A thought about "smart guns" and product liability.

[idntwn2]

Was chatting with a friend about the subject when the topic of product liability came into the conversation.

What if such a gun, when needed for a legitimate purpose, (bona fide self defense) was called upon and the electronics crapped out with "cannot connect to key" or similar error like we often see with bluetooth or wifi connections.

The would be robber, invader or rapist, grabs the gun, tosses it aside and completes the dastardly deed, causing great bodily harm or worse to the victim.
I would be a little bit aggressive in my actions against the manufacturer of said gun I think. Can you imagine the disclaimers that would have to be made? I can imagine the warning labels - "Do not rely solely on the "Einstein 9" as your sole means of self defense, it may become unreliable if subjected to heat, moisture, vibration, shock or EMF....... Or something like that.

Or the opposite, and the e-trigger is easily hacked, or maybe not so easily, but hacked none-the-less, defeating the intent of the device.

I would think the maker could be in for a bit of a problem when actual damages ensue, and I am pretty sure they would at some point.

I mean how many times have you guys had a piece of electronics really ever work first time everytime for always, even when in storage or not in use for months or years at a time? My trusty HP-12 comes to mind, but even it needs a battery once in a while, and I don't holster the thing. I cannot imagine that it would be as reliable if it were to be subjected to 2000 rounds strapped to the handle of a handgun. I can't tell you how many times my PC, tablet, smart phone, smart TV, DVR has just crapped, for no apparent reason. I am sure you all can relate.

Thoughts about product liability matters on these things?

[baekacaek]

As a software engineer I wholeheartedly oppose to the smart gun technology. You already mentioned some good points, but to sum it all up, my reasons would come down to reliability and abuse-ability.
We all know software bugs out here and there, more often than mechanical components. Adding software to the gun would just add another point of failure, like batteries dying, circuitry not working, or the software bugging out, etc. Who would want that extra unreliability?
Second concern is that the government can easily place some chip that when triggered via radio/remote signal, could disable the gun. Now you don't even need confiscation to take away guns from civilians.

[huntercf]

I would like to see legislation regarding smart guns that pertain to your question:

1. All smart gun manufacturers (SGMs) will guarantee that their devices will work 100% of the time under any circumstances.

2. All SGMs will be liable for any failure that results in any damage/loss/injury/death to a SG owner. This includes criminal liability. E.G. If a woman is raped because her SG failed during an attack then the SGM will be guilty of rape and conspiracy to commit rape. If a SG owner is murdered and their SG failed during the homicide (and the owner could have had a chance at protecting themselves) the SGM is guilty of murder and conspiracy to commit murder.

After that, if someone wants to build these stupid things then go for it.

[Catch]

Cases would be few and far between. They'd just be paid out, and we'd never hear about them.
Like car companies do.
It would take a high profile victim, higher than Paul Walker (who had hundreds of millions in potential earning power). Hopefully I'm wrong, and they never get that big.

[CALI-gula]

This is the same thing going on with self-driving cars right now. If an accident occurs while the car is on auto-pilot is the manufacturer at fault?

This is something the auto-pilot car manufacturers will have to hold in product liability insurance if they go down this route. The black-box these kinds of cars have will reveal the software/mechanics failed where liability will be on the manufacturer.

i can see the same thing being applied to auto-pilot guns.

In the early days of the automobile, Henry Ford wanted to include auto insurance in the perks just as you might get optional warranties or financing. But as the number of cars on the road grew it was seen as a bad idea and not cost feasible. But now, manufacturers might be forced to provide some kind of coverage.

.

[tbc]

A thought about "smart guns" and product liability.

The only way to evaluate the reliability of "smart guns" is to see them in actions in which there are none out there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[atxgun]

Was chatting with a friend about the subject when the topic of product liability came into the conversation.

What if such a gun, when needed for a legitimate purpose, (bona fide self defense) was called upon and the electronics crapped out with "cannot connect to key" or similar error like we often see with bluetooth or wifi connections.

The would be robber, invader or rapist, grabs the gun, tosses it aside and completes the dastardly deed, causing great bodily harm or worse to the victim.
I would be a little bit aggressive in my actions against the manufacturer of said gun I think. Can you imagine the disclaimers that would have to be made? I can imagine the warning labels - "Do not rely solely on the "Einstein 9" as your sole means of self defense, it may become unreliable if subjected to heat, moisture, vibration, shock or EMF....... Or something like that.

Or the opposite, and the e-trigger is easily hacked, or maybe not so easily, but hacked none-the-less, defeating the intent of the device.

I would think the maker could be in for a bit of a problem when actual damages ensue, and I am pretty sure they would at some point.

I mean how many times have you guys had a piece of electronics really ever work first time everytime for always, even when in storage or not in use for months or years at a time? My trusty HP-12 comes to mind, but even it needs a battery once in a while, and I don't holster the thing. I cannot imagine that it would be as reliable if it were to be subjected to 2000 rounds strapped to the handle of a handgun. I can't tell you how many times my PC, tablet, smart phone, smart TV, DVR has just crapped, for no apparent reason. I am sure you all can relate.

Thoughts about product liability matters on these things?

That's because those devices aren't designed with robustness. They are designed for maximum features. When you look at pacemakers or other medical devices they are extremely good.

Electronics are readily made more reliable than mechanical devices

Even cars have a very low computer failure rate for the key systems

Cars are now having keyless entry. How often does that fail? How often do mechanical key systems fail?

There are two areas where electronic triggers Will shine.



1) precision shooting
2) radically different ergonomics like bull pups or very light guns where the trigger is far from the receiver/chamber

[heidad01]

What the heck is a Smart Gun??
Electronics have no business in a gun unless if you are going to create a Mini Gun competitor. Software, even less unless if you are making one of them motion activated super sniper CIA type assassination weapons shown in movies.
Everybody is going to sue everybody if such a contraption was marketed. What good is a Smart Gun if you are wearing the wrist band/chip/what ever and your wife needs a gun when someone breaks in the front door.
Micro chips, Micro stamping, electronics, and software is best used in Clock Radios and have no use in guns but to cause disasters. Much like our gun laws.

[atxgun]

I wouldn't let all my guns have electronic safeties, but my nightstand gun would.

[sonofeugene]

Robust or not, they can always be defeated in some way. That's why you will never see "smart" guns. Law enforcement will never use them. Can you imagine a law enforcement agency switching to smart guns and then the bad guys coming up with a way to jam them? And don't forget the HUGE liability risk to the manufacturers if the system fails.

For similar reasons that's why we will never see online voting via computer or phone. Technology can't assure annonimity and at the same time confirm who you are so you can't vote twice, etc.

[heidad01]

I wouldn't let all my guns have electronic safeties, but my nightstand gun would.

Oh well. Good for you. Let us know when it malfunctions or runs out of battery or yo spill a cup of water over it trying to grab the gun while Bubba is standing there holding a gun to your wife's head.

If a Smart Gun had any practical use or advantage other than "Gun Control" it would have already been built by the zillions and used by the armed forces and LE.

[djflash]

That's because those devices aren't designed with robustness. They are designed for maximum features. When you look at pacemakers or other medical devices they are extremely good.

Electronics are readily made more reliable than mechanical devices

Even cars have a very low computer failure rate for the key systems

Cars are now having keyless entry. How often does that fail? How often do mechanical key systems fail?

There are two areas where electronic triggers Will shine.



1) precision shooting
2) radically different ergonomics like bull pups or very light guns where the trigger is far from the receiver/chamber

Lol...you're kidding right? Ever seen a sign for people with pacemakers to stay away from certain areas/electronic devices? A pacemaker is in a very specific controlled environment a "Smart Gun" will be bumped, have massive forces imposed on it during firings, contaminates, corrosive chemicals and don't forget about those almost guaranteed pesky software updates. You or average Joe citizen will be depending on none of those things interfering with its function in that split second when it needs to operate perfectly. Not to mention you'll probably be at worst stressed, sweating, tunnel vision etc etc.

NASA never has electronic failures or have redundancies?

[Frotz]

When I first read the term "smart gun", it was from a paper and pencil role-playing game sourcebook. It described a "smart gun" as one that has electronics that interface an aiming device with the user's nervous system to project an aiming reticle in the wielder's field of vision

[idntwn2]

That's because those devices aren't designed with robustness. They are designed for maximum features. When you look at pacemakers or other medical devices they are extremely good.

Electronics are readily made more reliable than mechanical devices

Even cars have a very low computer failure rate for the key systems

Cars are now having keyless entry. How often does that fail? How often do mechanical key systems fail?

There are two areas where electronic triggers Will shine.



1) precision shooting
2) radically different ergonomics like bull pups or very light guns where the trigger is far from the receiver/chamber

Having a pacemaker and comparing it to a smart gun in terms or reliability is completely a straw man.

Yes, MILSPEC and medical grade quality standards are established at very large confidence intervals because their failure causes death. Because of this, the reliability of them is very high. They are designed this way. They cost a fortune.

While it is only a SWAG on my part, my guess is that such "robustness" would cost in excess of 10 grand per gun to achieve the same level of reliability.

And, the gubment could just shut em off. They can do it today with any car with factory installed telematics, whether active or not.

It is not and has not ever been about safety. It is about control.

Your safety is between your ears. Not in an IC.

[Noble Cause]

Lets take a look at the Armatix iP1 Smart Gun:

It was tested by NRA in conjunction with people trained by Armatix:
Here is a summation:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armatix_iP1

Here is the actual NRA review:

http://www.americas1stfreedom.org/articles/2015/11/12/exclusive-we-test-the-armatix-ip1-the-not-so-smart-gun/

So lets summarize.

Pay 5 times the cost of a reliable handgun, with almost certain assurance
it will malfunction when you need it the most.

BTW, I'm not against the technology, per se, BUT I am vehemently opposed
to it being MANDATED by the government.

Very telling that not a single Law Enforcement Agency (that I know of)
showed any interest so far in adopting Smart Guns.


Noble