Posted on 09/06/2020 6:16:12 AM PDT by rellimpank
Smith & Wesson still feels the wound it suffered two decades ago when it decided to invent smart guns.
The idea was to invest heavily in the development of personalized weapons that could be fired only by a single person: the gun’s owner. This was considered a nearly science-fictional proposition in the late 1990s, years before the world was filled with smartphones and finger sensors. But consumer backlash against the project drove the gunmaker to the verge of ruin, and Smith & Wesson recently told shareholders that the corporate bleeding touched off by this long-ago episode has never fully stopped. “Sales still suffer from this misstep,” the company said in a February 2019 filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
(Excerpt) Read more at getpocket.com ...
Actually, a camera mounted on a gun able to store video would be handy when violent idiots like in AntiFa are possibly going to attack you requiring self defense.
“Smart Gun” was a political term created by the same tyrants that brought us the “Assault Weapon” ban. Smart guns are for stupid politicians. I’m happy with my dumb guns. They work every time. No reboot required.
“ an article so stupid it barely relates to the title—”
That’s what I noticed. Title is that smart guns don’t exist for stupid reasons, then the article goes on to mention several solid reasons why they don’t exist.
Saltpeter can be made from what we flush down our toilets.
Let me guess...the “Weinberg” co-author of the article is related to the New Jersey pol who tried to legislate “smart guns”.
I’d NEVER own something that wouldn’t work for others (for instance my wife) if I became incapacitated. KISS is a real engineering principle.
When all the cops and all the security personnel for the politicians have vetted, adopted and established track records for dependability and serviceability for “smart guns,” the idea may then merit discussion.
Add to that simple fact that any technology or features added to a firearm that may inhibit it's use are going to be hotly debated and studiously avoided by a large segment of the firearms buying public. There are still many people who claim for absolute reliability in a self defense situation you can't beat, and shouldn't trust your life to, anything but a revolver. They don't trust the complexity and potential for issues associated with semiautomatic handguns. So adding more complexity and a system specifically designed to prevent the weapon from firing...not going to be popular. A manufacturer might as well just go throw that R&D money in the river.
And a year and a half later, S&W is ramping up production.
I don’t know. We see the backlash now. Everybody ass-u-mes the worst. Honestly IF the technology works it’s a good idea. Truthfully it ends most of the arguments gun grabbers. If my gun can’t be used by anybody but me or the wife it’s no good to steal, can’t be turned against me. And hey there’s the end of reaching for the cops gun.
Saw yesterday their sales are up over 100%. Yep, Smith and Wesson is still suffering alright.
IIRC in the last bond movie he was issued a smart gun. Hope no one else around him would have a need to “pull a trigger”.
Don’t be naive. The gun grabbers want everyone completely disarmed. “Smart” guns are just part of the incremental process.
Yep. When faced with life-threatening danger, just whip out your gun, put your finger on a recognition pad, realize it isn’t taking because you are sweating, wipe your finger off and try again, apologize to the guy who has finished climbing thru your window at 10 PM and ask him to go on hold, reposition, wipe your finger and gun and try again....
The company has come under increased scrutiny due to the use of its firearms in mass shootings such as the 2018 Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, in which 19-year-old Nikolas Jacob Cruz used a Smith & Wesson AR-15 style rifle, the semi-automatic M&P15. The same weapon was used in the 2015 San Bernardino attack and the 2012 Aurora, Colorado shooting.[31][32][33][34]. -Wikipedia
Smart guns will be shunned by 90% of the gun buying public. They are rightly seen as a threat to our right to own conventional guns.
There is already a law in New Jersey that will ban the sale of all conventional guns if a smart gun ever makes it successfully to market.
I am in the boat that ALL limitations on firearms FIRST apply to government and survive a year in actual service before they are tested on civilians. Limit the capacity of firearms to 5 shots? Sure, convert all police firearms first for a year. Sexy black guns banned? Take it from the police first for a year.
I don’t have a problem with some sort of one person use gun as an free market option, but it shouldn’t ever be mandated or required by the state for private citizens. And that’s exactly what they want and probably eventually will get. In my opinion it would probably be better not to open that door up at all.
Freegards
If they mandate that I convert my guns to “smart guns”, I’ll do that (for some of them). Then I’ll bypass the “smart” features so they become reliable guns again. The smart side of my guns is the person holding them, as it should be.
Especially if Google and Apple get into the mix.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.