PM

Can you answer the question:

Do you have problem with the Commonsense Civil Right of Armed Self-Defense [CASD]

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 3:57 PM

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 3:57 PM

I don’t know what that is, so no, I cannot answer the question.

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 4:00 PM

Akzed on February 19, 2014 at 3:56 PM

So you’ve seen a lot of letters of marque and/or reprisal in the last couple of centuries, have ya?

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 4:01 PM

Honestly, I am still worried about getting the right trigger, polishing the ejection slide and having quality ammunition.

I don’t need electronics which represent another potential point of failure.

So until they make a reliable laser-gun, count me out.

Oh and you think some maniac intent on doing harm will grab this garbage?

How about people responding who suddenly find themselves armed with a paperweight?

Marcus Traianus on February 19, 2014 at 4:01 PM

Does anyone think any such systems will be sold without a way for a third party to disable the system? Because when DHS gets down to business they will want those things turned off.

And how long until that technology gets hacked and available on the black market? No serious criminal would be without one.

novaculus on February 19, 2014 at 4:02 PM

Dude busts down your door, you grab your liberal-approved I-Gun and start frantically pulling the trigger but no bang bang.

Mr. House Invader gives you a sly smile and holds out his black market “smart gun disabler” before advancing on you with his machete.

Good times in Utopia, good good times.

Bishop on February 19, 2014 at 2:46 PM

Bishop sure has a way of putting things. I had to laugh when I read it. He nailed it though.

shubalstearns on February 19, 2014 at 4:03 PM

UnstChem on February 19, 2014 at 3:46 PM

Yep. Carry a 1911 but the house gun is a 686.

novaculus on February 19, 2014 at 4:05 PM

The NSA has already found a way to hack into these guns. So, yes, soon they will be the only ones you’ll be allowed to own.

Nomennovum on February 19, 2014 at 4:05 PM

Let’s require them for the police.

njcommuter on February 19, 2014 at 4:06 PM

You’d not only be defenseless; you’d also be unable to hunt. Yeah, you’d still have knives I guess. Bringing knives to gunfights…

Marcola on February 19, 2014 at 3:27 PM

Ya but knives have uses beyond killing, so they’re ok.
Guns are just for killing, so nobody should have them.
So we just need to eliminate ALL guns from the planet./libtard

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:07 PM

So you’ve seen a lot of letters of marque and/or reprisal in the last couple of centuries, have ya? MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 4:01 PM

I haven’t seen the amendment repealing this clause.

More importantly, its point is that at least some citizens were assumed by the Founders to be as well armed as any soldier or Marine.

Akzed on February 19, 2014 at 4:07 PM

First the NSA’s database on calls.
Then the DHS wants to create a database to track license plates.
And now “smart guns” which could be disabled remotely.

1984

shubalstearns on February 19, 2014 at 4:08 PM

Fine.

Police MUST use this technology immediately, as well as microstamping, to prove their leadership and responsibility.

jc

J.R. Crum on February 19, 2014 at 4:10 PM

Yep. Carry a 1911 but the house gun is a 686.

novaculus on February 19, 2014 at 4:05 PM

Carry is S&W Model 60 .357Magnum or Glock 9mm subcompact.
House is either full size Glock .40 cal or Mossberg 500 Tactical with attached flashlight or AR-15 with laser pointer sighted for the internal length of the house – depending on what happens.

Welll, WOULD be, if I hadn’t lost all of them in a tragic fishing accident….

I can’t even seem to get a watch that consistently works right – I’m sure as he11 not trusting my life to electronics….

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:11 PM

I certainly would find some value in the ability to lock a firearm to be operable solely by me. I would also like real-time stats out of it, like barrel velocity, stress, accuracy, and so on.

Could be a good training tool. Would also be interesting to see if it could be fired remotely, like say the ending to Breaking Bad.

antisense on February 19, 2014 at 4:14 PM

Don’t forget…your smartphone tracks its location and reports to persons unknown to you in real time.

Now you want a gun that tells every LEO where your gun is?

Ok, lets not say LEO. Lets say “Eric Holder” instead.

BobMbx on February 19, 2014 at 4:16 PM

Simpler, older technologies give the illusion of control.
calbear on February 19, 2014 at 3:28 PM

Illusion? What is the illusion?
Every one of my guns has fired perfectly every time I pulled the trigger, and I hit the target I’m aiming for.
That’s not an illusion.

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:17 PM

Welll, WOULD be, if I hadn’t lost all of them in a tragic fishing accident….

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Wow. What a coincidence!

BobMbx on February 19, 2014 at 4:17 PM

Welll, WOULD be, if I hadn’t lost all of them in a tragic fishing accident….

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Wow. What a coincidence!

BobMbx on February 19, 2014 at 4:17 PM

Careful, you may be in violation of the Commerce Clause and thus liable to pay tax on the value of the items.

antisense on February 19, 2014 at 4:18 PM

I don’t know what that is, so no, I cannot answer the question.

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 4:00 PM

Let me help you out.
Which words are you having trouble understanding:

Definition of common sense
noun[mass noun]
good sense and sound judgement in practical matters:it is all a matter of common sense [as modifier]:a common-sense approach
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/common-sense?q=Commonsense
———————
Definition of civil
1 [attributive] relating to ordinary citizens and their concerns, as distinct from military or ecclesiastical matters:
Origin late Middle English: via Old French from Latin civilis, from civis ‘citizen’.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/civil?
————————–
Definition of right
noun
1 [mass noun] that which is morally correct, just, or honourable
2a moral or legal entitlement to have or do something.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/right?q=right
——————————–
Definition of armed
adjective
1 equipped with or carrying a firearm or firearms
1.1involving the use of firearms:
2 Heraldry having claws, a beak, etc. of a specified tincture
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/armed?
————————————
Definition of self-defence
noun
the defence of one’s person or interests, especially through the use of physical force, which is permitted in certain cases as an answer to a charge of violent crime:he claimed self-defence in the attempted murder charge [as modifier]:self-defence classes

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/self-defence?q=Self-Defense

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Wow! A .22 LR subcompact pistol that will fire as long as the ugly watch I’m not wearing at home is within 10 inches of the gun assuming that the time-controlled deactivation mode wasn’t accidentally activated and that both the AAA batteries in the pistol and CR2022 battery in the watch have sufficient charge and that costs $1800 for pistol and watch to make it work sounds fantastic!!

No reason to even have a his and hers dumb pistol in some generally accepted effective self-defense caliber with $500-600 left over for holsters, accessories and extra mags.

I can’t wait until they come out with their .25 caliber model!

/s

deepdiver on February 19, 2014 at 4:20 PM

I don’t know what that is, so no, I cannot answer the question.

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 4:00 PM

Let me help you out.
Which words are you having trouble understanding:

Definition of common sense
noun[mass noun]
good sense and sound judgement in practical matters:it is all a matter of common sense [as modifier]:a common-sense approach
———————
Definition of civil
1 [attributive] relating to ordinary citizens and their concerns, as distinct from military or ecclesiastical matters:
Origin late Middle English: via Old French from Latin civilis, from civis ‘citizen’.
————————–
Definition of right
noun
1 [mass noun] that which is morally correct, just, or honourable
2a moral or legal entitlement to have or do something.
——————————–
Definition of armed
adjective
1 equipped with or carrying a firearm or firearms
1.1involving the use of firearms:
2 Heraldry having claws, a beak, etc. of a specified tincture
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/armed?
————————————
Definition of self-defence
noun
the defence of one’s person or interests, especially through the use of physical force, which is permitted in certain cases as an answer to a charge of violent crime:he claimed self-defence in the attempted murder charge [as modifier]:self-defence classes

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/self-defence?q=Self-Defense

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 4:20 PM

Dude busts down your door, you grab your liberal-approved I-Gun and start frantically pulling the trigger but no bang bang.

Mr. House Invader gives you a sly smile and holds out his black market “smart gun disabler” before advancing on you with his machete.

Good times in Utopia, good good times.

Bishop on February 19, 2014 at 2:46 PM

This, but a more likely scenario is that the criminals steal and hack the “SMRT” guns as a status symbol and to make their heat look “legal”. The ever-incestuous liberal elite and police respond by passing a slew of regulations like forced GPS, online registrations before they can be used, “check-ins” before usage, etc.

Oh and literal “gun-free zones”. Public areas and buildings will be required to equip a kind of wifi that will disable all SMRT guns within. The minimum range is stealthily extended each year, or not (“for the children! “, etc.).

Mr. Mugger/Rapist is trying to carjack into your family’s car. You got your SMRT gun, but alas, you drove a little too close to a “gun-free zone”, extending +50 feet from a city park. Mr. Mugger/Rapist’s old fashioned .38 doesn’t have that problem. Game over.

smiley on February 19, 2014 at 4:21 PM

novaculus on February 19, 2014 at 4:05 PM

Carry is S&W Model 60 .357Magnum or Glock 9mm subcompact.
House is either full size Glock .40 cal or Mossberg 500 Tactical with attached flashlight or AR-15 with laser pointer sighted for the internal length of the house – depending on what happens.

Welll, WOULD be, if I hadn’t lost all of them in a tragic fishing accident….

I can’t even seem to get a watch that consistently works right – I’m sure as he11 not trusting my life to electronics….

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Funny you should mention that… I hear that’s happening all over the place, especially NY,CT – which is strange since its hard to go boating in the winter..

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 4:25 PM

I don’t know what that is, so no, I cannot answer the question.

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 4:00 PM

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 4:20 PM

Now that you should know the meaning of those words in the phrase: Commonsense civil right of armed self-defense

Why do you have a problem with that civil right?

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 4:28 PM

Ordinairily, I would go for the crotch-grab and say something to effect of “Yeah, I got your ‘smart gun’ right here, pal”, however, my ‘smart gun’ has made some embarassingly bad choices over the years.

Aside from that little tale, please, someone tell me why the geniuses of the Left think that passing laws can keep guns from the hands of criminals when they are unwilling to do anything about securing our southern border over which flow, willy-nilly, aliens and narcotics, and soon … guns.

M240H on February 19, 2014 at 4:31 PM

First, Obama gets an off switch for the internet.

Now, somebody wants to give him an off switch for firearms.

“Hey, what did you before you came to Camp 914?”

“Oh, I’m the guy that invented the Smart Gun”

BobMbx on February 19, 2014 at 4:32 PM

Mr. Mugger/Rapist’s old fashioned .38 doesn’t have that problem. Game over.

smiley on February 19, 2014 at 4:21 PM

The counter to that is a Smart Car, which detects an unpleasant atmosphere emanating from the person standing outside the vehicle and responds by activating the Wall Of Flame Car-Jacking Suppression System.

BobMbx on February 19, 2014 at 4:35 PM

Wow. What a coincidence!

BobMbx on February 19, 2014 at 4:17 PM

Funny you should mention that… I hear that’s happening all over the place, especially NY,CT – which is strange since its hard to go boating in the winter..

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 4:25 PM

Ya – I’m beginning to think all these guns that can already jump up and shoot people on their own have also figured out how to jump out of boats.

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:46 PM

The counter to that is a Smart Car, which detects an unpleasant atmosphere emanating from the person standing outside the vehicle and responds by activating the Wall Of Flame Car-Jacking Suppression System.

BobMbx on February 19, 2014 at 4:35 PM

Pity the fool who forgets to put on deodorant before he heads off to work in the morning.
But that might be a plus for his co-workers….

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:48 PM

Aside from that little tale, please, someone tell me why the geniuses of the Left think that passing laws can keep guns from the hands of criminals when they are unwilling to do anything about securing our southern border over which flow, willy-nilly, aliens and narcotics, and soon … guns.

M240H on February 19, 2014 at 4:31 PM

Come now – isn’t it obvious?
The drug cartels who run thousands of tons of illegal drugs into this country every year are DRUG dealers.
They couldn’t possibly switch into the guns and ammo business. They just wouldn’t know how to smuggle THOSE particular illegal items.
Duhhhhh…

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:50 PM

Wow. What a coincidence!

BobMbx on February 19, 2014 at 4:17 PM

Funny you should mention that… I hear that’s happening all over the place, especially NY,CT – which is strange since its hard to go boating in the winter..

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 4:25 PM

Ya – I’m beginning to think all these guns that can already jump up and shoot people on their own have also figured out how to jump out of boats.

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:46 PM

Ice fishing. Very popular up North this time of year — or so I’ve heard.

Yeah — that’s the ticket!

Alien on February 19, 2014 at 4:54 PM

I don’t know what that is, so no, I cannot answer the question.

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 4:00 PM

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 4:20 PM

Now that you should know the meaning of those words in the phrase: Commonsense civil right of armed self-defense

Why do you have a problem with that civil right?

What’s the good Word MJ?

Have you studied up on those Common words, can you make Sense of them?

Try to be Civil, but you know I’m Right.

Just be advised that I Armed with the facts in my Self-defense.

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 4:58 PM

Ice fishing. Very popular up North this time of year — or so I’ve heard.
Yeah — that’s the ticket!

Alien on February 19, 2014 at 4:54 PM

Well hey, if the guns can jump out of boats, I’m sure they can also jump through a hole in the ice pretty easily.

(Or should that be “more easier”?)

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:58 PM

Hey genius, why was congress empowered to grant “letters of marque and reprisal” if private citizens were not as well armed as any foreign forces they might encounter – on land or sea?

Akzed on February 19, 2014 at 3:56 PM

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I point this out to my more reasonable liberal friends (there are a few such folks out there) all the time. When they argue that the founders would never have anticipated private persons being able to own weapons that were capable of perpetrating a mass murder, as they were only familiar with individuals owning single-shot pistols or muskets (or single shot rifles at best) – I point out that the letter of marque powers in the constitution assumes that individual private citizens (or perhaps even voluntary private associations of individuals – perhaps even, God forbid, a corporation!) could and would own the most powerful “weapons of mass destruction” available at the time – multiple long gun cannon mounted on a ship capable of serving as a capital warship (or at least a frigate). And you didn’t need to get the letter of marque before acquiring this WMD – in fact many merchantmen armed themselves in a similar fashion (although perhaps with a few less guns, but of a similar type). Doesn’t this suggest the founders expected private citizens would be able to own the most powerful weapons available to the military, never mind a handgun or rifle, no matter how many rounds it might fire. After all, imagine the carnage a well-heeled individual bent on murder and mayhem could have caused by sailing such a ship manned by well-paid mercenaries into New York Harbor and opening fire – yet the founders trusted in the citizens. The usual response from those good liberal folks is a long silence, followed by “I need to think about that”. (Although, I am sure our good trolls will have any number of devastating responses.)

erin_harkiewicz on February 19, 2014 at 5:02 PM

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 4:00 PM

Damn Dude?!?!

Bmore on February 19, 2014 at 5:03 PM

Intruder breaks in, grab your smart gun and point, pull the trigger only to hear …. “recalculating” …. (said in annoying electronic female voice).

4reds on February 19, 2014 at 5:03 PM

Well hey, if the guns can jump out of boats, I’m sure they can also jump through a hole in the ice pretty easily.

(Or should that be “more easier”?)

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:58 PM

That ice can be pretty thick. I once used You use the gun to shoot a hole in it. It’s called “sighting in.” From what I’ve heard.

Alien on February 19, 2014 at 5:05 PM

The only Gun “problem” we have in America is, for the most part, young minority males shooting each other and other people with ILLEGAL Handguns

AND not enough ability for parents, family member, doctors and schools to have CRAZY people involuntarily committed to nuthouses.

That’s IT. And the media narrative ignores both things.

AYNBLAND on February 19, 2014 at 5:07 PM

Didn’t they already stock-up on the orders of the guy forecasting a race war?

DHS Contracted To Purchase 704 Million Rounds of Ammo Over Next 4 Years: 2,500 Rounds Per Officer
(CNSNews.com) — The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is contracted to purchase 704,390,250 rounds of ammunition over the next four years, which is equal to a total of about 2,500 rounds per DHS agent, according to a January 2014 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report entitled Ammunition Purchases Have Declined Since 2009.

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 5:09 PM

That’s IT. And the media narrative ignores both things.

AYNBLAND on February 19, 2014 at 5:07 PM

The media narrative isn’t based in reality. We live it.

Alien on February 19, 2014 at 5:11 PM

Ya – I’m beginning to think all these guns that can already jump up and shoot people on their own have also figured out how to jump out of boats.

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:46 PM

Personally I saw all this coming and sold all my guns privately at fair market value, because I’m an evil capitalist.

Fenris on February 19, 2014 at 5:16 PM

A gun is only as smart as the person firing it.

RedNewEnglander on February 19, 2014 at 5:17 PM

So you’ve seen a lot of letters of marque and/or reprisal in the last couple of centuries, have ya?

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 4:01 PM

Still no answer on abolishing all constitutional text through 1799?

Really, the 11th and 12th Amendments should be struck also, since Founding Fathers served as presidents through 1817.

The Schaef on February 19, 2014 at 5:23 PM

I’m really not sure what to say. This has got to be the single dumbest idea I have ever heard of.

Let’s start with the current model… $1400 for .22 handgun + $400 for ugly black watch. $1800 for a lousy POS that will only piss off an invader instead of stopping them. The article compares that to a .40 for $600. I consider this a gun tax on STUPID PEOPLE or LIBERALS (but then I repeat myself).

Since only one company manufactures those ugly black watches, does that mean that a company is creating a monopoly over my ability to protect myself? And here I thought liberals think corporations are EVIL. Do they wish to place their defense in the hands of one of those evil companies?

And what about those places that ban firearms. Can they now block people from entering because it detects you have one of those watches on?

And as someone else has pointed out, what about my wife’s need to defend herself with my firearms? Can I file charges against the company as an accessory to murder if my wife dies because she is unable to activate my gun to defend herself?

And gun jammers would become prevalent among criminals.

And criminals… err… politicians would love to force the issue.

I could go on and on and on, but it all comes down to…

The dumbest idea ever.

dominigan on February 19, 2014 at 5:29 PM

RFID chip disables gun right when you need it.
Yardarm notifies user (and the intruder) the gun is moving by phone while you’re trying to hide from said intruder.
Intelligun unlocks by fingerprint, thus thwarting your spouse who is trying to use it against the threat of the bad guy.
In each situation…..Oops!
71% of Americans favor personalization of new hand guns. That may be accurate, but I would think it would be custom grips, engraving, or gunsmithing lightening the trigger as a form of personalization. Afterall, only 14% of Americans wanted smart guns last year. The rest of us want what we want when we need it without needless complications that may cost lives when it goes wrong.
Gun education, training and practice would do more than irrational bans based on uninformed assumptions and fear.

geezerintraining on February 19, 2014 at 5:30 PM

Ya – I’m beginning to think all these guns that can already jump up and shoot people on their own have also figured out how to jump out of boats.

dentarthurdent on February 19, 2014 at 4:46 PM

Ice fishing. Very popular up North this time of year — or so I’ve heard.

Yeah — that’s the ticket!

Alien on February 19, 2014 at 4:54 PM

It really makes you wonder why people take those guns that can jump up and shoot people on those trips?

DinaRehn on February 19, 2014 at 5:38 PM

The counter to that is a Smart Car, which detects an unpleasant atmosphere emanating from the person standing outside the vehicle and responds by activating the Wall Of Flame Car-Jacking Suppression System.

BobMbx on February 19, 2014 at 4:35 PM

Heh, made me think of Magnavolt…and it won’t even run down your battery.

Oldnuke on February 19, 2014 at 5:40 PM

Nope. Sorry ‘bou’ that.

I be ol’ skoo.

Ol’ skoo 1911A1 .45ACP
Ol’ skoo S&W M-19 .357 Mag
Ol’skoo CZ-75 SA 9mm
Ol’ skoo Browning P-35 Hi Power 9mm

Yep. Just another Luddite, I guess.

Solaratov on February 19, 2014 at 5:45 PM

“Honey? Does this watch go with the Glock? Maybe the Kimber?”

Microsoft gave us the BSOD, liberals will give red streets of death.

RFID? Yeah, like that’s foolproof. Zap the RFID. Would it trip the gun into “locked” mode and now the gun is inoperable? Or would the gun fail into an “open” mode of operation?

Still wouldn’t buy one. Keep It Simple Stupid. Simple works.

raz0r on February 19, 2014 at 6:09 PM

Hey genius, why was congress empowered to grant “letters of marque and reprisal” if private citizens were not as well armed as any foreign forces they might encounter – on land or sea?

Akzed on February 19, 2014 at 3:56 PM

So you’ve seen a lot of letters of marque and/or reprisal in the last couple of centuries, have ya?

MJBrutus on February 19, 2014 at 4:01 PM

This is the best you can come up with? I’ve seen you do better over the years.

I had to look up what a letter of marque and reprisal was. I’m usually the best versed on this stuff out of everyone I personally know but somewhere I either missed this bit of history or completely forgot it. Getting little tidbits of proper historical context is one the great things about this commenters on this site. Something MJBrutus is purposefully ignorant about.

UnstChem on February 19, 2014 at 6:20 PM

Anyone that even thinks of buying C R A P like this deserves what they get.

TX-96 on February 19, 2014 at 6:30 PM

Hey, my 228 has two “bar codes” on the right side that can’t be removed easily. That is about as high tech as I get.

HonestLib on February 19, 2014 at 6:36 PM

Meh.

Frankly, if you’re going to copy James Bond technology, I’d rather have the jet-pack and the passenger-side ejector seat.

Oooo! Or the Lotus that turned into a Sub!

…Or Robert Shaw’s wrist-watch garrote.

And I vote S.E. Cupp as the next Bond-chick!

a5minmajor on February 19, 2014 at 6:44 PM

I carry a pistol designed over 100 years ago, but I’m no luddite. Now that I think of it, the newest guns I own were designed or based on designs from before the Vietnam War. You first, Mr. LEO, you first.

Mini-14 on February 19, 2014 at 6:57 PM

Sorry, but as rarely as I’ve had my rifle visited by Major Malfunction during either Sitting or Prone RAPID FIRE in a High Power Rifle Match all I really need is another FAILURE MECHANISM. And this is when the MR-1 target is NOT RETURNING FIRE.
No thanks, I’ll pass on these idiot contraptions/inventions.

Talk about a BUG being a FEATURE.

Missilengr on February 19, 2014 at 7:28 PM

Not much to add, I think most people hit the major points…why? Cuz this story (or a clone) run every time there’s a gun control furor. It’ll be good technology when the cops/military adopt it – but they won’t for all the reasons mentioned, like reliability and the possibility the bad guys could shut their guns off too. Having said that I’m seeing more cop stories (where they shoot 80 year old men in their beds) where I think maybe that would be a good thing.

John_G on February 19, 2014 at 7:39 PM

I only have one handgun, a 1911, with any kind of safety on it. All the rest are just pull the trigger propositions. Count me out for any high tech safety devises or any safety devices at all.

claudius on February 19, 2014 at 7:57 PM

The only 100% effective safety is “keep your booger picker off the bang switch” LOL

Mini-14 on February 19, 2014 at 8:06 PM

How about Smart Bullets?

Walter L. Newton on February 19, 2014 at 8:44 PM

I don.t hate the concept. Some ideas like a pistol that recognizes me and only fires when I pull the trigger is pretty cool. I don’t like the idea that a chip could turn my pistola off at certain locations. I prefer to be the only “off” switch.

paulsur on February 19, 2014 at 9:17 PM

Hold on Mr. Burglar! I have to hit several buttons on my “watch” in order to turn on my gun.

Yakko77 on February 19, 2014 at 9:19 PM

I guess MJBrutus is saying he will be wearing his kneepads when the govt comes for his guns.

Seriously, this smart gun idea is a baaad idea no matter how you slice it.

Hard Right on February 19, 2014 at 9:19 PM

Seriously, this smart gun idea is a baaad idea no matter how you slice it.

Hard Right on February 19, 2014 at 9:19 PM

.
Whatd’ya mean “baaad idea” ?

The government will be MUCH better off, once it’s mandated … or isn’t that what you meant ?

listens2glenn on February 19, 2014 at 9:29 PM

If the point of the Second Amendment is self-defense, including the right to defend yourself against a violently oppressive government, why would you want to embed a technology in your weapon that could probably be disabled remotely by the government?

Allahpundit on February 19, 2014 at 2:41 PM

.
Nailed it.

Kataklysmic on February 19, 2014 at 2:50 PM

.
Dittos … totally . . . . . nothing else really needs said, after that.

listens2glenn on February 19, 2014 at 9:33 PM

Am I right in assuming that serious gun aficionados hate this concept?

Allahpundit on February 19, 2014 at 2:41 PM

.
Hate is too mild a word.

rbj on February 19, 2014 at 3:01 PM

.
What rbj said.

listens2glenn on February 19, 2014 at 9:34 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3