Slashdot Mirror
Smart Gun with Minicam and Biometric Access
StrawberryFrog writes "Ya well no fine, those crazy South Africans are at it again, this time with a "intelligent firearm". You may have heard of guns with fingerprint recognition before, but this also uses a laser to ignite the propellant, has multiple barrels and incorporates a minicam to record as evidence what you are shooting at. It's a very different gun design, and one that depends on electronics to make it work."
They would invent smart bullets so that a gun can be fired in the U.S. by Dubya and it will hit all the evil-doers in Iraq.
Because you see, Saddam is an evil, evil man and the U.S. is not interested in Iraq's oil fields (nor was it interested in Afghanistan's natural gas and iron deposits.)
10 people in about 15 seconds or less
Oh no, a ten round magazine is far more terrifying than that. With armor piercing rounds and careful alignment of your shots it will kill at least 20 people! Of course, any competent shooter will have one round in the chamber in addition to the magazine, so there's another two dead innocents. Naturally one should consider using tiny gas dispensers in the rounds for an area effect. Certainly that would be good for 100 or more! At some point the NRA will finally succeed in producing tiny fission warheads. At that point 10 rounds should be good for wasting several hundred!
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
i love guns!
you love guns!
guns are great!
guns make big noises!
i want one!
woohoo!
(BANG)
dead gun owner
the world improves a bit
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
but they tried it in gunpoweder and it workd just fine.
But they did not try using taggants in gunpower in bullets being fired from guns. Many inexperienced reloaders have lost fingers, thumbs, and their lives by improperly reloading ammunition.
What method can be used to insure that the distribution of taggants is uniform between batches of smokless powder? What method can be used to make sure that the process of shipping does not cause the taggants to unevenly distribute in one container of smokeless powder?
If a mixture assumes a 1% taggant content and through the process of settling the taggants constitute 5%, a bullet might not have enough kinetic energy to clear the barrel of a firearm. In and of itself, that's no big deal, but when the next bullet, with the proper mixture, is fired the barrel of that gun is going to explode in someone's face.
I'm sorry if you don't like it, but fuck you. I'm not willing to take that chance with my life.
the NRA, is, surpisingly, not you and me, nor even most US gun manufacturers, but rather its mainly funded by foreign owned cheap gun maunfacturers.
Where is your proof of this? It doesn't even pass the giggle test. The NRA has approximately 3 million members in the US. At $35 per year, those people provide $105 million in operational revenue, PER YEAR. How much money do you think that the NRA has? The NRA tends to conserve for 3 years and spend a bundle during big election years.
The more expensive (mainly US + european based) manufacturers are not big NRA supporters since they would prefer to see the fixed costs of gun ownership rise a bit, so that the differential costs of their higher quality weapons are not as noticable.
Glock, Beretta, Taurus, Smith & Wesson, Magnum Research, HK, are all served by the efforts of the NRA. Every one of those companies make pistols that were effected by the gun ban of 1994. They all stand to make a bundle, if the NRA can get it repealed.
In fact the better gun manufacturers are solidly behind legistlation to improve handgun safety since anything that would make people have to go out an buy new and higher quality guns is good for them
The only "better" manufacture to get on board was Smith & Wesson. They did so, not because of a desire to make "safer" guns, but as a way to get immunity from liability lawsuits. Makers of quality firearms don't need such legislation, because their guns are already safe. The people who spend money on guns already know this. Glock puts their guns through stress tests that even the US military does not.
If a gun is safe to use after being frozen in a block of ice, or submerged in salt water, it'll work just fine after being in a desk drawer.
unfortunately the quality gun makers dont have the clout the NRA has.
So, you do understand. The few hundred, or thousand people who own those companies aren't as powerful as the 3 million people in the NRA.
As it is police dont even track ballistics and shell casings across juristiction boundaries. THe homeland defense hysteria may finally cure this with a central database. Which is a great worry to 2nd amendment people. And of course to the NRA.
The problem is not with a centralized database of all ballistic information on bullets recovered from crime scenes, the problem is with a ballistic fingerprint database that will include every gun sold in the US. It is a backdoor way to get universal registration, which all 2nd amendment advocates with a sense of history are against.
Maybe you should try a debate about Perl or Ruby, because you have no chance in a debate on guns.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano