Interesting "smart gun" article on the Register

[twidget1995]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/01/16/smart_guns_column/

Probably the biggest acknowledgement that so-called smart guns have a steep uphill battle here:

"Unfortunately, the main obstacle to smart guns is consumer willingness to adopt the technology ; without that, all the good intentions and product demonstrations in the world won't get it to take off. Governmental regulation is likely to be ignored and sidestepped, particularly in a country with millions and millions of non-smart guns already in circulation."

FWIW, if proponents of smart guns are so gung-ho on them, lets equip ALL LEOs with them first. We should also, probably, equip ALL National Guard units and the military, too. That would create a market for the technology.

Of course, getting LEOs and the military to buy into that paradigm faces an even steeper hill than firearms consumers. Actually more like Slim and None and Slim already walked off the brow.

[Unsilenced]

A lot of people say they'll adopt it when the police and military do, which seems fair enough.

I'll be a little more generous and agree to adopt it when pigs fly through the frozen bowels of h***.

[kmas]

Smart Operator is more Important

The person wielding the gun needs to be Smart.

Skilled Modest Accurate Restrained Tactical

[xSlapshotx]

LEOs probably have the most opportunity for their guns being taken away and used against them. Yet they say "NO EFFIN WAY!" And I don't blame them.

[mlevans66]

Not going to happen. Last thing we need is another reason for a gun to fail in the heat of battle. Noooooooooooooooooope train to F*ck thatville. Alllll aboard! Chugga Chugga Nope! Nooope!

[CouchOperator]

I'll pass