4 ms·

There's no such thing as a "smart gun" that's actually useful in the real world. There are too many failure modes that cannot be tolerated when a gun is needed

There's no such thing as a "smart gun" that's actually useful in the real world. There are too many failure modes that cannot be tolerated when a gun is needed to save your life. To your point about toddlers - safe storage and safe methods of carry solves that, and they work with every gun in circulation already. 1) Lock up your gun if it's not directly under your control (i.e., in a holster). 2) Carry your gun in a proper holster, on your person. Not in your purse in the shopping cart, but on your hip. These two, together, would prevent every case where a toddler shoots somebody. It's not appreciated outside gun circles, and sadly even in gun circles a lot of people don't get it, but good holsters are the most important investment you can make. A huge fraction of gun accidents trace back to cheap holsters.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
zzalpha 9y ago
I'm going to play devil's advocate, here: 1) Lock up your gun if it's not directly under your control (i.e., in a holster). "But then it's not available when someone breaks into my home!" 2) Carry your gun in a proper holster, on your person. Not in your purse in the shopping cart, but on your hip. "How does that help me when I'm in bed and someone breaks in in the middle of the night?" I'm going to be blunt: while I recognize my own reply is somewhat simplistic and idealistic, yours is no better. There is simply no technology, today, that makes gun ownership in the home both safe and is perceived as 100% effective in circumstances where a weapon is needed for self-defense in an emergency situation. This type of technology is a search for a solution to that problem. Is it the solution? Or a perfect solution? Clearly not. But to imply there is no solution, or that it's a solution in search of a problem, belies a profound cynicism. This is Hacker News. Folks, here, believe technology can solve everything, from world hunger to poverty. But for some reason, apparently it's impossible to improve on the firearm. it's baffling.
- lostapathy 9y ago
  It's not impossible to improve firearms - tons of innovation happens in that space. At the same time, anything that decreases reliability is a deadly liability that cannot be tolerated. To your counter-examples. Carry your gun at home if you're worried about break-ins. Put your gun in a quick-access safe when you sleep. Problems solved
  - zzalpha 9y ago
    So, suppose we live in a fantasy world where a smart gun is developed that has extremely high reliability. Would you agree that would represent an overall improvement in firearm technology? I'm trying to understand if the objections are rational, or religious. I honestly can't tell.
    - brandonmenc 9y ago
      Have you ever fumbled around unlocking your phone? Can you do it instantly every time you pick it up? This would be unacceptable for most gun owners if it happened even every thousand rounds. It's rational.
      - zzalpha 9y ago
        You're already making a ton of assumptions about the entire possible solution space (specifically that it requires an active effort to unlock the gun that necessitates "fumbling"). How is that rational?
    - bifrost 9y ago
      The only people touting "smart guns" as a solution are people who seem to think that firearms are the actual problem. Let that sink in for a moment.
      - zzalpha 9y ago
        The same argument could be made for child safety caps on bottles of Tylenol or bleach. That's not a rational argument. It's an appeal to emotion, and a bit of a dog whistle.
- user5994461 9y ago
  >>> "How does that help me when I'm in bed and someone breaks in in the middle of the night?" There are holsters for bed.
- Pinckney 9y ago
  People get pissed off about smart guns because state such as New Jersey want to shove them down everyone's throat, regardless of whether they have children present in their homes, whether they already have a safe they're happy with, or whether the guns are affordable or effective.
cc439 9y ago
>2) Carry your gun in a proper holster, on your person. Not in your purse in the shopping cart, but on your hip. Even then, a proper retention holster that covers the trigger would solve that problem in 99% of cases. Sure, a particularly strong and determined toddler might be able to figure out the release after a few minutes of trying but nobody leaves their child completely unsupervised (not even taking a glance at what they're up to) for several minutes at a time.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

zzalpha 9y ago

I'm going to play devil's advocate, here: 1) Lock up your gun if it's not directly under your control (i.e., in a holster). "But then it's not available when someone breaks into my home!" 2) Carry your gun in a proper holster, on your person. Not in your purse in the shopping cart, but on your hip. "How does that help me when I'm in bed and someone breaks in in the middle of the night?" I'm going to be blunt: while I recognize my own reply is somewhat simplistic and idealistic, yours is no better. There is simply no technology, today, that makes gun ownership in the home both safe and is perceived as 100% effective in circumstances where a weapon is needed for self-defense in an emergency situation. This type of technology is a search for a solution to that problem. Is it the solution? Or a perfect solution? Clearly not. But to imply there is no solution, or that it's a solution in search of a problem, belies a profound cynicism. This is Hacker News. Folks, here, believe technology can solve everything, from world hunger to poverty. But for some reason, apparently it's impossible to improve on the firearm. it's baffling.

lostapathy 9y ago
It's not impossible to improve firearms - tons of innovation happens in that space. At the same time, anything that decreases reliability is a deadly liability that cannot be tolerated. To your counter-examples. Carry your gun at home if you're worried about break-ins. Put your gun in a quick-access safe when you sleep. Problems solved
- zzalpha 9y ago
  So, suppose we live in a fantasy world where a smart gun is developed that has extremely high reliability. Would you agree that would represent an overall improvement in firearm technology? I'm trying to understand if the objections are rational, or religious. I honestly can't tell.
  - brandonmenc 9y ago
    Have you ever fumbled around unlocking your phone? Can you do it instantly every time you pick it up? This would be unacceptable for most gun owners if it happened even every thousand rounds. It's rational.
    - zzalpha 9y ago
      You're already making a ton of assumptions about the entire possible solution space (specifically that it requires an active effort to unlock the gun that necessitates "fumbling"). How is that rational?
  - bifrost 9y ago
    The only people touting "smart guns" as a solution are people who seem to think that firearms are the actual problem. Let that sink in for a moment.
    - zzalpha 9y ago
      The same argument could be made for child safety caps on bottles of Tylenol or bleach. That's not a rational argument. It's an appeal to emotion, and a bit of a dog whistle.
user5994461 9y ago
>>> "How does that help me when I'm in bed and someone breaks in in the middle of the night?" There are holsters for bed.
Pinckney 9y ago
People get pissed off about smart guns because state such as New Jersey want to shove them down everyone's throat, regardless of whether they have children present in their homes, whether they already have a safe they're happy with, or whether the guns are affordable or effective.

cc439 9y ago

>2) Carry your gun in a proper holster, on your person. Not in your purse in the shopping cart, but on your hip. Even then, a proper retention holster that covers the trigger would solve that problem in 99% of cases. Sure, a particularly strong and determined toddler might be able to figure out the release after a few minutes of trying but nobody leaves their child completely unsupervised (not even taking a glance at what they're up to) for several minutes at a time.