We can send a man to the moon, a robot to Mars, and access the world’s wealth of information from a $200 hand-held gizmo that fits in our pockets – but we can’t figure out how to stop a crazy person from walking into an elementary school with an assault rifle to murder innocent children.
When it comes to preventing gun violence, technology has failed us. Why is that?
This question has tugged at my subconscious since the hideous shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School last December. So-called ‘smart gun’ technology, which would prevent guns from being fired by people other than their rightful owners, seems like the perfect middle ground to the gun control debate: Nobody has to give up their guns, and everybody is a bit safer. Despite having existed in one form or another for two decades, smart gun technology cannot be found in a single firearm at your local gun store. According to some backers of tighter gun control, this is a problem.
“… A lot could change if, for example, every gun purchased could only be fired by the person who purchased it,” said U.S. Vice President Joe Biden during a meeting with video game executives in January. “That technology exists, but it’s extremely expensive. But if that were available with every weapon sold, there’s significant evidence that it … may very well curtail what happened up in Connecticut. Because had the young man not had access to his mother’s arsenal, he may or may not have did what he did.”
Smart gun tech
When Biden says smart gun technology is expensive, he’s not kidding. One of the most commonly cited smart gun solutions is the Smart System developed by Armatix GmbH, a German company. The Armatix iP1 .22 caliber pistol will only fire when in range of a watch that contains an RFID chip, and requires the user to punch in a five-digit pin to make the firearm operable. (Try doing that in the dark, with an intruder barreling down on your family, says every gun owner ever.) That setup, while not yet available in the U.S., would cost buyers about $10,000.
Mossberg Group has developed a similar product, called the iGun, which requires users to wear an RFID-embedded ring that unlocks the iGun’s trigger once it’s in close proximity.
Another company, TriggerSmart, which is based out of Limerick, Ireland, recently patented a “childproof” gun technology, which also uses RFID chips to “personalize” the gun. TriggerSmart has also developed a system that creates “safe zones” in which no enabled guns will fire – like, for example, an elementary school.
In the days following the Sandy Hook shooting, TriggerSmart founder Robert McNamara found himself utterly frustrated by the lack of safety technology in our guns.
“I was literally pulling my hair out,” McNamara told Reuters. “I thought, we have a technology that could have helped prevent that massacre.”
If you’re anxious for us to find a solution to our gun violence woes, smart guns seem like an exciting, next-generation option.
Millions of dollars in state and federal funding later, a commercially viable smart gun is not yet available.
The smart gun opposition
The problem here is not just that the tech is too expensive or too clunky – though all the available solutions seem to have at least one of these problems. As with all things related to the 2nd Amendment, the truth is far more complicated. But it basically boils down to this: People who want guns don’t want smart guns – especially if they cost ten grand.
Herschel Smith, a blogger and gun enthusiast, summed up the general sentiment about smart guns this way: “… Here’s a note to manufacturers. You go right ahead and ‘dabble’ in smart gun technology. I will purchase such a gun when hell freezes over.”
That’s not to say some people, like those with small children in the house, might choose to buy a smart gun but not a “dumb” gun. But those people appear to be few and far between. And as a result, gunmakers aren’t pumping R&D money into making a product people ultimately won’t buy.
“The gun industry has no interest in making smart-guns,” SUNY Cortland political science professor Robert Spitzer, who has written four books about gun policy, told The New York Times. “There is no incentive for them.”
Adding to the complications is that neither pro-gun nor the anti-gun lobbying groups support smart gun technology. Pro-gun groups, like the National Shooting Sports Foundation, say the technology is unreliable, and dismisses the possibility that smart guns will curb gun violence. And the Violence Policy Center (VPC), which is generally in favor of gun control, actually agrees with this assessment.
“Many of the issues addressed by a smart gun can be addressed by a trigger lock,” Josh Sugarman, founder of the VPC, told U.S. News. “I think we have to be honest about what percent of gun violence this might affect – most homicides are committed with a person’s own gun.”
So, in short, the only way for smart guns to gain ground in America is for Congress to completely ignore both sides of the gun control debate, and impose laws, like that of New Jersey, requiring gun manufacturers to install smart technology in all of their weapons. I’m going to go out on a limb here and predict that that will never, ever happen.
And even if it did – which it won’t – that still leaves all the guns already out in the wild that would remain smart tech-free. According to Small Firearms Survey (PDF), Americans currently own in the neighborhood of 270 million guns – or 89 guns for every 100 people. Those guns would still be out there, dumb and potentially dangerous in the wrong hands.
Conclusion
As the gun control debate rolls forward, expect to see a lot of talk about smart guns, and how they can solve all our problems with gun violence. If you’re anxious for us to find a solution to our gun violence woes, smart guns seem like an exciting, next-generation option. But you shouldn’t believe any of it. The tech may be there, but the market isn’t – and nothing on the horizon will change that.
Unless you view a gun as a gadget and not a potential self defense tool, it’s absolutely unacceptable to incorporate *any* technology that could reduce the reliability of a gun.
If a soldier wouldn’t trust his life to it, I wouldn’t trust my life to it.
That said, I feel perfectly safe without a gun in my home, but others might not.
We are close to the situation in which anyone who wants a gun will be able to print one out with a 3D computer in a home. “Smart” guns have no market for the same reason that devices in automobiles that sense whether your breath has any dope in it or booze before you can start it up have no market. Too intrusive, too easy to get around. Can’t lend a gun to a friend or relative to shoot off a few rounds.
A criminal who steals or comes in possession of a gun illegally, will just rip it apart and bring it back to it’s raw elements. If someone who purchases the firearm legally, has it programmed to their biometrics, this wouldn’t prevent anything anyway.
It would prevent Stupider people from doing it. It could be easier to keep the tech complicated and make it harder for someone to do that.
Ya, how’s that working for you? It’s called security through obscurity and NEVER works.
yeah like James said. It doesn’t really work all that well. I mean, lets look at the PS3. There are thousands of PS3′s that have been hacked. The PS3 was boasted as the most secure console in history. You can’t tell me that every single person who hacked their PS3 was a hacker who knows how to exploit security keys… Technology can always be exploited by the mindless of people given time.
p.s. The grammar nazi in me is screaming!
King go watch “Swordfish” & tell me how you stop something like that… if a mental deficit can’t get their fingers on a gun than they’ll use something else… time for a National ID!!! Oh I forgot OBAMA couldn’t get one…
Which aspect of Swordfish are you talking about? the ball-bearing explosive? I agree, you remove one choice, and 10 more pop up. Until everything is banned, and people still get killed.
I’m @ a loss @ what to do… how would mental illness be determined ? / In the 60′s it was no problem @ all carrying guns in the trunk of a car to pheasant hunt @ the end of the day… the thought of turning guns on fellow students never entered our minds…What has gone wrong with society… I don’t recognize this America…it’s Bizarro America…
You can blame the hyper aware media for most of that, I would imagine. Giving most of the incidents are rammed down our throats 24/7. Most of the time with inaccurate information, all in the hopes that they might get something right. Whatever happened to reporting?
There really isn’t much we can do. As humans are far to unpredictable to be successfully “controlled”, and regulated in such a manner that we will always be safe. If guns are not used, than a bomb/fire bomb would be used. There are plenty of incidents in this country where bombs have been used. Oklahoma City, World Trade Center, Unibomber to name a few. It’s the sad reality that we live in.
True that King… Bizarro America
A person who wants your car will simply hot wire it. Using a key for the ignition wouldn’t prevent anything anyway.
A person who wants in your home will break a window. Locking your windows wouldn’t do anything anyway.
This is why it’s called preCAUTION, not prevention. ;)
So let’s bubble wrap and place everything under 5 feet of concrete.
Sounds reasonable.
And every one of these doesn’t actually solve the problem because all you have to do is have the trigger with you or hack the gun (which would be easy) and volia you can go on a shooting spree.
The only solution to gun violence by these nut jobs on government sanctioned (and forced onto them) drugs, is arming the teachers.
But let’s do it in an intelligent way. What we don’t need is guns in holsters on the playground and in the classroom.
What we do need is a safe in every classroom with a thumbprint reader, hooked up to a central computer in the principle’s office that is not hooked to the internet. That center computer should have a thumbprint scanner to enter new prints into the system, and the principle can remove them. Every safe would then be keyed to the white list. HOWEVER:
It wouldn’t matter who’s thumbprint was used if the alarm wasn’t pulled. Have a purple alarm beside the red fire alarm throughout the school. Require it to be pulled (and make sure it sprays dye on the person that pulled it) before anyone can get into the safes.
Inside the safe should be a loaded and chambered 9 mm semi-auto and 2 extra 17 round clips.
Any teacher that feels comfortable doing so, could then, in the emergency situation, remove the gun and defend the students. But only in an emergency. In no other case would the gun be accessible to anyone. And at no time would a teacher be forced to carry, nor would there be teachers wandering around the school with guns on their hips waiting for it to accidently go off.
The only one that should have the power to carry at all times is the principle. That way there is no delay as the nut job walks through the front door. But they should have to go through training and physc evals the whole deal.
This is how technology can end the mass murders in this country. Mass murders of > 3 don’t happen where people are carrying. They just don’t. There has only ever been one case of a mass murder where people were carrying in all of American history. It is only where people are disarmed that you have a problem.
Relying on people not getting around “safe guards” in guns that will be easily broken, is not a solution. The solution is to stop making teaches and students victims and give them a way that they can safely be able to defend themselves and the children in their care.
My technological solution accomplishes all of that, and would be very cost effective to implement.
Anyone want to start up a project on kickstarter with me?
The only problem with the safe idea is that it would take too long. Yes, it’s a thumb print reader and that could be quick, if it functions properly. Firearms for self defense are useless locked up. This is just strictly speaking here: Firearms are only viable when they are on a person.
An armed person walks into a classroom. The teacher doesn’t react in time to jump to the safe from across the room, because she isn’t tethered by a 2 foot cord to the safe. Shooter lights up entire classroom. Mass casualties still involved. Now if the teacher was armed, it might have been a different outcome. When dealing with these kinds of situations, time is of the essence and all factors should be taken into account. I am not expressing an opinion in the issue. Just presenting the flaw in your idea.
You’re assuming that they get to the classroom before someone notices… which has never happened and isn’t likely to happen either given doors being locked that they have to shoot through and cameras in most schools that are monitored and just having to walk down the hallway with a gun.
And the point is that even in that worst case scenario, the gunman gets to one classroom, not 10.
As a responsible firearms owner, you have to assume all situations are not in your control. We take training courses for such events.
Of course. But I don’t see a kindergarten teacher on a play ground picking up and playing with kids with a loaded 9 mm without a safety as responsible. I do see self-defense and guns as a good thing, but you have to create a system that isn’t putting people at risk to try and cure a very rare problem.
My solution balances both needs out with minimal risk. And if the principle is carrying at all times, you now have a “sheriff” in every school that is there armed instantly.
I understand. I am not arguing your point. Simply pointing out a flaw. You can see the outcry from people if another incident happens, and there were guns in safes in the classrooms… they would cry it doesn’t work, no matter how many people were saved by your method.
I would stick with RFID Or something simpler. It shouldn’t cost $10,000 to make. It would be simpler, Smoother and streamlined.
RFID can be taken off the person easily and can be lost/forgotten. Thumbprints cannot and works well and is super easy for the teacher. Press thumb to screen. Open safe. Get gun. Start pulling trigger.
RFID: fumble around looking for it in your purse, wallet, pocket. Can’t find it, 5 kids dead, keep looking, you’re dead.
Have it implanted in the Trigger finger/Hand/Arm/Brain.. Then there no problem.
Get the whole family Implants, So if the kids are alone they too Can kill intruders. Out, Left the wife kids and guns at home? No problem RFID Implants in the blood/Body parts keep your family safe.
And I’m already halfway to world domination.
Btw, You can shoot the person, Cut off their thumb, And use their gun..
… to ignore the stupidity of the first part of your comment but answer the second, if you’re cutting off their thumb you’d still have to have the alarm pulled and you’d be dead pretty quickly from the other teachers coming for you anyhow, and one more gun isn’t going to save you from that.
So instead of being ridiculous, why don’t you contribute to the actual solution presented or close your mouth and stop typing before you look even more stupid?
Honestly, I don’t think teachers would want that kind of responsibility anyway. At least not all of them. I can’t imagine a 5’4″ 120 lb woman charging into a classroom to investigate gun shots with a loaded gun in her hand. Most would stay with their class, and even then, not want to touch the gun.
Training would obviously be a huge factor involved. But with that, insurance would increase. Who would cover the insurance, training, 1 gun per room, the technology installation/upkeep. etc.? There’s a big cost to all of that.
The point is that they don’t have to if they don’t want to. It’s up to the teachers. Just like the current plans by more than half of the states to arm the teachers is optional too. The ones that did, could, and would save the lives of the rest.
The cost in bulk of putting in the safes, emergency system, computer and training those that wanted it would cost less than 2 years of the NRA’s plan to put an armed security guard in every school when you factor in wages and benefits. I’d guess it would be less than 1 year if you included the training that the security guard would have to go through.
Thus it’s a no-lose. Worst case, no teacher uses it and everyone dies, but that’s no worse than we have today which is a turkey shoot. Best case, even one teacher has the stones to pick up the gun and save lives. And with this system there is virtually NO risk to anyone in the meantime unlike every other suggestion that I’ve seen.
Fair enough. There are plenty of options out there… And it is scary times we are living in. Hearing some people’s ideas of submitting to more intrusive government is the most fearsome outcome of this entire situation. In my opinion.
1000% agree! We don’t need more government. We don’t need a jack booted thug at every school either.
What we need is to empower the victims to defend themselves because nothing else will actually accomplish the goal. That means we have to arm the teachers somehow. If there are better ideas, I’m all for it, but so far I haven’t heard anything that approached a good solution that was actually safe, and effective and cost effective.
Yes, because building in a method to stop guns from firing could never possibly be abused by tyrants.
Although a good idea, this is also a very bad idea. Somebody who has malevolent intentions will always find a way to attain their goal, be it a bomb, or arson, or a knife. What if somebody who owned this “tech gun” was in a situation, and got hurt or unable to use the gun, but there was somebody (good guy) there who could, but wasn’t able to because of the tech lock? Seems like a bad idea in a situation like that. All in all, this gun control issue is being attacked from the completely wrong direction. Guns aren’t the issue, the issue is the criminals who use them. Banning guns will not stop a bad guy from using a gun since he doesn’t follow the law anyway. If your car needed an alternator you wouldn’t change the oil and hope it fixes the problem, so lets stop wasting resources trying to ban guns when the guns aren’t the problem.
Armatix iP1: Useless if you happen to be sleeping, or injured on the watch arm.
Igun is the same way…
And the company from jersey has way to high of failure rate
who wants to pay $10k for tool that has a 1 in 100 change of not working in a life or death situation?
The problem with smart guns is the same problem as the AWB, the situations where it is useful are rare and the cost/intrusiveness is high.
If you want to fix the violence in our country fix race relations, drugs and poverty. If you want to stop mass shootings stop glorifying the shooters and making them celebrities and start parenting. Or alternately wait a while, contrary to what the gun grabbers and media would have you believe murder rates are droping and have been for the last couple decades.
SMART gun.. everytime you trigger it tweets!
ain’t going to happen!
The central problem with Smart guns is the central problem with the Assault Weapons Ban. The amount of situations where it’s useful are tiny and the cost/intrusiveness is very high.
If you want to fix the violence in our country fix drugs, poverty and race relations. If you want to stop mass shooting stop turning the shooters into celebrities and start parenting.
Also keep in mind, contrary to what the media and the gun grabbers want you to believe violence has been dropping pretty consistently for the last 20 years as is.
I know it may be close to impossible to get rid of all the “dumb guns” as the article puts it, but here’s an idea that came to mind. Thinking of the Tasker app on my phone, what if guns had just a GPS chip built in that had a predetermined set of locations (schools, malls, airports, etc)that when in range of these places would not function UNLESS you had a special something, like a watch or a BADGE that only law enforcement personnel would have that had a transmitter that sent a signal allowing the gun to work. I wont go into details of how the entire plan would work but I imagine you all can figure it out on your own. I don’t need to spell it out for you.
Impossible to enforce. Easily breakable. Too intrusive to privacy.
WOW, the gun is CUTIE……..!
it’s okay, if not caught, his name terrorists ……. heheheheheh ^ _ ^
It’s dumb. I love how there’s so much talk of gun violence when thats not even the number on murder weapons used in the country.
The best part about the figures that are thrown out is: They don’t differentiate between gun deaths by police, or suicides. You take those out, and the number of gun violence drops dramatically. You take legal use of a weapon out of the picture, and the number barely moves due to the low death rate.
It’s all about how they frame it. Bias to their cause.
This is crucial to dont be killed with your own gun
Death from getting hit by lightning is statistically a bigger concern than people being killed by their own gun.
A family member has this on his gun that is kept at home where there are kids. The gun is locked up but has this tech. on it.
Metal Gear, more and more everyday. :)
Really nice post Andrew. Technology has a history of being the solution for many things. We’ll have to wait and see what technology will do for guns.
Enough with all the political correctness… past time to take the mental deficits out of the picture … time for a National ID …
National ID? No thanks. I already have an ID and a passport. That’s all the statists need from me.
Stop with all the political correctness already…past time to take the mental deficits out of the picture…”Oh but there’s nothing wrong with my child…” BULLSH*T!!!