Gun With Wireless Arming Signal Goes On Sale Soon

An anonymous reader writes "Armatix has built a pistol that will disarm itself when it is taken away from a watch that sends it a wireless arming signal. The .22 caliber guns will go on sale in the US within months, and the initial price is 7,000 euro. Higher caliber models will follow. To activate the gun, users must enter a pin code on the wristwatch, and then keep it within roughly 20cm of the gun. If the person is disarmed, the gun can't be used against them. Also coming soon this year, civilians will also be able to buy three-shot Tasers, rubber bullets, as well as Heckler and Koch black rifles." This might not be good news for the citizens of New Jersey.

Comments

Strange fascination

[medoc]

What is it with you americans that you're so fascinated with this stuff? For a member of a normal civilian society in peace, these things are just bad and repulsive.

Re:Strange fascination

[StoatBringer]

Don't you know anything? If every citizen is not armed to the teeth, the King of England could just waltz right in, take over and make everyone his slave.

Is that what you want? 'Cos that's what'll happen!

Re:Strange fascination

[BlackHawk-666]

but I will say you'd be surprised how much more understandable the interest is when they're a common and generally harmless part of your existence rather than an evil bogeyman.

33,000 Americans per year would agree with that statement...if they could, if they weren't full of holes and lying in graves they'd definitely call guns 'generally harmless'.

Re:Strange fascination

[KevinIsOwn]

See, we Americans have a widespread cultural mistrust of government.

Don't go accusing all of us Americans of being as paranoid as you. There are plenty of us who find it perfectly reasonable for the state to ensure that weapons are only owned by people who know how to properly and safely use them.

And it's not that hard to measure knowledge of guns, especially if you force people to take a course on them (or perhaps test out of the course). You could ask about safe storage methods, situations in which gun use is legal, etc. There's nothing arbitrary about it- we rely on certifications in almost every part of our society to ensure that somebody has the knowledge they claim they have, and there's no reason that gun ownership should be any different, given the consequences to the people around the gun owner should they not properly handle the weapon.

Re:Strange fascination

[denzacar]

See, we Americans have a widespread cultural mistrust of government.

See... I am not an American, but I have this distinct feeling that you have just insulted a great number of your compatriots.
AND a whole bunch of Canadians, Mexicans and all those people in South America.

No criminal record is acceptable, I suppose, though here in the US that bar seems to be getting lower and lower over time. When it was limited to felonies, and felonies were violent crimes, that was fine. But now it is expanded to white-collar crimes and domestic assault that results in a misdemeanor.

ANY crime record is an indication of tendency towards being a fuckup. It is not a prolonged punishment.
It is just an indicator that not only does the person in case have a tendency toward breaking the law, but also that he/she has a tendency of doing stupid things - like getting caught and sentenced.
Such people should NOT be allowed to have guns. Period.

No failed psych eval makes sense, but again - that bar keeps getting lower too. I've heard tales of ex-military being denied a weapon because of a decade-old PTSD diagnosis. This only makes it less likely for them to seek treatment.

So what if the person in case is a ten times decorated war veteran who lost 3 legs and four arms fighting for the country?
If he still believes that Charlies are about to get him he should NOT be allowed to have a gun.
And any history of mental disorder is again - an indicator towards problems with reasoning. Sorry, no gun for the crazy person.

Safe storage? Fifth Amendment. No law enforcement officer will ever enter my home unless they have a warrant or are acting on an emergency.

One - that is not the fifth amendment. You are thinking about the fourth.

5th: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

4th: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

And two - your statement that you want to purchase a gun and be issued a license for it gives police the "probable cause" to INSPECT FOR SAFETY whichever location it is that you will be holding your gun at.
If you refuse to let them in - then they have a probable cause to come back with a warrant cause there is a chance that you are planning to simply ignore the law.
In other words - you intend to break the law.
And I do believe that we all agree that there should be no illegal guns and gun owners out there, right?

Working knowledge of guns? How do you propose to measure this? Anyone who can read can have a "working knowledge of firearms and their use" in about 30 minutes. Sounds like an arbitrary test, to me. One that can be manipulated by whomever is responsible for administering it.

Simple. But not arbitrary.

Holding gun properly - as in by the grip and not like a club. When you are letting people use a tool specifically designed to kill people - assume that they are complete morons.
Handling gun safely - not pointing it at other people "for fun", understanding the use of the safety.
Being able to load an

Re:Wait hold on mugger...

[Anne Thwacks]

Your argument fails because:

(x) Some people are stupid
(x) Some parents are stupid
(x) Some children are stupid
(x) Some people with access to guns are intoxicated
Loads of other reasons too numerous to mention.
I accept that the proposed technology is about as useful as the official British response to nuclear attack: put a brown paper bag over your head - sure it wont help, but you probably wont know!

Guns dont kill people, Americans kill people!

Re:Wait hold on mugger...

[Knuckles]

The only people who could love this idea are liberal gun grabbers who are afraid somebody might get hurt with a gun.

And we all know how utterly stupid it is to expect something like this. I mean, when was the last time in the US someone got hurt with a gun?!

Re:Guns are equalizers

[medoc]

Quite interesting arguments which just happen to fly in the face of every statistic comparing murder and crime rates between the US and gun-forbidding countries of similar level of evolution (ie: european). Talk is enjoyable but facts don't listen.

Re:Wait hold on mugger...

[Jeremi]

The only people who could love this idea are liberal gun grabbers who are afraid somebody might get hurt with a gun.

I don't know, there might also be a market amongst conservative gun enthusiasts who want to keep a gun around the house, without worrying about their kids getting to them and blowing each other's heads off.

Re:Wait hold on mugger...

[Anonymous Coward]

Where do you live, Baghdad? Kabul? It certainly can't be a civilised country, because people who live in civilised countries do not have to worry about carrying lethal weapons to defend themselves.

I've never even seen a mugger ...

Re:Guns are equalizers

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course not because I'm armed to the teeth. Now if you'll excuse me I have to go bandage a minor sucking chest wound caused by an accident-prone neighbor cleaning his firearm and make sure those pesky Canadians aren't massing on the border.

Re:Wait hold on mugger...

[aurispector]

Would you feel safe anywhere at all? I doubt it. I feel safe in my American suburban neighborhood, too. There are certainly places I would never venture armed or no. I'd like to know how in your perfectly safe gun free world. a 98 lb female is supposed to defend herself against being raped by a 250 lb assailant? Pepper spray? Or should she just lie back and "think of England"? If it were my daughter I'd rather she put a bullet in the bastard's eye.