Slashdot Mirror
New Smart Gun Company Hopes To Begin Production This Summer
Lucas123 writes Safe Gun Technology (SGTi) is hoping it can begin production on its version of a smart gun within the next two months. The Columbus, Ga.-based company uses relatively simple fingerprint recognition through a flat, infrared reader positioned on the weapon's grip. The biometrics reader enables three other physical mechanisms that control the trigger, the firing pin and the gun hammer. The controller chip can save from 15,000 to 20,000 fingerprints. If a large military unit wanted to program thousands of finger prints into a single weapon, it would be possible. A single gun owner could also temporarily program a friend or family member's print into the gun to go target shooting and then remove it upon returning home."
"When I pull the trigger, I want the gun to fire. I doubt this will be reliable enough to depend upon."
More to the point: if you want it to be reliable, then the fingerprint technology has to be loose enough to be UNreliable. We already know this. With today's technology, if you want to allow access with fingerprints reliably, you have to make your parameters loose enough that false positives slip in too easily.
Which means that in order to be near 100% reliable for an "authorized" shooter, this thing provably can't do what it's intended to do: reliably block the UNauthorized.
a spring and a lever have a MTBF measured in millions of cycles. RoHS-compliant electronics made with commodity parts do not.
And I buy guns with as few extraneous safeties as possible.
This space for rent.
As long as he only accidentally shoots himself. That's fine. However, he can't gurantee that.
But it's irresponsible behavior like that that gives fuel to the anti-gun crowd.
I agree with the concern about the biometric identification though, in TFS. It's too easy for it to fail, even if it's merely the battery going dead, though if it's low enough charge, the trigger action may be able to charge it up, enough so that firing actually doesn't need a battery. I can see cases where someone would want this on their guns, and it's a responsible thing in those cases. People shouldn't force their desire for irresponsibility onto others - if you don't want this, don't buy it. I know I won't. However, I don't have a situation where this would be relevant (my guns are only loaded at the range and when camping). Just because I wouldn't want this, and it doesn't add any safety benefit in my situation... doesn't mean it shouldn't be around, because it sure as hell isn't hard to think of reasons why people would want this and it would provide safety to themselves and/or others.
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
Why does it have to be so reliable?
Because yelling "Excuse me, armed thugs who just broke down my door, I need you to hold up for a minute while my gun registers my fingerprint so I can shoot you" is a good way to get yourself killed.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
As long as he only accidentally shoots himself. That's fine. However, he can't gurantee that.
But it's irresponsible behavior like that that gives fuel to the anti-gun crowd.
I don't see it as dangerous enough to arm the Anti Gun crowd. Personally, I'd be willing to sacrifice the one extra round for that extra measure of safety and I just don't sit near him. If it went off the way he carries it, he's only going to hit his backside and the floor behind him (or somebodies foot in the worst case). :)
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Why, out of curiosity, would you worry about lead solder in a thing that fires lead bullets?
I wouldn't. You probably wouldn't. But politicians and regulatorycrats in some parts of the world do. RoHS is big in the EU. If you manufacture something, it has to be RoHS, even if you are making it out of lead.
Do you have an emotional response to firearms that makes thinking difficult for you?
Nope, but the statistic is misleading. My consumer SCSI HD has a MTBF of 5 years (and my last drive lasted 10 years of 24/7 use before the drive started to even whine a bit). How many times does the read/write arm - which is basically a lever and spring - move during that time? Probably hundreds of millions.
Guns are just simple mechanical machines. There's nothing magical about their parts, which will function in relation to the quality of their design and maintenance as well as their usage situations - like most things.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
I've fired hundreds of thousands of rounds through various belt fed MGs, when I was doing instructing duties with NATO militaries. It's not unrealistic as an edge case. Barrels are a consumable part with a well designed automatic weapon. If they're not, it's a bad design or not intended for serious usage. Will the average firearm see hundreds of thousands? Na.
Will some poor firearm be the range beater? Ayep. Also, you have to take life shortening factors into account. Firearms should be built to tolerate environmental concerns (heat, water, etc), abrasion, etc.
I don't trust many electronics to handle that. I've seen plenty of vehicle electronics fail under those circumstances, despite being generally covered or theoretically sealed. Make police carry it for two decades, and I'll start to consider testing it. That's not unusual. M16 is near 50 years old. M1911 is over a century and very popular.
Tale of two guns I own, both purchased with the goal of being conceal carry pieces: Walther PPS #1 - 2300 rounds fired. Error: failure to eject last round properly: 1. No other jams and I've fed good ammo and cheap ammo through it. Had so much success a year ago I bought another as a spare. 1400 rounds through it, no failures to fire or eject. Maybe I'm just lucky, but I'll trust my life with either of those weapons. I am confident that if/when I need them to go boom they will.
Also last year I bought a Ruger SR40c because I wanted something in .40S&W. Excellent sights, great trigger, very accurate and manageable recoil for me. But it had problems with double feeds, failure to eject, and light strikes. Put 600 rounds through it to "break it in" and still had problems through the 1000 round mark. Sent the gun back to Ruger and they replaced some parts and replaced the barrel. 500 rounds through the gun since I've got it back and other than it still hates winchester ammo (hard primer) seems to be okay if I'm shooting Hornaday Critical Duty or Defense ammo. I still refuse to carry it. It will probably take another 1000 rounds before I will even consider it again.
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.