Thanks to technological innovations, firearms have come a long way since black powder muskets. In most cases, gun control proponents argue that these technological advances have made firearms more dangerous, using the current effectiveness of firearms such as semi-automatic rifles as evidence that firearms have become too powerful for the public to own.
However, there is one technological advance regarding firearms that most gun control proponents support whole-heartedly—smart gun technology. In this article, we’ll take a look at what smart gun technology is, its pros and cons, and whether or not it really is the answer to stopping gun violence.
What is Smart Gun Technology?
Smart gun technology is designed to prevent a firearm from being used by anyone but the firearm’s owner. There are a variety of different ways that this is accomplished, but one of the most popular methods is to install fingerprint sensors within the firearm’s grip. If anyone besides the person whose fingerprints the firearm is programmed to recognize tries to use the firearm it will not discharge.
In this way, smart gun technology is designed to prevent firearms from being accidentally discharged by children as well as prevent them from being used by a criminal who steals the firearm.
The Pros and Cons of Smart Gun Technology
Supporters of smart gun technology argue that requiring all firearms to be equipped with the technology would reduce gun deaths. While smart gun technology certainly has the potential to reduce some accidental and intentional gun deaths, this is not an entirely accurate assessment.
For one, even if all firearms were equipped with fingerprint sensors, nothing is stopping a would-be shooter from buying a firearm and programming it to their fingerprints just like anyone else. If there’s one thing that recent shootings have taught us it’s that most shooters would have been able to legally purchase a firearm if they wanted to, regardless of whether or not the firearm they used was in-fact their own. As for stopping accidental discharges of a firearm by small children, proper firearm storage is a much simpler solution.
There are also a few significant drawbacks of smart gun technology that need to be considered. For one, the technology is still not 100% reliable, meaning that a firearm equipped with smart gun technology could very well fail to discharge at a time when your life depends on it. Better technology may eventually be the answer to this dilemma, but, for now, one should hesitate to stake their life on the technology performing as it’s designed.
Another huge drawback is that a firearm equipped with fingerprint sensors can only be used by one person. If you want to let your buddy try out your gun at the range, teach your children how to shoot, or rely on a single firearm that can be used by anyone in your household during an emergency situation, smart gun technology becomes a significant obstacle. You also won’t be able to fire your gun if you are wearing gloves, or if your fingers are too sweaty, wet, or covered in blood.
The final drawback of smart gun technology is its expense. Building fingerprint-reading technology into a gun’s grip isn’t cheap, and it’ll raise the price tag of a firearm by a significant amount. If smart gun technology became a requirement, this could present a serious barrier to entry for people who may already struggle to afford a firearm as-is.
Conclusion
At American Gun News, we aren’t inherently opposed to smart gun technology. The technology does offer some promise for making firearms safer, and if a person wants to purchase a firearm equipped with smart gun technology then they should have every right to do so. What we are opposed to, though, is making smart gun technology a requirement for all new firearms. The drawbacks of the technology are simply too considerable to force it upon all gun owners.
This technology may very well be part of the answer for curbing gun deaths, and it’s certainly a more reasonable solution than making firearms illegal as most gun control proponents call for.
However, smart gun technology is not the magical answer to gun violence that some claim it to be. So long as the technology remains an option rather than becoming a requirement, it could be beneficial, but supporters of the Second Amendment should stand very strongly against making this flawed technology a requirement for firearm ownership.
~ American Gun News
The biggest drawback to “smart gun technology” is the technology in and of itself. “If it can be programmed, it can be hacked,” and I don’t see this as ever being corrected. Add in the fact that the government would then have records of your smart gun, and then they could disable it remotely, preventing it from being used. In which case, we’d then have an effective gun ban as these weapons become nothing more than paperweights. The whole smart gun push and narrative is nothing more than a blatant attempt to seize and remove a gun owners rights electronically. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves.
not only that but a record of your biometric data, no risk there.
Sounds great… except to firearm owners. I question who would purchase the product.
Making this technology a mandatory requirement for buying a firearm is just wrong. Here in California for example that has already happened with micro-stamping. No new guns can be added to the Cal-Guns roster because micro-stamping is required. Micro-stamping is supposed to allow a spent cartridge to be traced back to the gun that fired it. Even though the technology is pretty much non-existent, the AG successfully pushed for it to become law. As older technology guns came off the Cal-Guns roster no new guns have been added because they do not meet the micro-stamping requirement. As a result the availability to purchase guns with newer and better technology is no longer available. So we have gun control by legal maneuvering. If you think was by accident or an oversight, please think again.
Considering the problems people have with SAFES that use this same technology it makes zero sense to make it MANDATORY in all guns. Also what happens if the battery dies do you think there would be time to change it in an emergency.
Add in all the SECRET things they snuck into other technology from TRACKING chips to remotely disabling the item it makes no sense for a FREE nation to give that kind of power to those who have proven time and again they will abuse whatever power they have been given.
Remember it was outed long ago onstar can be used to monitor how fast you are driving, remotely start the car, remotely disable the car, and remotely lock someone in the car on the newer models. This was a feature added in the name of stopping car thefts and recovering the vehicle yet can be easily abused and according to some lawsuits has been. For example the person who rented a car got no tickets but the company refused to refund a certain type of fee that was supposed to be refunded if they did no damage to the vehicle the companies excuse THEY MONITORED THE TRIP via this system and arbitrarily decided they had violated the speed limit never mind the exemptions such as the brief time needed PASSING a car or the fact the company had no way of seeing the current speed limit signs on the road.
Frankly since MICRO STAMPING came from a FICTIONAL movie were it was DEPICTED as resulting in the wrongful conviction of the man framed by another who used a completely different weapon simply because they relied on the TAG the gun applied to the bullet and a grainy video that would not stand up as proof in any court today.
The fact that people RELOAD and REUSE shell casings added to the fact that CRIMINALS can make their own guns from scrap metal negating the very excuse they used to impose micro-stamping in California should have been enough proof that it had nothing to do with protecting people or preventing crime.
I recall when they passed that one it stated right in the “law” that it was only to be enforced AFTER the technology became functional. Yet despite the fact it has never gotten out of PROTOTYPE stage development they began doing so.
A criminal can
1) simply replace, rebuild it without the stamp, or modify the part that STAMPS the shell
2) Use a brass catcher to keep their shell casing and DROP the casing they collected from whoever they want to frame
Once law enforcement begins relying SOLELY on the micro-stamp to identify the gun (because it will be cheaper than running ballistic tests) it will make it far easier for criminals to get away with crimes even blame innocent people.
Since this new smart gun tech is based on the same FINGERPRINT tech certain phones use lets ask the people with those phones how often it FAILS and takes another try to unlock the phone then apply that delay to the mere SECONDS you have if a criminal is shooting at you with their home made full auto gun.
I had a dell XPS M1330 computer with a finger print security device on it. It would easily mistake a life-size PHOTO of the fingerprint as the real thing and would constantly not recognize the print if even a spec of dust, water etc was on ones finger or the scanner. Not to mention the fact that simply removing the device and booting with other software to make certain changes eliminated its security lockout functionality.(it simply plugged into a custom usb connection internally like the camera) Something that had to be done to keep using it after I injured my thumb leaving a scar across the fingerprint thus it no longer matched the stored pattern.
Smart guns are the most Asinine idea and piece of crap to ever come down the turnpike. I have enough trouble with the finger tip recognition on my iPhone and then what if you battery expires; What of you are wounded and your spouse tries to use the firearm to fend off a crook or killer?
Then suppose you want to sell it to a friend or relative, How do you change the settings, Can you turn off the idiocy?
Tell them to stick their “SMART GUN” asininty up the same lower orifice where their liberal anti-gun heads are located.
Re firearms, assuming that I carry one for personal protection, it must function properly as a firearm, immediately, without hesitation or lag, when and if needed. While carrying a gun for personal protection involved trust in a relatively simply mechanical device, introducing this so called Smart Gun technology requires intimate trust in an electronic gizmo, which I’m less than willing to undertake.
does it work if you are wearing gloves; cold weather; if it’s wet; if I go down can my wife/son/daughter use the weapon? if the answer is anything but yes then my answer is “no”