Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
American
Joined
·
3,289 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The Obama administration on Wednesday announced a series of specifications for smart-gun manufacturers, born out of the president's January executive action aimed at curbing gun violence.

But there's a catch to the new set of guidelines: They're voluntary. "This project was designed to spur the growth of enhanced gun safety technology - and not to mandate that any particular individual or law enforcement agency adopt the technology once developed," the Department of Justice wrote in a blog post.

The National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action wrote an essay Friday that questioned what, if anything, the Obama administration's smart-gun effort accomplished. "But it appears the president hopes to portray the publication of the document as a 'win' during his waning days in office," the piece stated.
 

·
NRA Instructor
Joined
·
3,391 Posts
The Obama administration on Wednesday announced a series of specifications for smart-gun manufacturers, born out of the president’s January executive action aimed at curbing gun violence.

But there’s a catch to the new set of guidelines: They’re voluntary. “This project was designed to spur the growth of enhanced gun safety technology â€" and not to mandate that any particular individual or law enforcement agency adopt the technology once developed,†the Department of Justice wrote in a blog post.

The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action wrote an essay Friday that questioned what, if anything, the Obama administration’s smart-gun effort accomplished. “But it appears the president hopes to portray the publication of the document as a ‘win’ during his waning days in office,†the piece stated.
Lame duck. Lame plan.

I think that is another part of the Obama legacy that will vanish soon.
 

·
Seasteading Aficionado
Joined
·
44,900 Posts
At least voluntary beats goverment force every time
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,460 Posts
This is great.

Basically, a glock that performs like a glock, except smart. No one will meet that criteria for years and years.
 

·
American
Joined
·
3,289 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
If you read the blog post from the DOJ they start off by saying that the initiative is a joint venture with the DOJ, DHS, and DoD. However, later they say "The baseline specifications were drafted by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) - DOJ's research, development and evaluation agency - in partnership with a team of firearms experts at DOJ and DHS. " Seems DoD dropped out - or did not endorse the final specs.

Baseline specifications are available in PDF format here: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/250377.pdf
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,956 Posts
Basically, a glock that performs like a glock, except smart.
Except when it isn't smart any longer. Which makes no sense to begin with.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20161118/federal-smart-gun-standards-set-a-high-bar

At the end of the day, though, two required specifications seemingly would render the whole exercise moot. The first requires the system to “default to a state to allow the pistol to fire†in the event the “security device†malfunctions. The second requires the operator to be able to “quickly reset or disengage†the security device if a malfunction occurs.

And that, of course, says it all when it comes to the supposed “wisdom†of “smart guns.†Any firearm that won’t fire when it’s needed just isn’t “smart.†And any “security†system that defaults to turning itself off during a problem just isn’t secure.
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,519 Posts
Wow. So if a 10 year old kid got hold of Daddy's "smart" .45 pistol, the kid could easily deactivate the kill switch and make the gun fire.
He would just have to know what button to push or whatever.
Which I'm sure he could find out with Google and YouTube, or a visit to the gun maker's site.
 

·
Proud GCO member.
Joined
·
7,960 Posts
This is no different than his previous executive order, which meant nothing. He committed them to look into the feasibility and nothing more. And every single one said, "Ok, done. Next."
 

·
American
Joined
·
3,289 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Wow. So if a 10 year old kid got hold of Daddy's "smart" .45 pistol, the kid could easily deactivate the kill switch and make the gun fire.
He would just have to know what button to push or whatever.
Which I'm sure he could find out with Google and YouTube, or a visit to the gun maker's site.
Well.....the specs say only 9 & 40 need apply. No 45 smart guns. Another reason to consider 45s IMHO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,360 Posts
the government should definitely use these weapons. :rotfl:
 

·
Seasteading Aficionado
Joined
·
44,900 Posts
the government should definitely use these weapons. :rotfl:
Maybe We should make a law that forces all goverment agents and contractors to use these guns :-k

:rotfl2::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,460 Posts
Except when it isn't smart any longer. Which makes no sense to begin with.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20161118/federal-smart-gun-standards-set-a-high-bar
Exactly. You have people clamoring for "smart guns" but the government itself puts out a document which says basically a smart gun should be as reliable as a dumb gun and should default to being a regular old dumb gun is what we would want.

That is renders the entire "smart gun" argument as invalid, or at the very least stupid. Oh I could pay $600 for a regular glock, or $1200 for a government recommended smart glock which operates nearly identically. No one will build such a thing. Any state proposing such a smart gun mandate should be pointed to this government recommendation and use it as a baseline, which will never be met.
 

·
Weapons Law Booklet
Joined
·
1,056 Posts
From what I've been reading about "smart gun" technology that is supposed to recognize the fingerprint (or other prints across the user's skin, maybe on the palm or whatever), its full of flaws and failures. If your hand is wet with oil, sweat or blood, the gun won't read your prints. Think of how likely it is that you'll be punched, stabbed, or otherwise injured in by your assailant before you have a chance to draw your gun. If you grab your pistol a few seconds after your attacker hit you across the face with a crowbar and broke your nose, and you reached up there to your face first and got your dominant hand covered in blood-- your gun is now disabled and will stay that way until you clean and dry your hands!

For what it's worth, my iPhone 5S has the fingerprint-touch ID unlock feature, and it doesn't work with gloves (even thin driving gloves), it doesn't work if the phone is wet (even slightly damp like mist or condensation), it doesn't work if my hands are wet, and even when "I think" conditions are ideal, it won't recognize my thumb print on the first try about 10% of the time anyway!
 

·
Weapons Law Booklet
Joined
·
1,056 Posts
Before we have smart guns imposed on us ("us" being this minority of Americans who own firearms. "Us" being a widely-condemned and hated minority in the eyes of the leftist elites who push for total civilian disarmament)...
...let's try SMART IGNITIONS on cars!
Stick your finger into a scanner on your vehicle's dashboard.
The scanner confirms your identity and checks you against a database maintained by the government (and insurance companies) to make sure that (1) you're still a licensed driver whose license is not expired or suspended or revoked, and (2) that you are an approved driver of the vehicle in question (the insurance companies would want this).
Heck, maybe the scanner could also check your blood pressure, pulse, and sniff your skin for alcohol or drugs!
Then, only if everything checks out, will the car start.

If "smart guns" are on the horizon, "smart ignitions" on vehicles ought to be too, and let's make that first.

After all, motor vehicle crashes kill about 10X as many people as guns do, if you don't count gun suicides. Just comparing fatal crashes to gun murders or fatal gun accidents.

I don't like the idea of EITHER system, but IF the government wants to try something, let it try cars first. That way, we ALL have some skin in the game, and the government isn't tempted to use this scheme to oppress what it sees as a minority group that can be abused without great political repercussions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phil1979
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top