Jonathan Mossberg is among a small number of pioneers looking to build a safer gun. But unlike many others, he was in the gun business when he started down that path.If the Mossberg Company has a lick of sense, they'll pay Johnnie-boy a lot of money to change his last name to "Glock".
His family is renowned for its premier line of shotguns treasured by law enforcement, hunters and the military. Mossberg already has spent more than a decade working to develop - and someday bring to the market - a firearm that the wrong person cannot fire. It is intended to work without fail in the hands of its owner in a life-or-death situation.
Both Colt and Smith & Wesson looked into this shit when the last Clinton was president and, as a result, they both were driven to their knees by the resulting consumer backlash. Because it isn't the Bloombergers and the Bradys and the Giffords who buy guns. It's people who are notoriously conservative when it comes to whiz-bang technological "improvements". And there is no way around this: The technology adds another failure point. Where's the watch? Where's the ring?
If it's a RFID setup, it can be jammed. The cops will love it the first time that some bad guy puts a high-powered jammer in his car and then, having disabled the cop's RFID-coded gun, leisurely pots him.
If it's DNA-coded, what happens if the cop has been in a struggle and has traces of somebody else's blood on his hands?
Of course, if this stuff is mandated, there are a couple-hundred million guns, or more, that won't have the RFID chips/DNA readers and will be worth a lot more.
SmartGuns are weapons-grade stupid, all right. And so are their designers.
RFID, DNA, Fingerprint?
ReplyDeletehow can you have that work without a computer inside the gun? that means proprietary software and software glitches/patches, say like the F-35, or the Google Brick!?