PDA

View Full Version : Make guns smarter!


Freq18Hz
01-09-2013, 9:33 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/09/opinion/shane-smarter-guns/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Summary:

"""The root of the problem is that guns are "dumb." Pull the trigger and they discharge bullets mindlessly, regardless of who is doing the aiming or where they are aimed. Guns should "know" not to fire in schools, churches, hospitals or malls. They should sense when they are being aimed at a child, or at a person when no other guns are nearby."""


Click the link for more choice nuggets. Software/hardware professionals will get a huge kick out of this one.



-Freq

Stewdabaker23
01-09-2013, 9:53 AM
They should make guns like in the movie " Judge Dredd" they only work for the owner and each bullet has a piece of their DNA attached to it.

Joewy
01-09-2013, 9:58 AM
Then what happens when you really need to use it and it just dosent work. Perhaps you have gloves on or something else is on your hand that interfers with the sensor. Or some guy tries to mug you and rape your wife. The guy gets the jump on you and knocks your gun out of your hand and starts pummeling you. Your wife pickes up the gun and "Click" wont work for her. You are both dead.

Stewdabaker23
01-09-2013, 10:02 AM
I don't know I wasn't being serious. Guns are fine the way they are.

robcoe
01-09-2013, 10:02 AM
Jeremy Shane, who served in the Justice Department during the George H.W. Bush administration, has led ventures in online media, energy and education.

In technology, those who can't do teach, those who can't teach become management, and if they can't even pull that off they lead ventures.

I design military equipment for a living, and the shock and vibration tests are some of the most brutal ones in terms of causing failures in designs(even in potted flight units using S level(mil spec for those not in engineering) components I have still seen basic chip resistors just open up under vibration or temperature cycling after just a few hours, and those are some of the simplest, most reliable components that there are), and none of the things I have designed come close to getting the kind of punishment that a gun takes every time it fires.

Yea, you might be able to make A gun that could do that, if you hand built it, extensively tested it and correctly potted all the components with no errors. However that gun would probably cost $50,000 and not be producible on a production scale, and would likely fail within 1000 rounds.

In short, this guy is a moron, and needs to talk to actual engineers before he opens his mouth again about a technical solution.

SilverTauron
01-09-2013, 10:17 AM
The "techno-gun" aspect is another way to disarm the law abiding.Make it law that all legal citizens have to carry a Windows Gun that has to be pre-loaded w/ a government ID before shooting, and you've disarmed everyone without firing a shot.

"911 what's your emergency"

"There's a burglar in my home!I need my gun unlocked NOW!"

"I'm sorry, according to Sacramento PC 1984 youre only allowed one self defense unlock per year. Officers will be on the way as soon as they're finished investigating the donut robbery."

voiceofreason
01-09-2013, 10:20 AM
Guns are not reliable enough as is.

Adding software will undoubtedly decrease reliability.

So to disable a "smart" gun, a strong electromagnet or EMP will render it useless?

fortdick
01-09-2013, 10:26 AM
Hillary's safer guns and safer bullets. Most are probably too young to remember that one.

Moonshine
01-09-2013, 10:35 AM
I remember seeing a prototype handgun from S&W on the news a few years back that would only fire in the owners hand. Why didn't this prototype work? Because when a bullet is actually fired it destroys the electronics and software in the process LOL!

Smart guns belong in a Buck Rogers or Flash Gordon comic, not political discourse!

Wherryj
01-09-2013, 10:44 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/09/opinion/shane-smarter-guns/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Summary:

"""The root of the problem is that guns are "dumb." Pull the trigger and they discharge bullets mindlessly, regardless of who is doing the aiming or where they are aimed. Guns should "know" not to fire in schools, churches, hospitals or malls. They should sense when they are being aimed at a child, or at a person when no other guns are nearby."""


Click the link for more choice nuggets. Software/hardware professionals will get a huge kick out of this one.



-Freq

...and cars should be autopiloting and capable of warp speed journeys while running on nothing but rainbows and unicorn tears. Unfortunately, reality often interfers in the best of plans.

robcoe
01-09-2013, 10:45 AM
I remember seeing a prototype handgun from S&W on the news a few years back that would only fire in the owners hand. Why didn't this prototype work? Because when a bullet is actually fired it destroys the electronics and software in the process LOL!

Smart guns belong in a Buck Rogers or Flash Gordon comic, not political discourse!

I remember that show, the other problem with it was that all the electronics and the power source to make it work had to be installed in the magazine, making it just an ugly single shot pistol.

RifleFan
01-09-2013, 10:59 AM
The sad thing is, is libs never see people as being accountable or responsible for their actions. You did not build that! It's a the systems fault! It's that scary looking guns fault!

In my opinion, this is the root of many issues we are facing.

Wherryj
01-09-2013, 11:15 AM
In technology, those who can't do teach, those who can't teach become management, and if they can't even pull that off they lead ventures.

I design military equipment for a living, and the shock and vibration tests are some of the most brutal ones in terms of causing failures in designs(even in potted flight units using S level(mil spec for those not in engineering) components I have still seen basic chip resistors just open up under vibration or temperature cycling after just a few hours, and those are some of the simplest, most reliable components that there are), and none of the things I have designed come close to getting the kind of punishment that a gun takes every time it fires.

Yea, you might be able to make A gun that could do that, if you hand built it, extensively tested it and correctly potted all the components with no errors. However that gun would probably cost $50,000 and not be producible on a production scale, and would likely fail within 1000 rounds.

In short, this guy is a moron, and needs to talk to actual engineers before he opens his mouth again about a technical solution.

Those who can do, do.
Those who can't do, teach.
Those who can't teach, write.
Those who can't write, govern.

Did I miss any?

Wherryj
01-09-2013, 11:19 AM
I remember that show, the other problem with it was that all the electronics and the power source to make it work had to be installed in the magazine, making it just an ugly single shot pistol.

You'd also soon discover what should have been obvious. Whenever you need it, the power source will have self-discharged rendering the tool that you needed worthless in an emergency.

How many times do you REALLY need a flashlight, only to find the batteries dead/leaking, etc.? Do you REALLY need to add this much more complication to a tool that is typically used in an emergency? I'd argue that this ONLY serves to make the tool more useable in a bad way. Only the "rogue shooter"/criminal is going to have the time to prepare and assure that HIS gun is working properly because only the person initiating the event will have the knowledge that it is about to occur.

nick
01-09-2013, 11:28 AM
More calls for a tech solution to a human problem. Some people would do anything, just so that they don't have to face the uncomfortable reality.

Joewy
01-09-2013, 11:37 AM
Around 1985 or so someone did come up with a decent self defence gun and tried to market it. I cant remember what it was called. But they were only leased, not bought. They used caseless ammo and after 18 months or so the ammo corroded the gun and it wouldnt work. The bullets were numbered to the gun and it could be tracked. You were suposed to turn it in every year and get a new one. The Idea had merit but didnt go anywhere. It was suposed to be a go around of the many silly reasons the antis came up with of why you couldnt carry a Concealed weapon.
There was no Magazine and besides the bolt and barrel the rest of the gun was Injection molded plastic formed around the internals. There was no way to take it apart. It was good for 10 shots and that was that.

robcoe
01-09-2013, 11:52 AM
Around 1985 or so someone did come up with a decent self defence gun and tried to market it. I cant remember what it was called. But they were only leased, not bought. They used caseless ammo and after 18 months or so the ammo corroded the gun and it wouldnt work. The bullets were numbered to the gun and it could be tracked. You were suposed to turn it in every year and get a new one. The Idea had merit but didnt go anywhere. It was suposed to be a go around of the many silly reasons the antis came up with of why you couldnt carry a Concealed weapon.
There was no Magazine and besides the bolt and barrel the rest of the gun was Injection molded plastic formed around the internals. There was no way to take it apart. It was good for 10 shots and that was that.

Can't recall the corrosion thing, and it had no bolt(was electronically fired) but other than that it sounds like you are describing the O"Dwyer VLE.

A gun that answers a question nobody ever asked, "hey, I would like a muli-shot gun that has no magazine, runs on batteries, and you have to replace the barrel after you shoot it, and if it has a malfunction it explodes, can someone make that?"

Joewy
01-09-2013, 11:59 AM
At that time the arguments were all about how the gangs were getting handguns that were either stolen or that people lost. The point was that this gun would have a shelf life and in so limit the amount of time that it was a danger if stolen. It was very difficult to do a straw buy too if the gun had to be turned in every year. If you fired one bullet it would start to corrode and become ineffective in a few days.
It wasent the gun you mentioned. I saw one and it did have a bolt and had a charging handle on the left side. It looked like one of those old 1911 looking BB gun pistols.

billofrights
01-09-2013, 12:06 PM
The nefarious part is the whole bit about guns not firing in schools or "safe" zones. Who determines that? What's to keep the gov't from declaring EVERYWHERE a "safe" zone and turning off all the guns but theirs? NOTHING. Stupid, stupid idea.

Fellblade
01-09-2013, 12:12 PM
Maybe they can make guns leave a fingerprint on their spent cartridges, a microstamp if you will. This way law enforcement will know exactly who pulled the trigger, since there is no way a person other than the lawful owner could have fired it or left brass at the scene.

NytWolf
01-09-2013, 12:22 PM
Those who can do, do.
Those who can't do, teach.
Those who can't teach, write.
Those who can't write, govern.

Did I miss any?

Those who can't govern, self-proclaim Messiah.

Wherryj
01-09-2013, 12:27 PM
They should make guns like in the movie " Judge Dredd" they only work for the owner and each bullet has a piece of their DNA attached to it.

Aside from the fact that the technology is absolute fantasy, BOTH versions of that movie stunk on ice. That alone should be enough to permanently veto this idea.

Wherryj
01-09-2013, 12:29 PM
Those who can't govern, self-proclaim Messiah.

Actually, I might argue that those types are actually in the "do" category. They are VERY adept at doing at least one thing-manipulating people. In that case they either sell the Sham Wow very successfully or they set up their own commune and milk the "followers" very well.

Wherryj
01-09-2013, 12:30 PM
Maybe they can make guns leave a fingerprint on their spent cartridges, a microstamp if you will. This way law enforcement will know exactly who pulled the trigger, since there is no way a person other than the lawful owner could have fired it or left brass at the scene.

What will they do about the brass fairy? Everytime I go to the range it appears that the brass fairy has made a recent visit. Lucky me!

Do they need to get the brass fairy to register all of the spent casings that s/he leaves to keep those from getting confused with casings used in a crime?

robcoe
01-09-2013, 12:58 PM
Maybe they can make guns leave a fingerprint on their spent cartridges, a microstamp if you will. This way law enforcement will know exactly who pulled the trigger, since there is no way a person other than the lawful owner could have fired it or left brass at the scene.

Bad idea, actually just makes it easier for a criminal to create reasonable doubt.

Example

Steal .38 revolver(38 special rounds being .357 inches in diameter)

Pick up some random 9mm brass(9mm rounds being .355 inches in diameter)

Kill someone with .38

after hitting something the bullets are most likely to mangled to be able to tell 2/1000's of an inch difference.

Leave a stamped 9mm casing

When arrested, say "it wasn't me, the casings say it was that guy"

And of course, all that assumes that files have also been successfully outlawed.

OlderThanDirt
01-09-2013, 1:02 PM
Guns are already smarter than politicians.

myk
01-09-2013, 1:08 PM
Someone's been watching Star Trek.

So I guess if a woman is assaulted in a school, hospital, church or mall then she or anyone else in that situation is SOL; looks like the guns aren't the only dummies...

tetris
01-09-2013, 2:16 PM
I remember seeing a prototype handgun from S&W on the news a few years back that would only fire in the owners hand. Why didn't this prototype work? Because when a bullet is actually fired it destroys the electronics and software in the process LOL!


You can make electronics that would be reliable in a gun, but it would cost a fortune and be bulky. They sell artillery rounds with self-guided GPS that take FAR more punishment than any gun.

Never discount what can be accomplished with enough money and time, with respect to engineering. On the other hand, that doesn't mean the product would be affordable or even particularly practical.

Wherryj
01-09-2013, 2:42 PM
Guns are already smarter than politicians.

Someone just had to restate the obvious.

steve91104
01-09-2013, 2:43 PM
IMO, complexity means more points of failure, which means more risk to me if I am depending on the gun to save my life. If simpler means less chance of failure, I pick simpler!

Merovign
01-09-2013, 2:52 PM
You can make electronics that would be reliable in a gun, but it would cost a fortune and be bulky. They sell artillery rounds with self-guided GPS that take FAR more punishment than any gun.


The Excalibur self-guided artillery round only ever has to work once - and their success rating is 92 percent. Nearly 1/10 fail.

I have a 109-year-old rifle that works fine.

So, once you create a *reusable* security device for guns that is a lot closer to 100% than that artillery, you only have to keep it running for 110 years to convince me.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

unusedusername
01-09-2013, 3:03 PM
Guns should also be designed to sense where they are being aimed. Artificial vision and optical sensing technology can be adapted from military and medical communities. Sensory data can be used by built-in software to disable firing if the gun is pointed at a child or someone holding a child.

Image recognition algorithms are no where near developed enough to be able to tell the difference between a child and an adult. Heck, they have trouble telling the difference between a child and a bowl of soup sometimes unless they have been specifically trained for that child and that bowl of soup.

If the child changes the way his/her hair is combed, then bingo, the child has turned into a bowl of soup.

Maybe in 30-50 years, until then this remains fantasy land.

OlderThanDirt
01-09-2013, 3:55 PM
Someone just had to restate the obvious.

Obvious to you and me, but someone had to do it for the poor politicians and their aids that lurk on this site.

NoJoke
01-09-2013, 3:56 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/09/opinion/shane-smarter-guns/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Summary:

Guns should "know" not to fire in schools, churches, hospitals or malls.

Will this be a windows based gun? How often does it need to be re-booted? What happens when the battery dies? Can bad guys carry around wireless signals to tell the good guy's guns they're a "school"? If/when teachers are given the opportunity to try to carry a tool to protect our kids - do they get a different signal w/in the school zone? Will pre-tech guns be retrofitted or swapped out for an identical tech gun? What if there's a power outage at the school? Will school generators interfere with the signal?

nicoroshi
01-09-2013, 4:10 PM
Smart guns?
What we really need are smart people to objectively look at the ENTIRE issue, and it's causes which we seem to be in very short supply of these days.
If we had that this 'discussion' that they want would be focusing on mental health, pharmaceutical companies, and gangs instead of inanimate objects.

http://firingsquad.us/wp-forum/gallery/4-090113180826.jpeg

LoneYote
01-09-2013, 5:24 PM
"Trigger control software could be relaxed when the gun is at home or in a car, while other safety features stay on to prevent accidental discharges. Guns used by the police would be exempt from such controls."

Why exactly? I mean if all guns have this magic tech that prevents them from working in a school, church, or whatever why would the police need guns?!?!

TimRB
01-09-2013, 7:40 PM
Those who can do, do.
Those who can't do, teach.
Those who can't teach, write.
Those who can't write, govern.

Did I miss any?

Those who can't govern, govern in California.

Tim

loose_electron
01-09-2013, 8:09 PM
all legal citizens have to carry a Windows Gun

A "Windows" gun?

LOL!

and you thought you had problems with FTF and jamming before!

Be sure to update your gun when it boots up!

I saw that article and immediately thought the writer knew nothing about technology and even less about guns...

LoneYote
01-09-2013, 8:13 PM
A "Windows" gun?

LOL!

and you thought you had problems with FTF and jamming before!

Be sure to update your gun when it boots up!

I saw that article and immediately thought knew the writer knew nothing about technology and even less about guns...

Fixed it for ya....

Capt.Dunsel
01-09-2013, 8:28 PM
If my memory serves my correctly they already tried " Smart Guns", you had to wear this ring that let you fire the weapon, if someone without the ring tried to fire the weapon it wouldn't. Was designed for LEOs in case their weapon was taken during a fight.

My memory ain't what is was when I was young.:oji:

They also tried to get your firearm to imprint a serial number on the casing( micro ingraving) to track it back in case it was used during a crime , wasn't as easy as they thought and not cost effective. Someone could scrounge your brass drop it at a crime sceen and tag your it.

Funbaby
01-09-2013, 8:34 PM
My new pistol has an internal lockout mechanism and has the potential to carry a RFID. The future is nearly here.

phrogg111
01-09-2013, 9:01 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/09/opinion/shane-smarter-guns/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Summary:

"""The root of the problem is that guns are "dumb." Pull the trigger and they discharge bullets mindlessly, regardless of who is doing the aiming or where they are aimed. Guns should "know" not to fire in schools, churches, hospitals or malls. They should sense when they are being aimed at a child, or at a person when no other guns are nearby."""


Click the link for more choice nuggets. Software/hardware professionals will get a huge kick out of this one.



-Freq


Wow, this guy is right! If guns could know where they were at, and not fire, then we wouldn't have the problem of gun violence!

It's a good thing there aren't hundreds of millions of unregistered "dumb" guns out there, and it's a good thing I can't build a shotgun out of pipe in my garage for under $50.

Oh, wait...

CBruce
01-09-2013, 10:12 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/09/opinion/shane-smarter-guns/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Summary:

"""The root of the problem is that guns are "dumb." Pull the trigger and they discharge bullets mindlessly, regardless of who is doing the aiming or where they are aimed. Guns should "know" not to fire in schools, churches, hospitals or malls. They should sense when they are being aimed at a child, or at a person when no other guns are nearby."""


Click the link for more choice nuggets. Software/hardware professionals will get a huge kick out of this one.



-Freq

Had a friend on Facebook that suggested we should put microchips in guns that prevented them from being fired if pointed at a person.

You can't really respond to something like that.

SilverTauron
01-09-2013, 11:49 PM
A "Windows" gun?

LOL!

and you thought you had problems with FTF and jamming before!

Be sure to update your gun when it boots up!

I saw that article and immediately thought the writer knew nothing about technology and even less about guns...

BOOM!

*front door gets kicked in...*

sh-t, gotta get my .45 out of the safe while I dial 911.

click-clack

"Thanks for using Windows Ballistic Version 3.1.2. Please wait while your .45 Caliber weapon installs mandatory updates. Do not remove the magazine or actuate the trigger during this update process. Your sidearm will be inactive for 20 minutes while the update is installing."

tommyid1
01-10-2013, 12:03 AM
hahaha problem is not that guns are dumb its that people are dumb

DCVR
01-10-2013, 2:20 AM
"""The root of the problem is that guns are "dumb." Pull the trigger and they discharge bullets mindlessly, regardless of who is doing the aiming or where they are aimed. Guns should "know" not to fire in schools, churches, hospitals or malls. They should sense when they are being aimed at a child, or at a person when no other guns are nearby."""

this is such incredibly stupid mentality. just another typical deflection of responsibility, wanting less accountability and having others 'think' for you.

it's like as if those kids who were raised in perversely over-protected environments finally grew up and rather than come to terms with reality, they in turn are now trying to child-proof everything for everyone else.