Recap of a post in GD

[AndyS]

24. I remember that post. I pretty much beat you to death with your own talking points.

Cut and paste from that post.

Star Member flamin lib (10,408 posts)

9. Let me know when you get to the serious part . . .

Response to flamin lib (Reply #9)Wed Feb 3, 2016, 02:48 PM
Star Member krispos42 (48,952 posts)

11. Would you trust skydiving with a parachute as reliable as your smartphone's fingerprint scanner?

Yes or no?

Would you want a loved one, working as a police officer, to have a gun as reliable as your smartphone's fingerprint scanner?


Response to krispos42 (Reply #11)Wed Feb 3, 2016, 03:35 PM
Star Member flamin lib (10,408 posts)

12. you guys sound just like Lee Iocacca when seat belts were suggested for

cars. People don't want them, they won't help and you're better off being thrown clear of the crash (paraphrasing).

You do realize how wrong he was, don't you?

Now, let me know when you get to the serious part.

Response to flamin lib (Reply #12)Wed Feb 3, 2016, 08:28 PM
Star Member krispos42 (48,952 posts)

17. You're avoiding the question, which means you don't like the answer.

Speaking of car safety then, would you buy a car with airbags that had a 10% chance of not discharging when the crash sensors triggered them?

Response to krispos42 (Reply #17)Wed Feb 3, 2016, 10:08 PM
Star Member flamin lib (10,408 posts)

19. Show me a car like that.

Response to flamin lib (Reply #19)Wed Feb 3, 2016, 10:34 PM
Star Member krispos42 (48,952 posts)

20. My point exactly. It doesn't exist because nobody would buy it.

The unlocking mechanism for "smart guns" is inherently unreliable. If that's not "serious" enough for you, then perhaps you could tell me what is.


Response to krispos42 (Reply #20)Thu Feb 4, 2016, 09:12 AM
Star Member flamin lib (10,408 posts)

25. The car doesn't exist because

THE TECHNOLOGY WORKS.

You found one example of a fingerprint reader that's slow and cling to it like a life raft in a storm.

Reliable technology does exist and some 'dumb guns' can even be refitted to it. The military doesn't use it because it doesn't fit the mission. The police don't use it because it because there aren't commercially available models. There aren't commercially available models because the gun manufacturers don't want to change their manufacturing floor which is basically the same as it was in 1840. Shit, they don't even want to include a mechanical safety devices on popular products like Glock and Keltek.

Meanwhile every commercial airliner and every automobile currently made in this country is fly/drive by wire, the same type of technology used in the talisman technology for guns. As a result cars have become safe to the point that they kill fewer people each year than guns.

Thanks to the talking points sent out by the gun industry spokes people in the NRA, NSSF and GOA and repeated word for word here the technology is killed in it's infancy. The one instance of a gun store offering a smart gun was met with death threats and a boycott. DEATH THREATS because the owner offered ONE model as a choice to his customers.

So, when you get to the serious part, let me know.

Response to flamin lib (Reply #25)Thu Feb 4, 2016, 12:14 PM
Star Member krispos42 (48,952 posts)

27. We're not talking about "fly by wire". We're talking about biometric identification.

The fly-by-wire system is very reliable, especially when it's triple or quadruple redundant. But that's not analogous to this situation. After all, the mechanicals of a gun are very reliable too. And I have no doubt that, once a smart gun's system was unlocked it would shoot reliably.

The issue is UNLOCKING the system.

Would you fly in a plane where the yoke wouldn't budge unless it recognized the pilot's biometrics? Where the computer will not respond to ANY control input unless it recognized the biometrics of the pilot or co-pilot? How about a car? Would you drive a car where changing the throttle, applying the brake, or turning the steering wheel was dependent on the car's computer recognizing the biometrics of the driver as the car was being driven?


So we're back to square one. Biometrics are being used on gun-storage devices such as gun safes. That's all well and good. But those are obviously much larger than a handgun and have much more room for electronics and batteries.


And the transponder issue still hasn't been addressed by you either. I'd personally rather deal with a transponder than a biometric reader of some sort as I see it as more trustworthy, even if it has other disadvantages.

Response to krispos42 (Reply #27)Thu Feb 4, 2016, 12:54 PM
Star Member flamin lib (10,408 posts)

28. The title of the OP is " Let's seriously discuss smart guns"

The fact that you now want to move the goal posts with techno-bable about biometrics is a red herring. Like I said, when you get serious let me know.

So you say even that isn't reliable enough, huh?

No standards body, like Underwriters Lab, certifies the reliability of civilian guns. California and Massachusetts do require that a firearm, to be sold there, pass a shooting test. But they ask only that it fire 600 rounds with no more than six failures.

Mauch says the de facto industry norm for civilian handguns is around 5,000 rounds with no more than 50 failures. But at H&K and Armatix, he claims, he has hewed to a higher standard: no more than 10 failures in 10,000 firings. “We tested the iP1 with more than a quarter million rounds,” he says. “You can use it in rain, dust, and mud.”

The iP1 takes two AAA batteries, which will power about 5,000 firings, according to Armatix. An indicator light begins flashing when the batteries still have one-third of their life remaining — i.e., more than 1,000 shots. The watch takes a common button battery, and a watch-face icon monitors its depletion. If the battery is allowed to run out, the gun will not operate.

http://fortune.com/2015/04/22/smart-guns-theyre-ready-are-we/

Yeah, it's only a .22 and it's $1,700. My first calculator was more than $100 and now they give away a better one with AARP dues. There's a 9mm in the works for the police market and with reliability 50 times the "industry standard" it shouldn't meet much resistance on that issue.

This guy Mauch is just another gun grabbing prohibitionist, right? No, he was the chief designer at H&K for 30 years and is credited with designing the most reliable assault weapon ever made.

Oh my! If the batteries run down it won't fire! Well my new $28,000 truck won't start if the battery runs down either but I've been driving for 52 years and the number of times that has happened can be counted on the fingers of one hand. If that concerns you use Lithium Ion batteries with a 10 year shelf life or just change them out when you change the smoke detector batteries.

The technology is here, it is reliable and getting more reliable and smaller every year. I just purchased a Windows 10 computer that measures 1.24 inches by 3 inches by .25 inches with 128 gigs storage upgrade-able to another 128 gig for $250. The price and size of biometrics will come down and even the Ludites among us will adopt.

Welcome to the 21st century. Stop living in the 17th.

Response to krispos42 (Reply #27)Thu Feb 4, 2016, 02:15 PM
Star Member flamin lib (10,408 posts)

31. Here's another that is tested, proven and being looked at by police.

http://www.iguntechnology.com/