Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-16-2019, 8:57 AM
Sentenza's Avatar
Sentenza Sentenza is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: San Diego
Posts: 564
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Default Bloomberg on Smartguns

Not a whole lot we don't already know.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-04-15/the-smart-gun-doesn-t-exist-because-of-new-jersey-and-the-nra?utm_source=pocket-newtab


Quote:
Prototypes generally feature biometrics or proximity-sensing radio-frequency identification (RFID) chips to authenticate users and unlock firearms. The trouble is that fingerprint readers struggle with sweat or dirt, and friends in law enforcement advised Stephens that cops often wear gloves. A sensor error in a self-defense situation could prove fatal.

Gunmakers have pointed to these same potholes. In a report filed with the SEC in February, Sturm Ruger described flailing RFID technology and ineffective biometric readers as “difficult design issues” that prevent the development of a smart gun. “Despite blanket assertions to the contrary,” the company wrote, “no proven user-authentication technology exists.”

Stephens agrees. “How many times have you tried to unlock your iPhone and it’s like [no]?” he says. “This is one of the rare situations in which false negatives are the difference between life and death.”

His research came up at a Founders Fund debrief with Thiel and the fund’s other partners. “I said, ‘Look, there’s zero chance that any of these companies will actually make money. Am I missing something?’ ” he said. “The answer was no. And that was it. End of conversation.”
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-16-2019, 9:01 AM
furyous68 furyous68 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Posts: 1,878
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Nice to see the truth coming out though. More articles like this need to come out. Fingerprint tech is a novelty at best for small electronics. RFID can be so easily tampered with it's laughable.
__________________
Quote:
95,000,000 people die each day in the U.S. from gun violence
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-16-2019, 9:09 AM
mit31 mit31 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 448
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Agreed, I read that article yesterday and based on the title expected the usual drivel. Surprised at the content. About the only thing in there that was crap was the "well meaning" tag for Weinberg and her smart gun law. Which we know is BS, and was 100% the first step to removing legacy guns from sale.

But on smart guns themselves, it is an article that I hope is widely read.

Quote:
Originally Posted by furyous68 View Post
Nice to see the truth coming out though. More articles like this need to come out. Fingerprint tech is a novelty at best for small electronics. RFID can be so easily tampered with it's laughable.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-16-2019, 10:22 AM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,847
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mit31 View Post
Agreed, I read that article yesterday and based on the title expected the usual drivel. Surprised at the content. About the only thing in there that was crap was the "well meaning" tag for Weinberg and her smart gun law. Which we know is BS, and was 100% the first step to removing legacy guns from sale.

But on smart guns themselves, it is an article that I hope is widely read.
Bloomberg the financial reporting news source does not kowtow to its owner's anti-gun animus.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-16-2019, 11:01 AM
Citizen One's Avatar
Citizen One Citizen One is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 167
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Everyone wants safer, better, more reliable firearms. Of that there is no doubt. Yes, it's bad and stifles innovation.

... but they are the ones that poisoned the well. They should not feign surprise at the results.

Quote:
He also believes that any Silicon Valley effort must aim to create a safer and better product than traditional firearms, rather than look at smart tech as a sideways approach to gun control.

Otherwise any gun startup would end up alienating the customers they need to win over.
Too little, too late. They've already shown their cards.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-01-2019, 12:56 PM
Murmur Murmur is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: SD North County
Posts: 659
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

The first step in safer and more reliable firearms is to get rid of the roster and let people buy current gen handguns.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-01-2019, 2:07 PM
dfletcher's Avatar
dfletcher dfletcher is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 14,603
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

I take a different approach on this.

Development of "smart guns" is linked to a prohibition on those that are not "smart gun compliant". That requirement was made by gun control proponents, who make the usual public safety assertions. They state they want to encourage development of "smart guns". I think they want to do the opposite.

Development of new technology has not been linked to a prohibition of the old in any field I can recall. We still ride in prop planes, we still use candles for light. Would TESLA exist if it meant the end of internal combustion engines? Of course not. New technology would have never been developed if it meant killing off a company's revenue stream of existing products.

New technology also expands markets.

There are plenty of people that don't particularly care for guns but would buy one if they could be assured a child or other unauthorized person couldn't use it, harmless if stolen. Single woman, older folks. Parents with kids. City folks in general. They might buy a smart gun. And maybe they'd become comfortable with guns and buy something else, like a plain old handgun or shotgun.

That's what the "smart gun law" is designed to prevent, is my POV. Link development to killing the "meat and potatoes" gun company product, thereby poisoning the field and preventing an expansion of the market.

We should think about that the next time someone accidentally hurts or kills themselves, or takes someone else's gun (Newtown for example) and uses it in a crime. Put the blood where it belongs.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-01-2019, 2:24 PM
GreggieBoy's Avatar
GreggieBoy GreggieBoy is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 903
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Yeah I don't think we need any more "safety" features. Way to easy for them to ban everything.
__________________
NRA Life Member
2nd Amendment Rights Supporter
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-01-2019, 3:48 PM
BryMan92 BryMan92 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 360
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

I don't even trust my iPhone to call 911.

Pure mechanical system reliability > Mechanical + electrical system reliability
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-01-2019, 4:11 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,847
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dfletcher View Post
Development of new technology has not been linked to a prohibition of the old in any field I can recall. We still ride in prop planes, we still use candles for light. Would TESLA exist if it meant the end of internal combustion engines? Of course not. New technology would have never been developed if it meant killing off a company's revenue stream of existing products.
The Green New Deal calls for the elimination of the internal combustion engine.(Planes too for that matter, but that will never happen.) Now I agree, it can never be completely eliminated--there are some places too remote to reach on batteries alone. But that does not mean they will not try. The idea is to supplant old tech with new tech. And, as ou recognize, that is the purpose of the smart gun laws, or specifically the one on the books in NJ that bans regular guns once there are smart gun replacements.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-01-2019, 4:52 PM
KHF1222 KHF1222 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Santa Clara County, CA
Posts: 216
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dfletcher View Post
I take a different approach on this.

Development of "smart guns" is linked to a prohibition on those that are not "smart gun compliant". That requirement was made by gun control proponents, who make the usual public safety assertions. They state they want to encourage development of "smart guns". I think they want to do the opposite.

Development of new technology has not been linked to a prohibition of the old in any field I can recall. We still ride in prop planes, we still use candles for light. Would TESLA exist if it meant the end of internal combustion engines? Of course not. New technology would have never been developed if it meant killing off a company's revenue stream of existing products.

New technology also expands markets.

There are plenty of people that don't particularly care for guns but would buy one if they could be assured a child or other unauthorized person couldn't use it, harmless if stolen. Single woman, older folks. Parents with kids. City folks in general. They might buy a smart gun. And maybe they'd become comfortable with guns and buy something else, like a plain old handgun or shotgun.

That's what the "smart gun law" is designed to prevent, is my POV. Link development to killing the "meat and potatoes" gun company product, thereby poisoning the field and preventing an expansion of the market.

We should think about that the next time someone accidentally hurts or kills themselves, or takes someone else's gun (Newtown for example) and uses it in a crime. Put the blood where it belongs.

I believe forum member 'dfletcher' is spot on when he stated that the development of smart guns will be linked to a
complete prohibition on those that are not smart gun compliant.

You don't think so, then how about this.

On October 24, 2013 the Armatix iP1 was placed on the roster as the iP1 was originally submitted before the
microstamping requirement.

On June 13, 2014 the Armatix iP1 Limited Edition was placed on the roster making it a second owner-id handgun to be
placed on the roster. The iP1 Limited Edition gets added to the roster since the changes simply added components
separate from the iP1 handgun, and was basically marketed by Armatix in the form of a newly-named package. The operating
distance enhancement did not change the metallurgy, dimensions, design, or the wiring, gates, and switches on the
electronic circuit board, or any of the physical hardware components of the iP1 Limited Edition handgun as compared to
the originally introduced iP1. So the iP1 Limited Edition qualified under the same requirements which were in effect when
the iP1 was originally certified on January 24, 2013 by the United States Test Laboratory in Wichita, Kansas.

At that time California in 2014, you had in the hopper "SB-293 Firearms: owner-authorized handguns". Its basic premise was
if two owner-authorized handguns have been placed on the roster, the bill would, commencing two years from the date
that the second handgun was placed on the roster, prohibit the Department of Justice from placing a handgun on the
roster that is not an owner-authorized handgun.

Last edited by KHF1222; 05-02-2019 at 5:27 AM.. Reason: Add a missing preposition.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-01-2019, 5:40 PM
scotchy scotchy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 22
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

If a state wants to support ID-locked firearms ("smart" is a pretty steep misnomer here) development, then have the state offer a rebate for adopting the technology, ala solar panels and electric cars.
This, obviously, would be political suicide.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-01-2019, 5:58 PM
FullMetalJacket FullMetalJacket is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 536
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

If smart guns are so desirable, let the state lead the way by mandating them for its law enforcement personnel.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-03-2019, 4:06 PM
KHF1222 KHF1222 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Santa Clara County, CA
Posts: 216
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BryMan92 View Post
I don't even trust my iPhone to call 911.

Pure mechanical system reliability > Mechanical + electrical system reliability
The requirement that a home self-defense weapon needs firmware/software to operate, and then the necessity of periodic
maintenance updates to fix bugs does not instill confidence in firearm reliability.

The present technology is too immature, subject to high severity errors leading to failures, and subject to signaling false positives.

Sound of phone ringing............

Technical Support #1:

Thank you for calling Wishy Washy Wonder Weapons of Walla Walla, Washington. My name is Bob. How can I be of
service to you today?

Customer:

Um, I'm Josephine and there's a burglar attacking me because the green LED indicator light won't go on no matter how
many times I press my fingerprint on the biometric sensor, and the backup facial recognition option fails with a 0F4
in that really tiny display window on the handgun.

Technical Support #1:

Oh, a hex code 'zero fox four' is a memory exception due to a storage overlay. Did you try performing a power-on reset
to reactivate the software on the handgun?

Customer:

Yes, I reset twice and on the third try I had to stop because I was getting violently assaulted.

Technical Support #1:

Ok, do you know the model number of the handgun, and the firmware version, release, and modification level you have?

Customer:

Geez, I really don't know. It would be whatever the gun came with when I bought it!

Technical Support #1:

Oh I see. Ok, there is a new firmware update that may fix that issue. I will open a problem ticket and create an
incident number for you. Are you ready to copy?

Customer: I'm a little busy right now fighting off my attacker!

Technical Support #1:

Ok, sorry you are experiencing some technical difficulties, but we may have a solution for you! You can grab a USB 2.0
cable, plug the cable into the handgun, then plug the other end into a USB port on your laptop, sign up for a free
Wonder Weapons account, download the latest firmware, upload to your handgun, and then do a reboot with a power-on reset
to reactivate the software and you will be ready to go! Do you have a couple of minutes while I have you on the line?

Customer:

hissing sound of static...no response

Technical Support #1:

Josephine, are you there?

Technical Support #1:

Hey Richard, the stupid customer abandoned the call.

Technical Support #2: (Richard)

The nerve of some customers. Close the problem ticket number with solution 'Customer no longer pursuing' to keep our
problem count low.

Technical Support #1:

Ok, I closed it. Next customer.

Last edited by KHF1222; 05-03-2019 at 11:05 PM.. Reason: Grammer correction
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-04-2019, 4:05 AM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 6,441
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I'd really like to have a "smart gun". Make it reliable and you'll have millions of firearms owners (or wannabe owners) willing to pay at least some premium to get one.

But the thing can't run on batteries. Not really an option if you are going to be moving through backcountry and will be traveling light. Also, not good in a SHTF situation where batteries may not be available.

Can't be subject to EMP. Too many developing scenarios where this could happen. And people tend to ignore this, but we will eventually be hit with a CME which will do much the same thing. We really should be preparing for the big CME because the statistics are a slam-dunk that it happens, but three days from now or three decades from now is what we don't know.

Can't be adversely affected by cold, heat, wet, or grime. Again, this kind of goes back to the battery when it comes to the cold - most batteries don't do as well in the cold.

Can't be more bulky or prone to mechanical/electronic failure than is a non-smart firearm. This may be technically possible but appears pretty unlikely in the near future.

Have to be able to use with gloves, cold-weather masks, etc.

My wife and a few others would have to be able to use it. But it has to be un-hackable. Good luck, I doubt this one will ever be achieved.

It can't link to the Internet or anything else I don't find to be necessary. This would be a security hazard.

Any delay in function due to electronics or anything else must be measured in just a few milliseconds (something like 3 ms). IOW, the delay must be negligible.

The market for a good smart firearm I think would be huge. If they ever come up with the tech to make one they'll sell like crazy. The problem is that I don't see the tech for it within my lifetime or that of my children or grandchildren.

The point is that the free market will create the smart firearm when the tech is available. Laws won't speed the development more than will the market so the laws are, at the very best one can imagine, useless.
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Don't consider anything I post as advice or as anything more than opinion (if even that).
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-04-2019, 7:01 AM
ronlglock's Avatar
ronlglock ronlglock is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,602
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

I don’t have readable fingerprints — and in fact they are different every month.

I am so glad that Apple introduced Face ID, because touch ID was a no go for me. I don’t play well with anything that uses fingerprints.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________


NRA/USCCA/DOJ instructor, NRA CRSO, Journalist
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-04-2019, 7:41 AM
FAS1's Avatar
FAS1 FAS1 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 386
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

If your iPhone fails to open with your print, you might be inconvenience slightly by missing your wife's call.

If your smart gun fails to recognize your print.....well you get the idea.

The one thing that I will say that people are currently doing that at some point the pro smart gun crowd will grasp a hold of and use against us is:

Quote:
Don't you already trust biometrics to store your home defense gun?
I can hear it already.
__________________
Glenn

FAS1 SAFE
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-04-2019, 8:31 AM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,150
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Anyone who has ever owned a smartphone with a fingerprint reader can see that this technology is nowhere near ready for gun use, and may never be ready. It takes several tries quite often. It takes at least a second. The more in a hurry and distracted I am, the more likely it is to not work. If I've just washed my hands it often doesn't work. And don't forget to keep the battery charged. The RFID stuff might be more reliable but it has its own other problems. It means having to wear something all the time, which might also fail.

For home storage, biometric safes seem like a reasonable idea. I haven't tried it but I like the idea of the one that's based on hand size / finger length. It's not high security but it should be quick and independent of sweating or dirt. But I don't see any way that could be incorporated into a gun.
__________________
"Weakness is provocative."
Senator Tom Cotton, president in 2024

Victoria "Tori" Rose Smith's life mattered.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-04-2019, 9:05 AM
FAS1's Avatar
FAS1 FAS1 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 386
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWFacts View Post
Anyone who has ever owned a smartphone with a fingerprint reader can see that this technology is nowhere near ready for gun use, and may never be ready. It takes several tries quite often. It takes at least a second. The more in a hurry and distracted I am, the more likely it is to not work. If I've just washed my hands it often doesn't work. And don't forget to keep the battery charged. The RFID stuff might be more reliable but it has its own other problems. It means having to wear something all the time, which might also fail.

For home storage, biometric safes seem like a reasonable idea. It's not high security but it should be quick and independent of sweating or dirt. But I don't see any way that could be incorporated into a gun.
Man, that was a James Comey statement about Hilary right there!
You named several reasons that you could get killed trying to get your gun, then say it seems like it's reasonable? Personally, I don't like those odds.



Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWFacts View Post
I haven't tried it but I like the idea of the one that's based on hand size / finger length.
I'm not familiar with any of those handgun safes. Can you give an example of one? Is that a new biometric technology?
__________________
Glenn

FAS1 SAFE
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-04-2019, 9:37 AM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,150
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FAS1 View Post
Man, that was a James Comey statement about Hilary right there!
No it isn't. Fingerprint readers don't work for anything that needs to be fast and reliable. I said that clearly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FAS1 View Post
You named several reasons that you could get killed trying to get your gun, then say it seems like it's reasonable? Personally, I don't like those odds.
No, the home biometric safes that use finger length seems like a smart design. Fingerprint readers are not a smart design. I wouldn't want a fingerprint reader on ANYTHING that I need to access quickly. You notice that cars don't use fingerprint readers? RFID works for cars, yes, but not fingerprint readers.

Fingerprint readers could be made physically small enough to go on a gun but they are not viable.

Finger length readers do seem like they would be fast and reliable, but there's no way to put them on a gun. I don't have children at home but if I did, I would definitely not leave a gun unlocked anywhere, and I would want a hand scanner safe if they would make one. As it is, I do have a regular combination safe, which there's no way I could access under stress and in the dark.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FAS1 View Post
I'm not familiar with any of those handgun safes.
I actually can't find one built into a safe. It would be cool to have one...

Quote:
Originally Posted by FAS1 View Post
Can you give an example of one? Is that a new biometric technology?
Yes. I couldn't quickly find a safe with that technology built in, but that type of scanner is a thing, and it works for situations where it needs to be fast and resistant to dirt / water. Would be cool to have that on a home gun safe. Would not be possible to have that on a gun.

Look, anyone who has guns at home should have a safe storage option, and if that safe storage option uses something like a hand scanner for fast access, cool. How is it bad to say, "this quick-access biometric technology is great for home storage"? That's all I'm saying. I said very clearly there's no fingerprint reader that's viable for use on a gun. A gun and a safe are two different things with different constraints and possibilities.

I did see there are a lot of fingerprint home gun safes and they all have combination access as a backup. I'm pretty sure these are low security fingerprint readers but would keep children out, which is what they are really for. They couldn't possibly be effectively built into a gun.

Also there's a big difference between access times needed on a carry gun vs. on a home gun. Usually in an attack in a home, there's some early warning, such as a sound of breaking a door, giving the user a few seconds or more to access it. For a CCW type situation, time is much less than that. Someone attacking with a knife, for example, gives no warning and fractions of a second count. A slow access method that might be suitable for home use wouldn't be suitable for a carry gun.
__________________
"Weakness is provocative."
Senator Tom Cotton, president in 2024

Victoria "Tori" Rose Smith's life mattered.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 05-05-2019, 8:00 AM
baekacaek's Avatar
baekacaek baekacaek is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 621
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

A bloomberg article criticizing smart guns? Someones getting fired
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-05-2019, 8:03 AM
Mayor McRifle's Avatar
Mayor McRifle Mayor McRifle is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 7,647
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
A sensor error in a self-defense situation could prove fatal.
Amen.
__________________
Anchors Aweigh

Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-05-2019, 8:06 AM
Mayor McRifle's Avatar
Mayor McRifle Mayor McRifle is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 7,647
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Citizen One View Post
Everyone wants safer, better, more reliable firearms. Of that there is no doubt.
Then why does the California Roster still exist? All it does is prevent us from buying safer, better, more reliable firearms.
__________________
Anchors Aweigh

Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-05-2019, 3:35 PM
FAS1's Avatar
FAS1 FAS1 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 386
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWFacts View Post
No it isn't. Fingerprint readers don't work for anything that needs to be fast and reliable. I said that clearly.



No, the home biometric safes that use finger length seems like a smart design. Fingerprint readers are not a smart design. I wouldn't want a fingerprint reader on ANYTHING that I need to access quickly. You notice that cars don't use fingerprint readers? RFID works for cars, yes, but not fingerprint readers.

Fingerprint readers could be made physically small enough to go on a gun but they are not viable.

Finger length readers do seem like they would be fast and reliable, but there's no way to put them on a gun. I don't have children at home but if I did, I would definitely not leave a gun unlocked anywhere, and I would want a hand scanner safe if they would make one. As it is, I do have a regular combination safe, which there's no way I could access under stress and in the dark.



I actually can't find one built into a safe. It would be cool to have one...



Yes. I couldn't quickly find a safe with that technology built in, but that type of scanner is a thing, and it works for situations where it needs to be fast and resistant to dirt / water. Would be cool to have that on a home gun safe. Would not be possible to have that on a gun.

Look, anyone who has guns at home should have a safe storage option, and if that safe storage option uses something like a hand scanner for fast access, cool. How is it bad to say, "this quick-access biometric technology is great for home storage"? That's all I'm saying. I said very clearly there's no fingerprint reader that's viable for use on a gun. A gun and a safe are two different things with different constraints and possibilities.

I did see there are a lot of fingerprint home gun safes and they all have combination access as a backup. I'm pretty sure these are low security fingerprint readers but would keep children out, which is what they are really for. They couldn't possibly be effectively built into a gun.

Also there's a big difference between access times needed on a carry gun vs. on a home gun. Usually in an attack in a home, there's some early warning, such as a sound of breaking a door, giving the user a few seconds or more to access it. For a CCW type situation, time is much less than that. Someone attacking with a knife, for example, gives no warning and fractions of a second count. A slow access method that might be suitable for home use wouldn't be suitable for a carry gun.
My apologies, I misunderstood you. When you said "For home storage, biometric safes seem like a reasonable idea", I didn't realize you were talking about a non-existent product.

As you point out, there apparently is one manufacturer of a hand scanner and with a price of $1500 you won't see it on a quick access handgun safe any time soon. Hell, people complain about spending $300 on one.
__________________
Glenn

FAS1 SAFE

Last edited by FAS1; 05-06-2019 at 6:59 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-05-2019, 5:37 PM
dfletcher's Avatar
dfletcher dfletcher is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 14,603
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OleCuss View Post
I'd really like to have a "smart gun". Make it reliable and you'll have millions of firearms owners (or wannabe owners) willing to pay at least some premium to get one.



The market for a good smart firearm I think would be huge. If they ever come up with the tech to make one they'll sell like crazy. The problem is that I don't see the tech for it within my lifetime or that of my children or grandchildren.

The point is that the free market will create the smart firearm when the tech is available. Laws won't speed the development more than will the market so the laws are, at the very best one can imagine, useless.
These comments highlight why anti-gun legislators linked development to a ban on currently manufactured "non-smart guns". The LE market, folks who would treat guns like an appliance - lots of demand to fill. But that means a) more gun owners and b) eventually more "regular gun owners" and they don't want that. "Smart guns" will go nowhere until the link between development and killing current inventory is eliminated. Anti-gun legislators have the ability to do so, but they never will.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-06-2019, 6:56 AM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,150
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FAS1 View Post
My apologies, I miss understood you. When you said "For home storage, biometric safes seem like a reasonable idea", I didn't realize you were talking about a non-existent product.
I seem to remember seeing some kind of finger length based quick-access safe on the market at one point but I can't find it now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FAS1 View Post
As you point out, there apparently is one manufacturer of a hand scanner and with a price of $1500 you won't see it on a quick access handgun safe any time soon. Hell, people complain about spending $300 on one.
Yeah, but that hand scanner could be manufactured at a lower price. I think it would be cool and I would definitely buy one for home use so I could have quick access to a home defense gun but I would be sure that it's not accessible to anyone else. That would be great.

But just looking at these things, it doesn't physically fit on a gun. I work in technology and my analysis is that a smart gun would need the following:
  • Instantly available to the owner
  • Denied access to everyone else
  • Activation is as fast, or nearly as fast, as a regular gun
  • Activation is so reliable that it's as reliable as a regular gun

I don't see any way to do this. The only access methods that are even being considered are fingerprint and RFID and they don't meet the criteria. I didn't even list "affordable" as a criterion, because I don't think you can achieve the four points above at any price, because of the fundamental facts of fingerprints.

I could summarize it another way:
  • Acessible to the owner only
  • No "worse" than a Level 2 holster

A level 2 holster does introduce probably 100ms to 200ms delay, so that's what I would pick as an accepptable access delay. Fingerprint readers can't do that; they seem to take about 1 second. Maybe with some big technology advanced that could come down. A level 2 holster is not affected by liquids, dirt, or gloves, and that seems to be a fundamental issue that no fingerprint reader technology could address. And a level 2 holster doesn't require fine motor movements, which again seems to be a fundamental issue that no fingerprint reader technology could address.

A fingerprint sensor is not fast and not reliable, and RFID is fast but not perfectly reliable and basically just moves the security problem from one physical object to another.

I did see this design for a smart holster:



which is also just a 3d rendering, not an actual thing, and doesn't solve any fundamental problems with fingerprint readers or RFID.

There's no technology that can make this viable on a gun.

But I hope someone would incorporate that hand scanner idea into a quick-access home storage device!
__________________
"Weakness is provocative."
Senator Tom Cotton, president in 2024

Victoria "Tori" Rose Smith's life mattered.

Last edited by CCWFacts; 05-06-2019 at 7:53 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-06-2019, 8:34 AM
KHF1222 KHF1222 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Santa Clara County, CA
Posts: 216
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I embrace new technology in smart gun design. However, when the owner-id technology advances to the point that if our
fictional character 'Josephine' had both an old fashioned S&W .38 snubby and a Wishy Washy Wonder Weapons device, she
could grab either one with equal confidence they would work with total reliability.

Gets surprised in the shower when completely wet, or with soapy hands when washing dishes in the kitchen, or wearing
latex gloves cleaning the counter top, comes into the house with grime on her hands from gardening, or any one of normal
household activities that could impact a smart gun sensor. You know that .38 snubby is going to work.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 5:09 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy