Can a blockchain-IoT hybrid finally give us smart guns?
Cate Lawrence

The answer as to why these technologies aren’t being developed is known to all firearms owners and manufacturers, and it is laughable that people who don’t think about the realities and details of using a gun for self defense or even aggression can’t figure it out. Considering these proposals is like watching a comedy cartoon for children. Lemme ‘splain Lucy.

In a self defense situation, presumably the user’s life is at stake. Guns are mechanical devices, and if the operation is well understood and practiced by the user they are highly reliable.

Semi-automatics are more prone to mechanical failure than revolvers and bolt action rifles and that in itself is something owners must resolve during practice / training sessions. The worst thing that can happen in a deadly encounter situation is for the device to fail! If that happens the other side has an advantage. (Many people have been killed because of this, and notably American servicemen in Vietnam were the first dead guinea pigs for the M-16 when it was introduced as a replacement for the bigger, more powerul M-14. Many others who would have been on the receiving end have been saved when an assailant had a gun that jammed or failed to fire.) Owners of semi-automatic handguns must run many rounds of many different types of ammunition through their weapon before they can be statistically confident that it will work properly in a life and death situation. This is one reason revolvers are still popular despite a lower round capacity. They almost always go BANG if they are in good working order because they are simpler in design; less to go wrong. Many pistol designs don’t even have safety locking mechanisms because the disengagement of one slows the user down in responding to an immediate and sudden threat. NO law enforcement organization in the world issues handguns with safety mechanisms. The TRIGGER IS the safety mechanism, and triggers on these types of guns typically require a much harder pull for them to fire so that accidental discharges are less likely.…If you don’t want it to go off, DON’T pull the trigger!

Now, complicating the operation of the weapon by adding more technology, especially “invisible” technology like BT, fingerprint recognition, or whatever, only exacerbates the problem of a possible failure to fire. Additionally, something like fingerprint recognition would require fairly precise positioning of the hand and finger to work. In a fight for ones life, the operator may have to fire the gun in an unpredictable manner. If their trigger finger is damaged or missing for example, they must use another finger, maybe from the other hand. If the trigger finger is covered in dirt, mud, grease, or blood, this would disable the gun! BT or wireless, network dependent? Rolling on the floor laughing my ass off! Did you ever have to wait for a BT device to pair? Oops your dead. It is fraught with complications.

Bottom line is that when we pick up a gun and pull the trigger, we want it to go BANG! NOBODY in the firearms owning population wants to complicate the operation of a gun!

S&W seems to have made a fool of the government by accepting the research money, because they already knew the answer.

There are probably 20 billion guns in the world, and the probability of being killed by one is mainly dependent on the orderliness of the society in which one lives, and for anyone not in a war torn region, it is very low. However the orderliness of a society is highly dependent on them.

The massive unknown statistic is the number of lives that are NOT disrupted or ended every day because of the fact that potential aggressors know that other people with guns (including law enforcement, military, and civilians) may respond to them.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.