“As the largest municipal buyer of weapons in the country, the city has a powerful opportunity to change the landscape on gun safety by committing to add a smart gun to its list of approved firearms for the New York Police Department,” NY House of Reps Rep Hakeem Jeffries and New York City comptroller Scott M. Stringer write at nytimes.com, “assuming that the technology can be proved to meet all the safety and security needs of its officers.” That’s a big “if.” But the pols are determined (kinda like the were in New Jersey)!

Too many children die every year because of guns that are left unsecured, and too many police officers are needlessly placed in harm’s way by guns that would be no more deadly than a paperweight if they were outfitted with smart-gun technology.

How many? Too many! (Setting aside the danger of paperweights, at least in murder mystery games.) Assuming the technology can be proved to meet all your safety and security needs, how many smart guns will you buy? Any?

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

118 COMMENTS

  3. I would probably buy one to mess arpund with but not to use in any defensive capacity.

    On a side note I’m not able to comment on most articles. There is no place to even try and enter anything.

    • I wouldn’t even want to waste my money on one to mess around with. My stupid tablet that I mess around with is plenty unreliable, I expect more from my guns.

      • I’d do it so I could figure out how to disable the smart gun tech. Mainly because I figure the future may end up needing someone skilled in disabling smart gun tech.

  4. So once “smart” guns are out there, the hundreds of millions of other guns in circulation just cease to exist? The children and cops are safe again, and all is right with the world?

    Is that how that works?

  6. If we can call the tracking point system a smart gun, yes I would buy one once the technology has become affordable. Otherwise, I have ABSOLUTELY no interest or reason to buy one.

    • Yup, language corruption, once again by the left. They use the term “Smart Gun” but all they are referring to is an integrated electronic locking mechanism. Something like the Tracking Point system is what should classically be referred to as a Smart Gun”.

  7. No. I have no reason to spend ten times more on a gun that takes batteries as opposed to one which does not.

  8. I realize “smart gun” is the term that has been historically used, but can we call them electric guns from now on. There is nothing smart about these mechanical device with added technology. All there is, is a gun with added technological points of failure to go with the small number of mechanical points of failure.

  9. Lose a thumb (or proper finger) or a “fob” smart-gun no werky. Therefore, smart guns just give the bad guys (including your government) options on disarming you. It’s not a solution looking for a problem, it’s a problem looking to dry-hump you in an attempt to procreate.

  10. I have had my hands on a Lorcin and one of those horrid pot metal “colt” .22 revolvers once so yeah, I would buy a smart gun.

    Makes a interesting conversation piece and probably a decent paper weight.

    Wont spend more than $200 tho, got my limits like any sane man.

  12. Nope.

    But if one were given to me, I would have a video posted within a week showing how to turn it into a dumb gun.

    • And worked in all weather, and worked without fear of possibility of command interdiction or interruption, and worked regardless of hand or grip, and worked absent any command delay, and worked like arms without smart technology. . .

  15. Too many points of failure that can be hacked when electronics become manifest in the design of firing the weapon. i.e, the government can inhibit your weapon deliberately or by accident.

  16. If I can mod it to make it full auto for a fun range only gun 🙂

    Never ever ever in a self defense gun…

  20. If the price wasn’t completely atrocious, I’d buy 1 maybe 2 just to tinker with the different ways of disabling, overriding, or just all around defeating the ‘smarts.’

    As any sort of firearm to actually use? No thanks.

  21. Given the chance of failure brought by blood, sweat, or other substances, given the possibility of a dead battery, given the chance my usual gun hand could be unusable, and given the inability to pass the weapon to a battle buddy, HELL NO! While true any technology can fail, further adding more tech to a tool seems like a bad idea. My guns are either in my control or locked up… no finger print ID required.

  22. Yes, IF and ONLY IF three conditions are met:

    1. It is as reliable as (or within 1-2% of) my current production firearms,
    2. It can be implemented without significantly increasing the price of the firearm, AND
    3. It offers some sort of tangible benefit to me over traditional firearms, such as cheaper or faster holsters, no need for safes, etc.

    So, in other words…. no.

  25. ‘Assuming the technology can be proved to meet all your safety and security needs…’

    First and foremost the gun would have to be immune from electronic detection or jamming. I wouldn’t pay one red cent for a gun the government can just turn off if some bureaucrat chooses to do so. That rules out RF which, as far as I know of, leaves biometric. The system would have to function reliably no matter how much blood I have dripping down my hand, regardless of which hand the gun is in, work with a gloved hand, it would have to be quickly programmed to accommodate lending the gun at the range or in an emergency. I don’t think those criteria will be met in my lifetime, but if they were I’d be open to owning one (NJ inane laws aside). But unless you have small children running around and you want to leave your gun laying around in plain sight, I just can’t see the advantage a ‘smart gun’ would have over a traditional firearm. So they’d also have to be the same price.

  26. If it:

    • Defaults to ‘on’ (batteries dead, broken, gun defaults to ‘works’)
    • Cannot be remotely tracked
    • Cannot be remotely shut down
    • Is used by all US PD and SOs first

    Then I might try one.

  27. Sure … IF it’s a CDF standard-issue MP-35 Infantry Rifle or equivalent. (Scalzi, anyone?)

    As meant by this article? No thank you.

  29. Wont buy a smart car either and so far I am not impressed with smart phones.
    Technology is outrunning my pace of income and learning ability. Every time I “upgrade”, I am setback by the learning curve. By the time I figure out enough “features” on any platform to make it truly user friendly, the software is obsolete and no support is available.
    I just want to make a phone call, read email, text and read TTAG. Is there an app for that? One that turns off all the other bullshit that I don’t need. Right now, the phone browser crashes when viewing TTAG.

    • All those pointless apps are a money making strategy. Why put Netflix on a phone? Because it chews through your data limit at lightning speeds, and we all know how bored some people get. Watch a couple of movies and enjoy that extra $100 tacked on to your next bill. I have a “smart” phone, but always disable or uninstall the junk programs every time I upgrade.

  31. while i would not get rid of a traditional firearm FOR the smart gun, i would probably buy a smart gun if it is reasonably priced. I dont see any reason not to really. Again, if it was my ONLY gun then no, i wouldn’t have a smart gun as my only gun.

  32. Technology always has bugs and is another source of failure. So no matter what they say, they are adding another “malfunction” to tool that already has three built in. And this may not be remedied with tap-rack-bang and may render your firearm useless.

    TLDR. No.

  33. Maybe one so that I can deconstruct it, learn how to circumvent the “safety”, and then give the instructions to Wikileaks to post it online. 😉

    • since the governmental recommendations for smart guns is that they default to unlocked when the electronics aren’t working, then all you have to do to disable them is remove the batteries (or fail to replace them when they run-down).

      If you think that kind of integrated electronic locking mechanism is safe to leave out around kids with no sense of gun safety, you’d have to have no common sense and no experience with guns.

  34. NO!!!

    There are too many ways that operation (as in being able to shoot) can fail at a critical time.

    Such potential failure modes include, among other possibilities:
    (1) Software error
    (2) Human error*
    (3) Electrical failure
    (4) Jamming or hostile remote disable

    * Human error includes human actions that interfere with or prohibit the smart feature from working as designed, such as failing to wear an enabling bracelet.

    None of those failure modes are possible right now with existing firearms. I’ll take the simplest, most reliable platform available when I encounter a life/death situation.

  35. I would, but not the kind of “smart gun” that is being suggested here. I don’t have any interest in a fingerprint reader on a gun, I have one on my phone already and it doesn’t always work very well. Sometimes it takes a few tries to get it to work, and it doesn’t work well if my hands are wet or dirty.

    I would be interested in messing around with a “smart gun” that has added smart features, like a round counter or something. That’s what I’d like to see on a gun. I wouldn’t use it except just for fun as a curiosity to mess around with, but it would be interesting at least.

    • Since all the left means by smart gun is something with an integrated electronic locking mechanism, I’ll pass on their version of a smart gun. Now, if I could afford something like the tacking point system, there’s a nice idea for a true smart gun!

  36. I would buy one out of curiosity only. And only if it didn’t embolden the anti-gunners to attack the guns as they’re designed and manufactured today.

    Which probably means no, I wouldn’t. Until society as a whole revers the second amendment and takes it as it’s written. Then, yhea. It’d be interesting to own one.

    O2

    • I mean really, we need to have a dialogue on this, and maybe come to a reasonable compromise. Can’t we all get along??? Look how divided we are!

    • macro aggression to be met with high velocity
      airborne lead poisoning.
      Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis

  41. Me? No.

    Once made available, it’s a short step to making them the only kind of gun that will be sold new.

    Because guns.

    Once ‘smart’ guns are the only type available for sale, LE will demand technology that makes them inoperable if cops are in the area.

    Remember, the only thing that matters is that cops get to go home safely.

    Criminals will copy that technology to ensure crooks get to go home safely.

    Us going home safely? Not so much…

  42. 3:18 – ‘But proponents point to states where smart guns are already meeting reliability standards. Last year California, the state that employs some of the most rigorous firearm testing, approved the Armatix iP1.’

    Bwahahahahaha… OMG, now that’s funny!

  44. Smart guns for cops, because “too many children die every year because of guns that are left unsecured.” That’s a shitty cop, who lets kids get ahold of his gun.

    No. Won’t buy one.

  46. I actually would like to see a “smart” gun added to the NYPD’s list of approved handguns. Then, we would be able to say, “Even the cops don’t want them.”

  47. No way, Jose.

    If the tech is as good as my iPhone, that still only recognizes me 2-3 out of 5 times. Hardly useful as an emergency deployment device. And why would I waste money on one for the range?

  49. Quit calling them smart guns. They aren’t. All they are is a firearm with an integrated electronic locking mechanism.

    Not so sexy when you call it what it actually is, is it? And since all we are talking about is a locking mechanism, there are far better (speed, reliability, cost) systems and methods available to accomplish the same goal.

  51. Honestly I’d buy a smart holster before I’d ever consider buying a smart gun. A holster seems like a much smarter way to go. Larger area for electronics, doesn’t affect the fundamentals of the gun, also having a holster out to charge seems a lot more responsible then having your gun lying around to charge.

  52. A lot of f**kin’ hope. Bad enough the 12lb. “NY1” trigger. If the rank and file are bitching about 15 vs 17 round mags for the Glock 17, you think they’ll embrace “smart” guns?

  53. Bad enough the 12lb. “NY1” trigger. If the rank and file are bitching about 15 vs 17 round mags for the Glock 17, you think they’ll embrace “smart” guns?

  55. So much ‘meh.

    I’m not buying one because I am poor and not spending the money on this kind of a toy. Do you have any idea how much ammunition I could buy with that money? And how much more fun the time at the range is when you have ammunition?

    Anybody else want to buy one? Go for it! Let me know what you think.

    Some politician going to try and make us all get one…. One-Finger salute and the biggest FU I can manage to deliver. You’re not going to force me to take a simple machine and make it complex just for your satisfaction in being able to say ‘you did something.’

  56. I wouldn’t say I would never buy a smart gun. It’s just that I would never spend extra, or compromise on caliber or reliability, in order to secure a gun against unauthorized use, since that’s something I already do as a matter of course using existing technology.

  58. How smart is it? If it has the same FPR that rarely works on my phone, then NO, HELL NO.

    Now if it recognizes me just by the feel of my hand on its hilt, warms to the touch, and asks (in a sexy female voice), “Hello, CJ. Are you ready to shoot some shit?” Then YES, HELL YES!

  59. I have a two and a half year old and I don’t want him to ever have an accident with my home defense gun. Yet I want my gun to be available within seconds in the middle of the night in case of a home invasion, etc…

    So far my best option to accomplish both of these aims is to get a small safe that I can keep by the side of the bed that is activated by a fingerprint sensor. Isn’t this fingerprint sensor on my safe the same as what would be on a “smart gun?” The only difference being the added time needed to fiddle around in my safe and get my gun?

    So yes, I would buy a smart gun if:

    1. They were 100 percent reliable.
    2. You didn’t have to worry about a battery dying. The battery lasted for ten years or something.
    3. They weren’t hackable.
    4. You could still own non smart guns.
    5. They cost the same as regular guns.

    If all of those conditions were met I’d have a gun that I could keep under my pillow, etc… for easy access that I wouldn’t have to worry about my child finding and firing.

    A win-win.

    • Current Federal recommendations on firearms with an integrated electronic locking mechanism (i.e. Smart Gun) is that the failure state of the locking mechanism is unlocked. So dead battery, flatly electronics (heck battery pulled out by a kid playing with it) all result in the firearm unlocking. That is not something I’d leave anywhere my toddler can get too.

      • That seems to defeat the purpose of a smart gun. Essentially you could just remove the battery and it’s ready to fire. So criminal steals your gun. Removes the battery and he’s got a regular gun. Or teenager finds gun, removes battery, shows friends, pulls trigger.

        If that’s the case, why even have a smart gun at all?

  62. i will buy one in twenty five years when they qualify for c&r.
    shop smart. shop s mart.

    “ok glockle, how long before you can shoot this guy?”

  63. IMHO there has only been one pairing of electricity with a firearm that’s worth diddly.

    The electrically driven rotary breach. That sucker turned an 1800’s gattling gun into a sweet ass tool for raining hate and discontent on bad guys (preferably from an airborne platform).

  64. Even if it works perfectly, it will only encourage people to leave their (smart) gun unsecured, and encourage children to pick up guns and play with them, because they won’t go off, ya know. Then of course the kid who is used to playing with Dad’s “smart” gun thinks his uncle’s “dumb” gun is the same. . .

  66. I remember you said you were once a skydiver, Robert. Remember when AAD (automatic activation devices) hit the market?

    First there was the crap mechanical Astra and the Sentinel that shot off your reserve if you were exceeding a certain speed at a determined altitude. Many in the ’80s and early ’90s stayed clear or even refused to do relative work with others that used them because of their malfunction rate. I witnessed one student save and more than one unnecessary malfunction because of them.

    Then the electronic Cypres appeared on the market in the ’90s and it worked well with few errors. Still, peeps turned them off when they knew were doing lower altitude pulls or other things (like high speed canopy maneuvers) which might exceed the parameters and their margin of error. I saved my life a thousand times without a cypres or any AAD on board.

    If you can’t turn off the ‘smart’ life saving device it’s a no go with me. Your own wit should be the judge whether a tool functions when you choose.

  67. Sure….as soon as the marine corps shows a positive 100 year service record in combat with them.
    Till that happens……..it’s a nogo.

  69. While its a work of fiction, Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of The Patriots shows probably the worst case scenario for “smart gun” implementation. In the game almost all of society has been converted to a “smart gun” mentality, and almost everyone has nano machines in their body that allows them to be tracked and to some degree, controlled, by their ruling governments. All guns in the world are “ID locked” to a particular user by their nanomachines, so only the intended user can use them. Its also explained that it can be used to shut down weapons to prevent them from being misused. Through the events of the game an insurrectionist force hijacks the system and is able to lock out almost all weapons in use by the US military. While im sure similar technology would take many decades to be practical in the real world, I’m sure it would be at least attempted to be universally implemented by most governments if it was. And I’m sure that just like the game it would be ripe for abuse and hijacking by the very people that we’d like to “lock out”. So I would NEVER buy a smart gun or support their development and implementation, I’m pretty sure that’d be the true “beginning of the end” for the individual right to own a firearm. Whats the point of owning one if it could be locked out at the whim of some beurecrat?

  70. I might after all the police purchase them along with security guards of the rich and famous first.

  71. Awwww hell no! As soon as they sell a few of them to the curious, they will scream “Success! People do want them and they will sell!” Then you will truly see them come after your guns.

  75. As a range gun? No. Four adult shooters in this family, we all use each other’s guns at the range. We don’t always go to the range together. If it’s fingerprint activated, no one else can use it. If it is bracelet activated, someone’s gonna lose the bracelet.

    Self defense gun? Absolutely not.

  76. I’d buy a ray gun. Other than that no. I don’t trust electronics well enough to use that gun in a defensive capacity. Which due to limited funds is how all of the guns I own are used around the house. If I don’t trust the thing to go bang I don’t get it/don’t keep it

  78. I already have a smart gun. It does exactly what I tell it to. It goes bang when it’s supposed to (when I squeeze the trigger) and doesn’t when I don’t. Seems pretty damn smart to me!

  79. What about smart dogs that won’t die when left in their K9 handlers’ cars “accidentally”?
    Here in AZ, it happens several times a year.
    If police (the only ones who are professional enough to have guns, I’m told) can let their dogs die in a car, what makes us think those “professionals” won’t leave their smart guns somewhere inappropriate (like a restroom stall, which they do now), and a criminal won’t find it, and, using a kit to be sold shortly, reset it to their own biometrics?
    And if someone thinks such a kit won’t be made and sold, think again. If it can be set once, it can be reset, especially as police departments will need to re-assign the guns to other officers as need arises (retirement, promotion, etc.).
    So, tell me again how these guns can only be fired by the “owner”?

  80. Zero. My dumb guns are more than adequate for all my defensive and recreational needs. Furthermore, I don’t believe in the preventative power of smart guns. In very limited circumstances they might prevent a shooting. In most cases, I think the technology is easily defeated, especially by criminals.

    I would not oppose smart guns coming to market and competing on a level playing field with dumb guns. There may be people out there who would embrace them as a defensive option. Such people genuinely, even though wrongly, believe that a dumb gun is too dangerous. If such people would join the ranks of the armed if smart guns were available, then I am all for that. Hopefully the smart gun acts as a “gateway drug” for those people.

  81. I’d be interested in one. I think it’d make the wife sleep easier. I wouldn’t want it to be my only gun, though.

  82. No… Not unless it’s hackable so I can put someone else’s fingerprint in there and then set it off remotely with an iPhone app. ☺️

Comments are closed.