Colorado High Schooler Invents Smart Gun That Unlocks With Your Fingerprint

[dizmo]

One reason why I doubt this will see any real adoption by law enforcement and definitely not military;

EMP grenades. Or explosions. "Oh no! My gun doesn't fire! Throw the bullets, throw the bullets!"

That and the fewer parts you have in a weapon, the better.

[Fulgrim]

Your argument is a little flawed my friend. Getting the gun out of the safe would be a lot slower than simply opening a drawer/reaching for its hiding place and unlocking it.

This is, of course, in countries that require them to be under lock and key.

Not only that, I highly doubt that it would take as long as 2-3 seconds to unlock. It'd be way faster than that, provided they're smart enough to make the entire area where the hand rests on the grip a sensor pad. Or at least a good portion.

It would unlock well before you'd even aimed the gun at the suspect. You're not aimed right at the baddie the second you touch the weapon.

 

No it's not flawed. If you don't have your gun on your person, you will have to retrieve it regardless. If you do have it on you, then you won't need to waste time scanning your finger to unlock the damn thing for firing.

[Imaginaerum]

The best would be that it can be desactivated by distance so If you use it badly, Police can shut it down. Or to activate it, you need to do at the police station.

No one would want that gun and no one would make it because they wouldn't sell

[martinrox1568]

It has been.

 

And with 3d printing now capable of printing an entire firearm (including the barrel) this is now pointless.

 

People will always find a way to kill people, the only thing you can do to keep yourself safe is prepare to defend yourself and those you love.

 

 

Indeed, the safest place you can keep your pistol, is on your hip, or under your pillow with the safety on, windows locked, door locked.

Here we go again. If you wanted to create something that fired a projectile and killed someone, you would've created a nail gun for $30 at your local home depot

[Builder]

Sounds like a smart idea, but in practice in the real world it is less than ideal.

 

Where reaction time is the deciding factor in someone being able to defend themselves, or another person.

In YOUR real world maybe. You know there are places where people don't have to carry firearms to feel safe, right?

 

People will always find a way to kill people, the only thing you can do to keep yourself safe is prepare to defend yourself and those you love.

People will indeed always find a way to kill people, however the first step in reducing how many times and how frequently that happens is removing the easiest handheld way of doing so.

[Trik'Stari]

Here we go again. If you wanted to create something that fired a projectile and killed someone, you would've created a nail gun for $30 at your local home depot

Or a potato gun that can fire a D sized battery wrapped in electrical tape. Which I can confirm (by accident, we did not intend this to happen, honestly) can disintegrate a sea gull at about 75 feet..... we were seeing who's 4 inch by 2 inch (4 inch diameter combustion chamber, 2 inch diameter barrel) could launch a D sized battery wrapped in electrical tape to fit the barrel, the furthest out over our local river (yes, a river, waaaaah ecomentalists), a sea gull must have thought it was edible because one swooped low and sort of collided with it, we saw nothing but a puff of feathers...

 

Also consider the amount of money one could make selling untraceable 3d printed "assault rifles" (quotes because that term is inaccurate and there's really no such thing, AR stands for Armalite Rifle) to something like the mafia or whatnot. Especially considering you could print automatic weapons (which cost tens of thousands to buy legally). etc.

 

As 3d printing becomes cheaper, it's not hard to see a "black market" springing up for 3d printed weapons. You can already easily print a .22 single shot pistol that only needs a nail (as a firing pin) to fire, with almost any 3d printer that can print plastic. And then once 3d printing reaches the point where people can print an entire 3d printer with a 3d printer, you can see where this is going.

 

Edit: The blueprint for the single shot pistol is already out in the open, the guy that designed it released it as soon as he had proved it could work, the government almost automatically tried to prevent him from doing so, but they were too late (you can't fight the internet, mwahahaha)

[Lavachyste]

No one would want that gun and no one would make it because they wouldn't sell

 

Not if it's the only to have a gun.

 

I know it's kind of cultural for the US to have a gun when you open a bank account, but that would make it more easy to follow tracks and to pre-select you can have a gun. If not, it become the anarchy with everyone having a gun...

[Jaybird]

As some one who is a gun owner, bio firearms are a bad choice. If you Cary a biopistol and you feel treated and need to defend yourself but you have one chance to pull the trigger, and nothing happens, the battery went dead, the bioscan didn't work, the hardware broke. And now you are either raped or killed because of a small failure that could have been avoided. Random fact. There are a number of cases were people drew their firearm in self defense but did not have the muscle memory to release the safety and as a result their attacker ended up beating them to death. So yes it's cool some 17 developed this, but no I will not buy it nor will I put a penny towards this idea. The best defense is to train with you weapon weekly and develops let memory so you know how to use it when things get heated.

[Imaginaerum]

Not if it's the only to have a gun.

 

I know it's kind of cultural for the US to have a gun when you open a bank account, but that would make it more easy to follow tracks and to pre-select you can have a gun. If not, it become the anarchy with everyone having a gun...

That'll never happen, and I have no idea what you said in the second part

[AlwaysFSX]

One reason why I doubt this will see any real adoption by law enforcement and definitely not military;

EMP grenades. Or explosions. "Oh no! My gun doesn't fire! Throw the bullets, throw the bullets!"

That and the fewer parts you have in a weapon, the better.

Spot. On.

[Lavachyste]

It's easy in the US to get a gun. So a lot of people can have one. By controling the issue and being able to desactivate the gun by distance, it could be usefull.

[Tech_Dreamer]

basically the good old James bond gun

[dizmo]

No it's not flawed. If you don't have your gun on your person, you will have to retrieve it regardless. If you do have it on you, then you won't need to waste time scanning your finger to unlock the damn thing for firing.

I think you're confusing how the scanner would likely work. It's not like a Samsung S5 where you have to repeatedly run your finger over it.

It would simply read the fingerprint when you touch the weapon. Unlock. Boom. Done. The second you grip it, it unlocks.

If it's like I imagine, the pad is built in to the grip.

If it got secure enough and validated, you might even be able to forgo the trigger lock (not required everywhere, but is in some places). Which would take a lot longer to take off than simply putting your hand on the grip.

[Jerakl]

In before "'Murica"

 

Seriously, this would be a good thing for police guns... assuming they actually destroy the guns they replace.

Or sell them off cheap

 

 

Oi m8s, I'll take em

[cae]

What if I'm wearing gloves? Introducing additional points of failure won't sell. At least research why the current line of "smart" guns doesn't work and is not looked upon favorably in the firearms community.

[IdortMasterRace]

In YOUR real world maybe. You know there are places where people don't have to carry firearms to feel safe, right?

 

People will indeed always find a way to kill people, however the first step in reducing how many times and how frequently that happens is removing the easiest handheld way of doing so.

 

Please read: http://i.imgur.com/Eous6VR.jpg

 

TLDR:

• Only 1 in 80 gun incidents are used for murder every year, the other 79 in 80 gun incidents are used to save lives in self defence.
• Countries with the lowest gun ownership rates have the highest crime and homicide rates.
• The United Kingdom, wear guns are illegal and banned, has higher knife crime than America has gun crime. The crime rate also increased dramatically following the gun ban in 1997.
• Countries where it is required that every single household has at least one gun have the absolute lowest gun crimes in the entire world.

Sources and citations are at the bottom of the image too.

[Cronus97]

The best would be that it can be desactivated by distance so If you use it badly, Police can shut it down. Or to activate it, you need to do at the police station.

Heck no, firearms are the only way we can ensure our personal rights and safety. The police are militarized enough, they shouldn't have the power to disarm the populace.

[Lavachyste]

Heck no, firearms are the only way we can ensure our personal rights and safety. The police are militarized enough, they shouldn't have the power to disarm the populace.

They should. Some country does not have that " only way we can ensure our personal rights and safety" and they are doing pretty good actually.  So it's not an excuse

[Cronus97]

They should. Some country does not have that " only way we can ensure our personal rights and safety" and they are doing pretty good actually. So it's not an excuse

For now that is. The rest of the world has a history of being oppressed, america doesn't. America is a country for the people, by the people, and that policy makes us the greatest country in the world when it comes to personal liberties. Sure we have our sins, and it isn't perfect, but the citizens having the right to possess firearms ensures that that balance is kept. Anything less would allow the government ( and if we didn't have weapons and a voice would be all powerful) to trample us down.

[Toddwjp]

the funny thing is the last time a smart gun like this came up the nra basically got it banned

 

 

Please read: http://i.imgur.com/Eous6VR.jpg

 

TLDR:

• Only 1 in 80 gun incidents are used for murder every year, the other 79 in 80 gun incidents are used to save lives in self defence.
• Countries with the lowest gun ownership rates have the highest crime and homicide rates.
• The United Kingdom, wear guns are illegal and banned, has higher knife crime than America has gun crime. The crime rate also increased dramatically following the gun ban in 1997.
• Countries where it is required that every single household has at least one gun have the absolute lowest gun crimes in the entire world.

Sources and citations are at the bottom of the image too.

 

-notice it says gun incidents, not gun deaths

-this is generally to do with poverty, when you cant afford food you cant buy a gun, correlation does not equal causation

-yes we have a higher knife crime rate but you would rather have the criminal grab a knife then gun, also if you read the dam sources at the bottom it says that we cant compare violent crime rate as the countries define it differently.

-countries which require this generally have very strict laws and regulations for gun ownership, dont have open carry, and dont allow people to own ammunition.

 

this infographic is propaganda based on BS using clever language to avoid facts and make things appear better in the US.

 

 

your argument sucks, admit it you like guns because you think there cool.

[cae]

the funny thing is the last time a smart gun like this came up the nra basically got it banned

 

It was met with resistance from the NRA, consumers, and dealers because of shady legislature that would limit market options.

 

The law, which requires the state’s gun dealers to exclusively sell smart guns within three years after the first one hits the market, has been largely forgotten since the Legislature adopted it in 2002.

 

“New Jersey’s smart-gun law is as dumb as it gets,” Bach, of West Milford, said in a statement. “It forces you to use an unproven technology to defend your life, and then exempts the state from liability when the gun goes ‘click’ instead of ‘bang.’ If it’s such a great idea, then law enforcement shouldn’t be exempt, and the free market should be allowed to determine its viability.”

 

http://www.northjersey.com/news/nj-state-news/nj-s-2002-smart-gun-law-could-take-effect-soon-limit-supply-1.576177

[Builder]

Please read: http://i.imgur.com/Eous6VR.jpg

 

TLDR:

• Only 1 in 80 gun incidents are used for murder every year, the other 79 in 80 gun incidents are used to save lives in self defence.
• Countries with the lowest gun ownership rates have the highest crime and homicide rates.
• The United Kingdom, wear guns are illegal and banned, has higher knife crime than America has gun crime. The crime rate also increased dramatically following the gun ban in 1997.
• Countries where it is required that every single household has at least one gun have the absolute lowest gun crimes in the entire world.

Sources and citations are at the bottom of the image too.

Switzerland's gun ownership rate is useless because while they mandate military service and people keep their service weapons, ammunition is kept in government-controlled depots where it is not freely accessible to citizens. 

 

Furthermore, it is much easier to kill people with guns than with knives. The same week that Adam Lanza walked into an elementary school in Sandy Hook, a man armed with a knife walked into a school in China. Adam Lanza killed 26 people with his Bushmaster XM-15-E2S, and this Chinese man killed exactly nobody. Everyone survived. 20 people were non-fatally wounded. He didn't even manage to wound as many people with his knife as Adam Lanza did with his gun.

 

Also what we define as crime in this country is ludicrous. In any country in Europe if you shot someone dead on the street you'd be convicted of murder, full stop. Here we have to question whether or not there was racial bias behind the crime, what the intentions were, etc. As a result "gun crime" is not a very accurate statistic of gun violence, because many deaths occur that are not the result of crimes. More accurate is our rate of firearm related death, which propaganda pieces such as the one you dug up. Our rate of firearm-related death per 100,000 people is 10.3. That may seem low, but we are in 13th place overall for gun deaths per 100,000 people.

 

Above us are such affluent and safe countries such as Honduras, Venezuela, El Salvador, Jamaica, Swaziland, Guatemala, Colombia, South Africa, Brazil, Panama, Uruguay, and Mexico. Our gun ownership rate per 100 people is 90, (it used to be around 101). 

 

That's my argument. Since you seem to be a big fan of having other people tell you what to believe instead of forming your own arguments, I'll leave you with this piece from "The Economist." http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2013/09/gun-control

[IdortMasterRace]

-notice it says gun incidents, not gun deaths

-this is generally to do with poverty, when you cant afford food you cant buy a gun, correlation does not equal causation

-yes we have a higher knife crime rate but you would rather have the criminal grab a knife then gun, also if you read the dam sources at the bottom it says that we cant compare violent crime rate as the countries define it differently.

-countries which require this generally have very strict laws and regulations for gun ownership, dont have open carry, and dont allow people to own ammunition.

 

this infographic is propaganda based on BS using clever language to avoid facts and make things appear better in the US.

 

My god, are you dumb.

 

your argument sucks, admit it you like guns because you think there cool.

 

No, I like guns because they protect and defend my life, my family, and my safety, and having self defence is a responsible thing to do. I know you might be a coward and would just sit back and watch someone break into your house, steal your possessions, shoot/stab your family to death while you sit there in the corner, but that isn't okay with me and I will defend myself.

[IdortMasterRace]

Switzerland's gun ownership rate is useless because while they mandate military service and people keep their service weapons, ammunition is kept in government-controlled depots where it is not freely accessible to citizens. 

 

Um, okay? Good for Switzerland? I don't even think Switzerland was ever mentioned. Besides, they aren't a representative and can not be generalised.

 

Furthermore, it is much easier to kill people with guns than with knives. The same week that Adam Lanza walked into an elementary school in Sandy Hook, a man armed with a knife walked into a school in China. Adam Lanza killed 26 people with his Bushmaster XM-15-E2S, and this Chinese man killed exactly nobody. Everyone survived. 20 people were non-fatally wounded. He didn't even manage to wound as many people with his knife as Adam Lanza did with his gun.

 

Okay, so tell me what you plan to do with someone illegally smuggles a gun into the UK (which is very easy to do), and breaks into your house with a gun? Are you going to fend him off with a knife? Of course not, you just said yourself a knife is useless.

 

Also what we define as crime in this country is ludicrous. In any country in Europe if you shot someone dead on the street you'd be convicted of murder, full stop. Here we have to question whether or not there was racial bias behind the crime, what the intentions were, etc.

 

That is how it is in Europe too, what. Europe has a fair trials system too. You wouldn't necessarily be convicted of murder for shooting someone dead at all, of course it depends on circumstances.

 

As a result "gun crime" is not a very accurate statistic of gun violence, because many deaths occur that are not the result of crimes.

 

First of all, the image specifically says accidents count too. Second, if you'd actually bother to read the sources, source 1 says that this includes general injury from a gun, accident or not. That counts as an incident. This is from the government themselves, that out of 80 incidents, 79 protect a life.

 

Our rate of firearm-related death per 100,000 people is 10.3.

 

You haven't even attempted to post a source, so I'm not going to take this seriously at all. But, that stat either means two things depending on your definition: it either means of those 10 deaths, 8 of them were self-defence and saved other lives; or, it means for every 10 that are homicides, 800 are actually self-defence and, again, saved other lives. If you bothered to post sources I could actually make something clearer out of that.

 

That's my argument. Since you seem to be a big fan of having other people tell you what to believe instead of forming your own arguments, I'll leave you with this piece from "The Economist." http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2013/09/gun-control

 

Oh, now you're linking me to The Economist, a specifically bias anti-gun publication. Meanwhile I linked you to specific statistics, research reports, government documents, etc.

[Builder]

Oh, now you're linking me to The Economist, a specifically bias anti-gun publication. Meanwhile I linked you to specific statistics, research reports, government documents, etc.

As if http://vicimediagroup.com is any better.

 

If you would read The Economist's article instead of taking it at face value based on your inherent biases, you'd see there is much evidence contradictory to the incomplete picture painted by your specifically conservative advertising agency.

 

The data was taken from Wikipedia and a cited source was checked, this could have been easily Google'd, but you'd prefer just to believe it's not true.

EDIT: You must not have read your own source if you think Switzerland wasn't mentioned.