8 ms·
“Smart Gun” that uses biometrics to authenticate
- eigenvalue 3y agoI don't own a gun (I've never even shot a gun before), but I came across this video on YouTube and I'm really impressed with how thoughtfully this BioFire gun was designed. If I did ever purchase a gun, I think for sure I'd insist on something like this, since the main risk seems to be your kids finding it or an attacker overpowering you and shooting you with your own gun, both of which would be prevented by this. Also you don't have to worry about someone stealing the gun and committing crimes with it (maybe it can be hacked, but probably not by the typical home invader!). Anyway, thought I'd share it with HN.
- necovek 3y agoIf guns like these were pervasive, a typical home invader would likely know who they can flip it to, who would know how to hack it. And soon enough, even your kids would learn how to hack it (if not before: kids really like figuring out stuff they are not supposed to do!). I don't own a gun either (though I shot one in a shooting range twice), but if I was ever worried I'd need to defend myself with guns, I'd probably stockpile on live rounds instead of guns: in a case where people would need to rise to arms, I figure rounds will quickly become more valuable and could be easily exchanged for a gun with someone without any rounds.
- egberts1 3y agoYour average home invader is not going to do the necessary preparation especially if they are addicted to O.P.M. (other people's money).
- necovek 3y agoSelling it after the fact does not really require any preparation: I guess you meant they won't come prepared to hack it, which I agree with. If biometric-auth guns were pervasive yet hackable, petty criminals will likely have a way to easily sell them off to someone better equipped to hack them. I was mostly countering whether biometric auth would stop them feom being used for crimes after getting stolen.
- madeofpalk 3y ago> And soon enough, even your kids would learn how to hack it How would a kid get the firearm? Are firearm owners/parents elsewhere so irresponsible that they leave firearms lying around unsecured?
- llamaimperative 3y agoThat’s the whole value prop of this gun: you can leave it outside of a safe. Otherwise you have both a safe (definitely secure + reliable) and a second, certainly more finicky safety device within the safe, which doesn’t really improve anything except your odds of losing whatever is about to happen. Insane proposition IMO.
- thatguy27 3y agoOnce they've overpowered you, they could just smash in your skull with your gun, or with a brick.
- matthewfcarlson 3y agoI’ve often thought the best home defense weapon is a baseball bat with a flashlight taped to the eye. Quick shine in the eye and wham.
- peepeepoopoo7 3y ago[flagged]
- giantg2 3y ago"since the main risk seems to be your kids finding it" Not an issue if you're storing it properly. Even if you have biometrics it should still be stored properly to prevent theft. "or an attacker overpowering you and shooting you with your own gun" Gear is no replacement for training. Even if they can't shoot you with it, you have much larger problems if they can overpower and disarm you. It won't stop them from bludgeoning you to death with, etc. "Also you don't have to worry about someone stealing the gun and committing crimes with it (maybe it can be hacked, but probably not by the typical home invader!)." That's not really how criminal systems work. Usually your common criminals are selling the stuff they steal on the black market. You have specialized shops (organized crime) who buy stuff like this (guns, phones, computers, etc) and can hack it and resell it. It's an interesting concept, but it will likely take a lot of testing. "Well-designed" is a matter of opinion, and not everyone shares that view.
- ohgodplsno 3y ago>It won't stop them from bludgeoning you to death with, etc. Fun fact: you only get bludgeoned to death _because_ you own guns. In most of the civilized world, people do not get assaulted in their own home by thieves. Thieves see that you're awake, run away because handling the police is more trouble than it's worth, done.
- harimau777 3y agoYou are saying that a greater risk of being shot during a home invasion makes a thief more likely to break in? That doesn't make sense.
- roundandround 3y agoNo he's saying they are more likely to bludgeon you because you may have a gun and shoot them before they can run away.
- thesuperbigfrog 3y ago>> Fun fact: you only get bludgeoned to death _because_ you own guns. In most of the civilized world, people do not get assaulted in their own home by thieves. Thieves see that you're awake, run away because handling the police is more trouble than it's worth, done. Citations needed. What distinguishes how intruders will react? When intruders are in your home, how do you know it is burglary versus home invasion, sexual assualt, kidnapping, etc. ? >> In most of the civilized world, people do not get assaulted in their own home by thieves. What defines "the civilized world"? In many parts of South America and Central America criminals will kill victims and witnesses so that no one will be able to identify them or testify against them. How do you know what intruders will or will not do? >> Thieves see that you're awake, run away because handling the police is more trouble than it's worth, done. Depends on the intruders (how do you know they are thieves?), depends on the police, depends on the speed of police response. If the intruders can stop you from calling the police and you are not a significant threat, why would they run away?
- BrotherBisquick 3y ago> an attacker overpowering you and shooting you with your own gun I know you're not arguing otherwise, but this never happens, and it's one of those annoying arguments that anti-gun people use to justify banning and confiscation.
- randombits0 3y agoFirearms enthusiasts will reject this with a strong passion.
- madeofpalk 3y agoTo be honest, I would also presume most firearm un-enthusiasts would be pretty unsatisified by this also.
- refulgentis 3y agoWhy?
- ethanbond 3y agoBecause it’s another thing that can malfunction at the single worst possible moment for a thing to malfunction. I’m not even an enthusiast and I would never ever ever buy one of these as a self-defense firearm. It just doesn’t make any sense in terms of the risk you’re trying to mitigate by buying a gun.
- unshavedyak 3y agoI would imagine it depends on what you're concerned about too. If you're using it for self defense but also have children you need to lock away the gun for, this might be attractive compared to a slow to access safe.
- ethanbond 3y agoTotally depends on what you’re concerned about, but even in that scenario the solution is to get a faster safe. Like even in that scenario, you would still not want your child encountering the gun at all for fear of the other kind of malfunction (accidental “approval”), as well as child endangerment, as well as “gun == safe” association, etc etc. So it will still have to be in a safe, and it will still have to be one you think is secure, so the biometric component is strictly more time & more points of failure.
- kneebonian 3y ago"smart" = complicated electronics likely to fail
- rzzzt 3y agoThat's CELTF, you will need a different selection of words to complete the backronym.
- lambic 3y agoMaybe think about what other lethal weapons already contain complicated electronics.
- harimau777 3y agoWhen it comes to personal weapons comparable to a hand-gun there's not much in the way of complicated electronics. The most that I can think of would be TASERs and holographic sites; neither of which are particularly complicated.
- lambic 3y agoA car?
- harimau777 3y agoCars aren't generally used as personal weapons. Their size, cost, and the difficulty deploying them rapidly (think of how long it takes to accelerate from stop compared to drawing a gun) makes them a poor fit for that roll.
- edfletcher_t137 3y ago[flagged]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- nonrepeating 3y ago[flagged]
- rishabhd 3y agoWell, Kojima called it in MGS4.
- rgoulter 3y agoWorth reading, from the description: """Biofire is a Colorado company that has spent the last 5 years or so developing a biometrically authenticated pistol, using both fingerprint and facial recognition systems. The gun is currently in the prototype/pre-production phase, and they are planning to have production models available around the end of the year. Obviously, there is a wide skepticism about this sort of technology in firearms, and I shared this skepticism when I first spoke with Biofire. The situations in which biometric ID systems could become a liability seem too numerous to count. What convinced me to give the pistol a closer look was Biofire's explicit focus on a particular target market where the technology fills a very real gap in current options: home defense for those with children or other people regularly in the household. For that situation, one must choose between an array of flawed options - trigger locks, rapid access (hopefully) safes, or keeping a gun separated from its ammunition. The idea of having a gun which can be left loaded and immediately accessible but only usable by a few specific individuals is an appealing one."""
- WirelessGigabit 3y agoStallone in Judge Dredd: "Grenade" Lawgiver: "Grenade"
- HonestOp001 3y agoPlease let us remember the biometric scanner on the laptops. I cut my finger and the laptop became inaccessible. No way.
- BiteCode_dev 3y agoA gun that can run out of battery. Does it it need to update its firmware too ?
- cykros 3y agoNo applause until it electrocutes someone trying to shoot it who isn't authorized, a la Judge Dredd. Also, given my experience with fingerprint scanners on phones, where I'm not nearly as insistent that it actually do what I tell it to, WHEN I tell it to, this really doesn't seem like something that is likely ever to be particularly well done. Seems the goal is "not shooting for other people," and if it happens to "shoot for the person its supposed to," icing on the cake.