Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US Department of Justice awards NJIT $254,889 to continue developing gun technology
New Jersey Institute of Technology via ^ | 11-Sep-2008 | NA

Posted on 09/16/2008 2:21:39 PM PDT by neverdem

Contact: Sheryl Weinstein sheryl.m.weinstein@njit.edu 973-596-3436 New Jersey Institute of Technology

The Department of Justice has awarded NJIT $254,889 to continue developing childproof child-safe gun technology. US Senators Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and US Rep. Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ-08) earmarked the grant in last year's annual Congressional appropriation bill.

"The money will help NJIT improve its patented dynamic grip recognition technology and move child-safe handgun technology closer to commercial consideration," said NJIT Senior Vice President of Research and Development Donald H. Sebastian. Our researchers look forward to using this new grant to solve the challenge of adding firing control to produce a complete prototype weapon that fully validates the biometric authorization concept."

The gun currently tests with an accuracy of 95 percent with 32 electronic sensors embedded in the hand grip. Researchers have been evaluating the system using law enforcement professionals as test subjects to demonstrate that the technology works with a wide range of users, firing postures, under stressful conditions and even while wearing gloves.

The next step is to use the authentication signal from the biometrics to enable or disable the firing mechanism. While this was not part of the original NJIT research plan, it is deemed to be a necessary step to secure private sector investment and commercialization of the technology.

Since 2000, NJIT has spearheaded efforts to develop a personalized handgun that can recognize, instantly and reliably, one or more pre-programmed authorized users.

In December of 2002, New Jersey became the first state to pass legislation specifying that three years after it is determined that personalized handguns are available for retail sale, dealers and manufacturers will not be able to sell, assign or transfer any handgun legally unless it is personalized.

"Too often, this program is perceived as a gun control issue, and it is not. This is about improved gun safety, and when the technology is perfected it will provide important benefits to every class of owner. It is clearly designed to safeguard unattended weapons in the home from unauthorized use by minors – with tragic consequences – but will also reduce the utility of stolen weapons, and offer safety benefits to sportsmen, law enforcement professionals and the military," Sebastian said.

###

NJIT, New Jersey's science and technology university, at the edge in knowledge, enrolls more than 8,000 students in bachelor's, master's and doctoral degrees in 92 degree programs offered by six colleges: Newark College of Engineering, New Jersey School of Architecture, College of Science and Liberal Arts, School of Management, Albert Dorman Honors College and College of Computing Sciences. NJIT is renowned for expertise in architecture, applied mathematics, wireless communications and networking, solar physics, advanced engineered particulate materials, nanotechnology, neural engineering and e-learning. In 2009, Princeton Review named NJIT among the nation's top 25 campuses for technology and among the top 150 for best value. U.S. News & World Report's 2008 Annual Guide to America's Best Colleges ranked NJIT in the top tier of national research universities.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Technical; US: New Jersey
KEYWORDS: 2008; banglist; democrats; doj; elections; guncontrol; lautenberg; menendez; njit; pascrell
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 09/16/2008 2:21:40 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem
obambi vows to cut funding for such research and development of new weapons
2 posted on 09/16/2008 2:25:26 PM PDT by maine-iac7 (No trees were killed in sending this message but a lot of electrons were terribly agitated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
This is about improved gun safety, and when the technology is perfected it will provide important benefits to every class of owner.

Yep! When perfected it means my wife can't protect me with MY gun!

3 posted on 09/16/2008 2:27:42 PM PDT by TexasRedeye (Eschew obfuscation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus; jocon307; Alberta's Child; Pharmboy; Calpernia; Malsua; dead; nj26; OldFriend; Clemenza; ...
BANG! Our taxes at work.
4 posted on 09/16/2008 2:29:11 PM PDT by neverdem (I'm praying for a Divine Intervention.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

More RAT Pork to shore up their voting base.


5 posted on 09/16/2008 2:32:45 PM PDT by Redleg Duke ("Sarah Palin...Unleashing the Fury of the Castrated Left!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

stooopid bastids (sp)


6 posted on 09/16/2008 2:33:16 PM PDT by Vaquero (" an armed society is a polite society" Heinlein "MOLON LABE!" Leonidas of Sparta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The problem with this is it's reliability. It will be too low for critical use and it will be mandatory for all except politicians, police, government bureaucrats, and connected insiders.

I could have shortened the list by just saying "criminals".

7 posted on 09/16/2008 2:42:13 PM PDT by Navy Patriot (The beauty of conservatism, Sarah Palin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Stick your technology up your ass, Mr. Sebastian. Under no circumstances will I ever allow your ‘technology’ on any of my guns.

Why is the DOJ is fronting the money for this?


8 posted on 09/16/2008 2:43:15 PM PDT by EdReform (The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed *NRA*JPFO*SAF*GOA*SAS*CCRKBA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

“We need safer bullets.”

~ Dr. Joycelyn Elders


9 posted on 09/16/2008 2:44:35 PM PDT by Islander7 ("Common sense and common decency are uncommon virtues among America's left.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The gun currently tests with an accuracy of 95 percent with 32 electronic sensors embedded in the hand grip

HELL NO. Buy a gun with this crap on it and you are one EMP bomb away from being disarmed.

10 posted on 09/16/2008 2:46:31 PM PDT by Centurion2000 (McCain/Palin 2008 : Palin the Paladin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
US Department of Justice awards NJIT $254,889 to continue developing anti-gun technology

Fixed it. A 95% success rate is abysmal. Anyone whose gun failed 5% of the time would be getting it repaired immediately. And I assume there's nothing like "tap-rack-bang" if this system fails - I'd guess your backup is throwing the gun at your attacker and asking him real nice not to rob/beat/murder you.

Even if a 100% success rate were achieved, which it won't be, the concept is still worse than useless. It has to be programmed to the gun's owner. Presumably not just anyone can program it, or it wouldn't stop criminals from stealing and reprogramming them. No doubt only FFLs would be permitted to program the guns, which means every private sale would have to go through an FFL and onto a 4473 - de facto registration of every gun. Plus, criminal gangs will have illegal reprogramming devices before half the FFLs have had time to buy one legally. The only "common sense" part of this gun control ploy is the total lack of it.

11 posted on 09/16/2008 2:57:36 PM PDT by Turbopilot (iumop ap!sdn w,I 'aw dlaH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I am ashamed to say that I graduated from NJIT, class of 1979.


12 posted on 09/16/2008 3:25:09 PM PDT by Fred Hayek (Leftism is a mental disorder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navy Patriot
The problem with this is it's reliability.

No, the problem with this is that no one can find any authorization in the enumerated powers of the Congress to give a quarter million taxpayer dollars to this company. And no, I don't buy the whole "regulating commerce among the several states" thing that politicians from both parties use when they can't find any real authorization for money they want to spend or laws they want to write.

Technical issues like reliability only come along AFTER the threshold question.
13 posted on 09/16/2008 5:10:55 PM PDT by publiusF27
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

“The gun currently tests with an accuracy of 95 percent with 32 electronic sensors embedded in the hand grip.”

Hey that sounds like it could be reliable. (S)

A handgun should cost about $10,000 with this crap on it.


14 posted on 09/16/2008 5:34:43 PM PDT by headstamp 2 (Been here before)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
> this program is perceived as a gun control issue, and it is not.

...which is why police forces in N.J. were explicitly exempted from the smart-gun law.

/sarc

15 posted on 09/16/2008 5:40:46 PM PDT by NewJerseyJoe (Rat mantra: "Facts are meaningless! You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: publiusF27
AFTER the threshold question

Yep, I got off subject, and was looking at the technology.

The appropriation was unconstitutional, as you say, and most "gun control" laws and regs are also unconstitutional, period.

16 posted on 09/16/2008 5:50:07 PM PDT by Navy Patriot (The beauty of conservatism, Sarah Palin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

“The gun currently tests with an accuracy of 95 percent with 32 electronic sensors embedded in the hand grip.”

My guns test with 100% accuracy if I keep them clean. This is the dumbest idea ever dreamed up.


17 posted on 09/16/2008 8:01:15 PM PDT by yazoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Is there any situation for which a “smart gun” would be useful, for which a “smart holster” would not be better? A smart holster might be of some use to cops who might lose their carry piece in a massed attack (if three people were to approach a cop discretely and then pounce, they’d have a reasonable shot of disarming him); a smart holster might make their job somewhat more difficult.


18 posted on 09/16/2008 8:04:44 PM PDT by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: supercat

Would cops want a smart holster that only malfunctioned 5% of the time?


19 posted on 09/17/2008 9:05:48 PM PDT by neverdem (I'm praying for a Divine Intervention.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Would cops want a smart holster that only malfunctioned 5% of the time?

A smart holster wouldn't be subject to the mechanical stresses of a firearm, and could use a variety of means to improve reliability, depending upon the wearer's "nuisance tolerance". For example, if the person didn't mind wearing special boots, the holster release could be enabled by, among other options, flexing of the toes. A maneuver that an attacker would have a hard time either forcing or preventing.

More significantly, by the time a gun fails to fire, it will likely be too late to adapt any backup plan. If the holster fails, there will more likely be time to draw a backup weapon.

20 posted on 09/17/2008 9:31:47 PM PDT by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson