"Smart" Firearm Draws Wrath of the Gun Lobby

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by 108, Apr 28, 2014.

  1. 108
    Offline

    108 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    17,560
    Likes Received:
    273
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings Received:
    +1,028
    Interesting article from the NYT on how the gun lobby is trying to squash "smart" guns from being sold here in the US.

    Seems like this type of weaponry could serve a really useful purpose in preventing gun deaths

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/28/u...draws-wrath-of-the-gun-lobby.html?hpw&rref=us
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2014
  2. Tasselhoff
    Offline

    Tasselhoff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2,193
    Likes Received:
    52
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +154
    I think they overplayed their hand. The simple fact is that the smart gun, as it is described in the article, is not something most gun enthusiast would want. It is too cumbersome to use on a regular basis, is no good for self defense, and would be a pita to use at the range.

    I can kind of see the fear of that the anti-gun crowd would try to make it mandatory for all guns to be smart guns though. Many already think that all guns should be banned, this would just get them one step closer. Still overkillon the pushback.

    Of course, if it is such a great product, maybe it could be marketed to police forces. I bet the watch could be fit with a gps and an email alert to the station everytime an officer draws his or her gun.
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  3. 108
    Offline

    108 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    17,560
    Likes Received:
    273
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings Received:
    +1,028
    yes, this particular one looks cumbersome, but I imagine technology will progress, and having a gun, only being able to be used by particular individuals in a household, could be quite useful, and I imagine there would be plenty who would be interested in this type of techonology.....if at the least, to prevent accidental shootings
  4. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,513
    Likes Received:
    402
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,666
    The air quotes around "smart" are unintionally honest. It is a triumph of technology over practicality and common sense.
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. 108
    Offline

    108 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    17,560
    Likes Received:
    273
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings Received:
    +1,028
    let's pretend that is completely true, and will always be true....is it for the gun lobby to be allowed to prevent that technology from being allowed on to the marketplace?
    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. g8orbill
    Online

    g8orbill Gators VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    67,964
    Likes Received:
    3,947
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Clermont, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +7,775
    just gotta have more guvment control don't you
  7. GatorBen
    Offline

    GatorBen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    6,378
    Likes Received:
    334
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,397
    Having a gun that you have to hope the batteries are good in and the owner recognition technology actually works correctly 100% of the time on could be quite useless if you ever had to actually use the gun.

    For something that I want to work, and work fast and easily, every single time I use it, simple is king. A lot of people will stop carrying a gun if it jams even a few times out of hundreds or thousands of rounds fired through it because you can't trust it to work when you need it to, are under extreme stress, and might not have perfect form.

    That's the exact reason I wouldn't ever consider buying one of these - I just don't see any advantage to them. It introduces a myriad of potential problems that wouldn't otherwise exist in a defense scenario, and I don't just leave guns laying around the house for someone to pick up and shoot in the first place since a safe is much more effective for that than their technology could possibly be, so what exactly is it good for?
    • Agree Agree x 3
  8. tegator80
    Offline

    tegator80 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,911
    Likes Received:
    884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    Ratings Received:
    +1,780
    Ranks right up there with solar energy and public transit. Nothing wrong with the ideas, just make it work and we can use the technology. Forcing upon the masses is just plain silly.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  9. wygator
    Offline

    wygator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    6,093
    Likes Received:
    240
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +654
    I guess going out to the range with my family and our collection of guns to share shooting would be a thing of the past. Not to mention different family members hunting with different rifles.
  10. 08gatorbait
    Offline

    08gatorbait Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2013
    Messages:
    1,631
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Tampa
    Ratings Received:
    +965
    When I have kids..id rather have this than a regular gun honestly. Just as an extra precaution. Not a bad idea, just wonder how far they will take it.
  11. 92gator
    Offline

    92gator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    5,806
    Likes Received:
    275
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +757

    If recollection serves, I believe there was a thread about this (the bolded) recently. No sooner had the idea hit the market place, than some over eager progressives floated the balloon of requiring this on all privately owned guns.

    So your concern is well placed in this regard--and probably why the "overkill on the push-back."

    IMO, it would be a good idea to supplement the market. e.g.--I, as a father of 4 kids, under 9, might actually appreciate such a feature....

    ...yet few thoughts could be more offensive to my sense of freedom, than the prospect of such a feature being mandated by the government.

    Unfortunately, such is the level of distrust our current government has built up vis a vis the 2nd Amendment--that the mere fact that such a power (to restrict the use of a gun) exists, lends itself to the almost inevitable conclusion that it will be used, by the Government. Against us.

    ...for our 'safety', of course...
  12. cjgator76
    Offline

    cjgator76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    17,026
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +293
    It doesn't sound like a desirable weapon, but I don't see why the manufacturer should be legally prevented from selling it.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. DaveFla
    Offline

    DaveFla Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    18,256
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +909

    Very well put.

    As a gun owner myself, one of my greatest fears is that my gun somehow winds up in the hands of a criminal and used to kill another person, or, heaven forbid, me. I love the idea of a smart gun, but for now, the technology just isn't there. It defeats the purpose of owning a gun for personal protection.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. helix139
    Offline

    helix139 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,091
    Likes Received:
    479
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,420
    Any sort of 'smart' gun is going to need to be electronic and will add an additional failure point to a device that you never want to have to troubleshoot when you need it. Bad idea. If it ain't broke (and it aint), don't fix it.
  15. helix139
    Offline

    helix139 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,091
    Likes Received:
    479
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,420
    This. It won't sell and that will be the end of it.
  16. fastsix
    Offline

    fastsix Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,131
    Likes Received:
    209
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Seattle
    Ratings Received:
    +914
    Only if you bought those guns.

    There seems to be a disconnect in this thread. The government isn't mandating these, a private company is selling them. If you don't want one, don't buy one.
  17. 108
    Offline

    108 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    17,560
    Likes Received:
    273
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings Received:
    +1,028
    I see the article just told you what stance to take.
  18. 108
    Offline

    108 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    17,560
    Likes Received:
    273
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings Received:
    +1,028
    Sure, but private industry should be able to do what they want, and people should be able to decide whether it works for them or not
  19. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,513
    Likes Received:
    402
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,666
    Goodness you better smile when you say that. As for firearms, for health insurance? Why not, exactly? As for employer benefits? Why not exactly?

    I'm fine enough with them selling it, but honestly, they will be tacitly endangering people who say "ooh, that's the safe gun!", buy it, and find that it's useless to them when they actually. need. a. gun. Or when the person to whom its programmed has already had their head caved in with a baseball bat and now their daughter can just throw the smart gun at the invader instead of picking it up and firing it, for example.
    • Funny Funny x 1
  20. 108
    Offline

    108 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    17,560
    Likes Received:
    273
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings Received:
    +1,028
    health care is tangibly different then a commodity like firearms, it is a false equivalency

    as for your endangering argument, can't that same logic be said about non "smart" guns themselves.....since when did they become full proof?

Share This Page