27 thoughts on “Why Smart Guns Are Dumb

  1. Yeah, very much not interested. Ever. Although your suggestion that they be the only allowed guns for said bodyguards has merit. Then we shall see how they like “gun control.”

  2. I liked smart guns as presented in some cyberpunk books and games… guns that you plugged into your brain for better accuracy. Can we have those instead?

    ps – they’d also work if you didn’t plug in, but then you don’t get the help aiming

    • That brain interface stuff sounds cool, until you think of it in terms of someone just installed the equivalent of Windows with all its crashes and vulnerabilities into your brain.

      • C’mon, it’s cyberpunk. Why would evil multinational corporations that are laws unto themselves want to do th… oh.

        Never mind.

  3. On a well designed, well manufactured smart gun (which doesn’t exist yet) it’s just several more parts to break. With most current guns, it’s more parts to break, plus a couple minute recognition sequence.

    Yeah, no.

  4. The People’s Republic of New Jersey tried to mandate smart guns but specifically wrote in the law that the police would be exempt. Asked why the Police said the current smart guns were too unreliable to trust officers lives to.

    • “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

      Um… yeah. Nothankyouverymuch. 🙄

  5. Magazine-size laws, accessory bans, and any restriction on allowable firearm types should be field-tested on cops first. If they don’t like it, then don’t force citizens to put up with it either.

  6. First rule of computer security is *physical* security. IOW, if your computer is physically accessible to the motivated hacker, he can break into it. Period.

    I am a motivated hacker, in possession of a “smart” gun. I WILL PWN THAT FIREARM. Period.

    Anybody who tells you otherwise is playing you for a fool.

    So, NOPE, not until the police and the military are willing to issue said technology. And NOPE after that, too.

  7. The greater the complexity, the less reliable. There is an inverse relationship here.

    And any hardware or software can, and will be hacked. Nothing is un-hackable.

  8. Well, 2nd Vote is doing an Important Public Service (note the caps!)

    They are monitoring a gun 24/7 to make sure… SURE I TELL YOU… that it commits no crimes and kills nobody. And they are inviting the world to join the monitoring to make sure that nobody is harmed by this gun. After all, according to the anti-gunners GUNS KILL PEOPLE… so we have to make certain!

      • Except for an LCP, all my Rugers have been/are single-action revolvers, but I would consider a No. 1 in 6.5 Creedmoor.

        I like my H&K P7 a lot.

        • The No. 1 is notorious for being difficult to accurize. I’d probably pick a Savage for the 6.5 these days. I’ve pared down my Blackhawk collection a lot recently.

          • They can be “Accurate enough”, though. A gunsmith friend had a #1 in .458 Mag that someone managed to bulge the bore (obstructed barrel). He rebarreled it in .30-30 Winchester. Sold it to me because it was “boring”. It shot better than I did. IIRC, with cast bullets I was getting MOA. The weight could turn any molehill into a mountain, but off a rest, it was fun.

          • I’ve had good luck shooting other guy’s No. 1s. YMMV. If I got one, it would be for target shooting.

            Right now, my preferred hunting rifles are a Marlin 1895 in .45/70 and a Tikka T3 Lite in .270 Win. The Marlin is handy in the woods where an unusually long shot would be 100 yards. The T3 shoots sub-MOA groups off a rest, and I can manage 1 MO-Deer across any of the corn or bean fields around here. My preferred hunting handgun for the woods is a Thompson Contender with a ported 14-in .45/70 barrel.

  9. I bet for less than a hundred dollars in parts you could knock out the control electronics. I wouldn’t want any guns used for security to have such a feature. Just need a lovely EMF pulse. Could you imagine having all of your staff’s firearms taken out by people who are using “dumb weapons?”

    For that matter, I can assure you that once they managed to mandate “smart weapons” they’d mandate that police be able to disable them with a control signal. A control signal which would remain secret for nearly as long as DVD encryption.

      • Before DVDs came out someone who worked in cryptography would have been able to point out the flaws in their implementation. When BluRay came out they actually listened. Quite a lot of first generation implementations of cryptography have been like that. For instance, you might as well have not used the first generation of wireless encryption at all. I pretty much expect the first generation “smart” guns to be just like that, as just about every industry has to learn the hard way how not to do it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s