Smart Gun - Good or Bad?

What Do You Think About Smart Guns?

  • I wouldn't buy one.

    Votes: 94 82.5%
  • Neat but I'm not for laws restriction use to them only

    Votes: 20 17.5%
  • Great idea and they should be the only guns sold.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters


Staff member
I wouldn't buy one and don't like the idea of any law having to use them. I just got an email from my mother asking me about them so I sent her some info I found on them. I just wanted to start a discussion about them to see what you think.

The smart gun has been criticized by both the gun-rights and gun-control groups. One argument is concerning the use of technology with little testing in the field in a machine where a delay or malfunction of chips could cost lives rather than save them. This issue is such a concern that the New Jersey law on smart guns exempts police departments from having to buy them. Which defeats the purpose of law enforcement officers using them in the first place. Smart guns show a lack of reliability, they do not always identify and allow the authorized user, the best examples show a successful performance only 80% of the time.

Moreover the National Rifle Association (NRA) and dozens of other gun-rights groups oppose any law - like the one intended to be passed eventually by New Jersey state - that mandates the sale of only such smart firearms instead of leaving the choice to the buyer. Firearms experts note that the biometrics factors are subject to change due to owner fatigue, aging, illness, injury and failure to place the fingers in the same exact place each time the pistol is held.

Some gun control groups, such as the Violence Policy Center, are concerned that it might increase gun sales, given the newfound sense of security. But given the increased cost of a "smart gun" a sudden surge in gun ownership is unlikely. Other gun control groups and individuals are more interested in "no guns" than "smart guns".
Nonetheless, the smart gun may become more common with advances in technology increasing its reliability.

If you look at the way the laws trying to require them, you see in a hurry what a bad idea they are. They always exempt law enforcement. If they are not reliable enough for law enforcement/military, they are not reliable enough for private citizens.

Of course they don't exist, and they are nothing more than a tool for the anti-gun, anti-freedom bunch to price guns out of the reach of the regular citizen.
If I ever get incapacitated my hope is someone near me would pick up my firearm and dispense of the BG. Couldn't happen with one of those.
"The right to buy weapons is the right to be free."--A.E. van Vogt

When 'smart guns' get as good as the ones in "The Weapon Shops of Isher" I'll be willing to discuss the subject.

Given current technology it's a simple "No."
Very bad idead! 80% of the time they work? C'mon.... not even worth the time or the money. I love how anti groups are afraid this will surge firearm sales. Hilarious what they are afraid of!:biggrin:
sounds interesting. I wouldn't want one even if they improve the technical flaws. Not a fan of any laws making it a required feature. I don't think this has a chance of becoming a reality nation wide.
Smart gun?

The antis blame inanimate objects (guns) for killing people. Now they suddenly want to have "smart" inanimate objects to kill people?
I retired as a senior electronics technician and taught electronics repair at the local university. Is it any wonder there were so many of us making GOOD money in the repair of electronic products?BECAUSE THE STUFF BREAKS DOWN WHEN YOU WANT OR NEED TO USE IT THE MOST!!!
I just love the inconsistent consistency of the anti gun nuts. To have any laws banning or forcing the people to own, or not to own, so called 'smart guns' is wrong. If the technology some day gets to were it works darn near 100% of the time, it should be up to the gun owner "to buy or not to buy." ER..sorry there Willy S..
This is a terrible idea.

  • It gives a false sense of security to people who may not realize the "smart" systems can be disabled.
  • It gives a false sense of security to (poorly trained) children who may decide to play with "smart" firearms.
  • More complexity increases the chance of a malfunction or failure.
  • Biometric systems can often be fooled without physically or electronically disabling the device.
  • It ignores the fact that people should pay attention to securing their firearms, and not buying a quick fix.
  • Smart systems will inevitably require some sort of government regulation or certification, which will cost taxpayer money.
  • It's an additional expensive feature - and to hit the price point, firearms manufacturers may sacrifice quality or other features that might actually make guns more safe.
  • It's another level of unnecessary complication that makes things more difficult than they need to be.
Let's just hope that this ridiculous idea doesn't gain traction nationwide. If someone wants a "Smart Gun," then fine, that's their choice. Don't force it upon those who don't want it, however.
And if you have one gun in the house, and it's programmed for you, the wife can't grab it and shoot a BG. So instead of one gun in the house, you need one for everyone who might need to defend it.

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Latest member