Jump to content

Smart gun: Difference between revisions

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Undid revision 616183584 by Vb works (talk) Not WP:RS and not in proper WP:CITE format.
Line 70: Line 70:
In an article in [[Forbes]], information security expert, Joseph Steinberg, discussed several technological shortcomings with smartguns that might “create new, serious safety issues for gun owners and non-owners alike.” Among them were claims that “biometrics take time to process and are often inaccurate – especially when a user is under duress – as is likely going to be the case in any situation in which he needs to brandish a gun,” “it is not ideal to add a requirement for power to devices utilized in cases of emergency that did not need electricity previously. How many fire codes allow fire extinguishers that require a battery to operate?,” “smartguns might be hackable” or even “susceptible to government tracking or jamming,” and “Firearms must be able to be disassembled in order to be cleaned and maintained. One of the principles of information security is that someone who has physical access to a machine can undermine its security.”<ref>[http://www.forbes.com/sites/josephsteinberg/2014/05/04/smartguns/ Forbes: Why You Should Be Concerned About The New 'Smart Guns' (Whether You Love Or Hate Guns)]</ref>
In an article in [[Forbes]], information security expert, Joseph Steinberg, discussed several technological shortcomings with smartguns that might “create new, serious safety issues for gun owners and non-owners alike.” Among them were claims that “biometrics take time to process and are often inaccurate – especially when a user is under duress – as is likely going to be the case in any situation in which he needs to brandish a gun,” “it is not ideal to add a requirement for power to devices utilized in cases of emergency that did not need electricity previously. How many fire codes allow fire extinguishers that require a battery to operate?,” “smartguns might be hackable” or even “susceptible to government tracking or jamming,” and “Firearms must be able to be disassembled in order to be cleaned and maintained. One of the principles of information security is that someone who has physical access to a machine can undermine its security.”<ref>[http://www.forbes.com/sites/josephsteinberg/2014/05/04/smartguns/ Forbes: Why You Should Be Concerned About The New 'Smart Guns' (Whether You Love Or Hate Guns)]</ref>


The potential effects of New Jersey's smart gun law has also influenced opposition to the technology in the United States; two attempts to commercially market the [[Armatix iP1]] smart gun in the California and Maryland were met with immediate opposition from gun rights groups, who argued that allowing the gun to be sold in the United States would trigger the law. The NRA also briefly boycott [[Smith & Wesson]] after it was revealed in 1999 that the company was developing a smart gun for the U.S. government.<ref name=njcom-smartguns/><ref name="verge-smartguns"/> The gun control debate took an interesting turn in the U.S. with the launch of Armatix iP1, a Smart Gun manufactured in Germany. Interestingly enough, both sides of the debate are quite resistive over the introduction of these smart guns.
The potential effects of New Jersey's smart gun law has also influenced opposition to the technology in the United States; two attempts to commercially market the [[Armatix iP1]] smart gun in the California and Maryland were met with immediate opposition from gun rights groups, who argued that allowing the gun to be sold in the United States would trigger the law. The NRA also briefly boycott [[Smith & Wesson]] after it was revealed in 1999 that the company was developing a smart gun for the U.S. government.<ref name=njcom-smartguns/><ref name="verge-smartguns"/>
Gun Rights side proposes that smart guns will be detrimental to the second amendment of the constitution. As per them, smart guns defy the purpose of self-protection as it might fail to respond quickly in an emergency.
While the gun control side see it as a mere tool to take away the real issue off the radar. They have maintained that the introduction of smart guns is going to have a negligent effect on reducing the gun violence for the apparent reason that people use their own guns anyway when committing acts of gun-violence. They have gone further and suggested that it will actually end up deterring [http://blog.privateeyesinc.com/2014/05/23/smart-guns-a-whole-new-chapter-in-gun-control-debate/ government’s focus from gun-violence research].

==References==
==References==
{{reflist}}
{{reflist}}

Revision as of 13:28, 9 July 2014

This article is about guns using biometrics to identify a legitimate user. For self-aiming weapon systems, see Smartgun and Sentry gun.

A personalized gun, or smart gun, is a concept firearm that is designed to reduce the misuse of firearms through the use of RFID chips or other proximity devices, fingerprint recognition, magnetic rings, or a microchip implant.[1]

Advantages

Proponents of smart gun technology say that the technology would reduce or eliminate accidental use and misuse of firearms by children and teens, as well as reducing accidental discharges or the use of a firearm against its owner if the firearm is stolen or taken away.[2]

Legislation

In the United States, New Jersey was the first state to enact an eventual mandate for smart guns. Governor Jim McGreevey signed the Childproof Handgun Bill into state law on December 23, 2002, which will eventually require that all guns sold in the state of New Jersey have a mechanism to prevent unauthorized users from firing it.[3] Weapons used by law enforcement officers would be exempt from the smart gun requirement. However, this law will only take effect three years after such a smart gun is approved by the state.[4][5][6] In May of 2014, hours after the publication of an article in Forbes by Joseph Steinberg, in which he criticized the New Jersey law for "delaying the production of truly safer and 'smarter' handguns" by incenting "gun manufacturers – who earn a tremendous amount of profit from the sales of conventional firearms... not to develop smartguns if by doing so they will cause their flagship product lines to become unsellable," New Jersey State Senate Majority leader, Loretta Weinberg, who had originally sponsored the New Jersey bill while serving in the State Assembly, stated that she would consider repealing the law if, after doing so, the National Rifle Association would agree not to impede the development of better smartguns.[7]

In April 2014, Attorney General Eric Holder told a House appropriations subcommittee that his agency is exploring smart gun technology as a means for curbing gun violence. The Justice Department has requested $382.1 million in increased spending for its fiscal year 2014 budget for "gun safety," a figure which includes $2 million for "Gun Safety Technology" grants, which would award prizes for technologies that are "proven to be reliable and effective."[8]

In October 2013 the European Commission published a document by commissioner Cecilia Malmström, stating that "he Commission will work with the firearms industry to explore technological solutions, such as biometric sensors where personal data is stored in the firearm, for ensuring that purchased firearms may only be used by their legal owner. It will carry out a detailed cost-benefit analysis on the question of making such 'smart gun' security features mandatory for firearms lawfully sold in the EU."[9]

Magnetic devices

The Magna-Trigger system for K- through N-frame size Smith and Wesson revolvers prevents the trigger from returning far enough to fire. It was developed by Joe Davis in 1975, and has proven reliable. This system will work ambidextrously, provided the magnetic rings used are worn on both hands.[10]

The Magloc conversion kit for 1911A1 pistols works by preventing the handgun from firing unless a magnetic ring worn by the user repels the magnetic blocking device installed inside the grip.[11] Once the system is activated using the matching magnetic ring, the owner can switch the over-ride switch to the on position and allow anyone to fire the pistol.[12]

Prototypes

Metal Storm

Australian defense company Metal Storm made a prototype electronic 'smart' personalized handgun called the O'Dwyer VLe. It utilized biometric authorizing technology and was the world's first 100% electronic handgun. It also incorporated Metal Storm's patented 'stacked projectile' technology, which, in cohesion with the nature of the weapon system itself, meant that there was no moving parts, no separate magazine, no ammunition feed, and it outstripped conventional firing systems.[13]

Mossberg

In 1999, Mossberg Shotguns, through its subsidiary Advanced Ordnance and an electronics design contractor known as KinTech Manufacturing developed a “Smart” shotgun using RFID technology. This product is currently being marketed by IGun Technology Corp. The advantage with this design was that the ring worn by the owner and used to identify the owner has a passive tag (meaning no batteries) that relies on proximity to the shotgun for power. The battery pack in the shotgun is designed to last up to 10 years when not used or up to 8 hours of continual usage (meaning always ready to be fired). The shotgun has low-battery indication.

Mossberg has trademarked the term "Smart gun".[14]

New Jersey Institute of Technology

A current prototype personalized gun by New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT) relies on biometric sensors in the grip and trigger that can track a gun owner’s hand size, strength, and Dynamic grip style also known as (DGR) Dynamic Grip Recognition. The gun is programmed to recognize only the owner or anyone whom the owner wishes to authorize. One of the major projects involves the NJIT team, which claims the prototype identifies gun owners with 90% accuracy.[15]

Colt

Initial prototypes produced by Colt's Manufacturing Company involved the intended user wearing a bracelet that emitted a radio signal that would activate a mechanism inside the pistol to allow the handgun to be fired. The project was apparently scrapped over concerns of the batteries in the bracelet and the pistol failing.[16]

TriggerSmart

Patrick O'Shaughnessy, owner of the Irish company Triggersmart, has patented and achieved a working prototype of a personalized gun in 2012 that works using radio-frequency identification (RFID) technology.[17] TriggerSmart's Robert McNamara has spoken with US Attorney General, Eric Holder, at the White House and he and O'Shaughnessy met with and discussed smart guns with the United Nations in Berlin and New York. The NIJ featured TriggerSmart when it issued its report on Smart Guns in 2013.[18] [19]

BIOMAC

A U.S. and Austrian company introduced a system that employs a biometric array of up to eight optical sensors which will be molded into the handle of the firearm.[20] None of the optical sensors will rely on geographic parameters, like fingerprints, but will measure biometric data below the skin. The biometric access technology which will be developed by BIOMAC will allow authorized gun owners to program the biometrics of up to eleven additional users into their weapon. All previous systems having been developed or which are being considered rely on one user per weapon. The biometric data programmed into the weapon will be done at authorized weapon dealers, and will remain in the weapon. BIOMAC's goal of a 99.99 percent reliability rate with recognition occurring in .5 seconds or less, if reached, will be the fastest and most reliable smart gun technology on the market. BIOMAC envisions licensing all weapon companies their technology for a nominal cost. The retrofitting of existing weapons with BIOMAC's patent-pending technology will be done through the Biomac Foundation, with all profits from the retrofitting going to victims of global violence.[21] For military and police use the biometrics of soldiers and/or law enforcement will be printed on a wearable device, like a wrist band, which once worn will allow the soldier and/or any other police officer wearing the biometric wrist band to pick up any biometric weapon programmed for their organization. The wrist bands will not be usable by anyone other than the people they have been programmed for. In this manner every soldier will be able to use any military weapon they may need to fire, and not have to have their individual biometrics programmed into the weapon.

Armatix

A German company, Armatix, has developed the innovative Armatix iP1 pistol that comes with a special wrist watch which uses radio frequencies to identify the user.[22]

WPW-Lock

In autumn 2012 a new method was presented by its inventor.[23] Starting with the simple question "Where does a weapon belong?" he concluded: In its owner's hand or in its owner's holster, and nowhere else! Using this logic, he recognized, a huge variety of solutions are possible, even those only by means of traditional, simple, and proven mechanics as it is installed by default in any weapon, and a safety lock. The new principle is: The firearm is unlocked by a release member (key, RFID, barcode, etc.) and the active state is maintained by a grip sensor (mechanical lever, any electronic sensor such as e.g. ultrasound). In example with a holster: If the weapon is pulled out of the holster, it is always activated automatically as long as its owner constantly holds it in his hand. The moment the owner lays the weapon aside or it is knocked out of his hand, a security automatically clicks into place which not only makes it impossible for any more shots to be fired, but it also prevents the disassembling of the weapon in order to remove the blocking device. A new activation is only possible by means of a release member in the own holster, by putting the weapon in it and taking it out once more if necessary. Electronic designs can use an electronic key like an NFC-chip which is mounted in a holster or in a watch or somewhere else on the body.

Innovation Initiative

Sandy Hook Promise, a group of parents of the Sandy Hook massacre, have launched an Innovation Initiative with members of the Silicon Valley technology community. This initiative will advocate for providing breakthroughs in new gun technology by providing grant and prize moneys.[24]

The smart gun is supposed to:

  • Reduce the likelihood of unintentional injuries to children
  • Preventing teenage suicides and homicides.
  • Limit the violent acts committed by criminals using stolen guns.
  • Protect law enforcement officers from criminals grabbing their firearms during a struggle.

If chip failure occurs one of two things can happen:

  • For civilian use, the gun will be set to not fire.
  • For law enforcement use, the safety system will be bypassed, and the gun will be allowed to fire.

Criticism

Smart guns have been criticized by gun-rights groups like the NRA[25] as well as by gun-control groups like the Violence Policy Center. Gun rights groups generally feel that smart gun technology is an attempt to control citizen ownership of firearms. The Violence Policy Center feels smart guns will make firearm ownership more commonplace by making firearms seem safer.[26]

Many firearm enthusiasts object to smart guns on a philosophical and regulatory basis as well as a technological basis. Gun ownership advocate Kenneth W. Royce, writing under the pen name of "Boston T. Party", wrote that "no defensive firearm should ever rely upon any technology more advanced than Newtonian physics. That includes batteries, radio links, encryption, scanning devices and microcomputers. Even if a particular system could be 99.9% reliable, that means it is expected to fail once every 1000 operations. That is not reliable enough. My life deserves more certainty".[27]

In an article in Forbes, information security expert, Joseph Steinberg, discussed several technological shortcomings with smartguns that might “create new, serious safety issues for gun owners and non-owners alike.” Among them were claims that “biometrics take time to process and are often inaccurate – especially when a user is under duress – as is likely going to be the case in any situation in which he needs to brandish a gun,” “it is not ideal to add a requirement for power to devices utilized in cases of emergency that did not need electricity previously. How many fire codes allow fire extinguishers that require a battery to operate?,” “smartguns might be hackable” or even “susceptible to government tracking or jamming,” and “Firearms must be able to be disassembled in order to be cleaned and maintained. One of the principles of information security is that someone who has physical access to a machine can undermine its security.”[28]

The potential effects of New Jersey's smart gun law has also influenced opposition to the technology in the United States; two attempts to commercially market the Armatix iP1 smart gun in the California and Maryland were met with immediate opposition from gun rights groups, who argued that allowing the gun to be sold in the United States would trigger the law. The NRA also briefly boycott Smith & Wesson after it was revealed in 1999 that the company was developing a smart gun for the U.S. government.[6][4]

References

  1. ^ "No Chip in Arm, No Shot From Gun". Wired.com. Retrieved 2012-08-04.
  2. ^ "Violence Policy Center – SmartGun". Retrieved October 12, 2011.
  3. ^ ASSEMBLY LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE STATEMENT TO ASSEMBLY, No. 700 with committee amendments
  4. ^ a b "Gun control: the NRA wants to take America's smart guns away". The Verge. Retrieved 5 May 2014.
  5. ^ Pearce, Jeremy (1/12/03). "Smart Guns, A Clever Bit of Legislating". New York Times. Retrieved 1/12/03. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= and |date= (help)
  6. ^ a b "Could 'smart-guns' finally hit New Jersey stores?". NJ.com. New Jersey On-Line, LLC. Retrieved 5 May 2014.
  7. ^ N.J. Democrat: We will reverse smart gun law if NRA plays ball
  8. ^ Elizabeth Harrington (April 7, 2014). "Holder: We Want to Explore Gun Tracking Bracelets". Washington Free Beaconaccessdate=April 11, 2014.
  9. ^ European Commission: Firearms and the internal security of the EU: protecting citizens and disrupting illegal trafficking, published October 10, 2013
  10. ^ Massad Ayoob, "State of the SMART GUN", Guns Magazine
  11. ^ "Selling Safety Priority #1". Shooting Industry. 2000.
  12. ^ "Magloc Smart Gun Conversion System from SMART LOCK TECHNOLOGY INC". Officer.com. 2007-08-20. Retrieved 2012-08-04.
  13. ^ http://www.gizmag.com/personalised-electronic-handgun-headed-for-commercialisation/2376/
  14. ^ Carter, Gregg Lee (2012). Guns in American Society: An Encyclopedia of History, Politics, Culture, and the Law. ABC-CLIO. p. 755. ISBN 978-0-313-38670-1.
  15. ^ Carter, Gregg Lee (2006). Gun Control in the United States: A Reference Handbook. ABC-CLIO. pp. 373–374. ISBN 978-1-85109-760-9.
  16. ^ Webster, Daniel W.; Vernick, Jon S. (2013). Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy with Evidence and Analysis. JHU Press. p. 72. ISBN 978-1-4214-1111-8.
  17. ^ TriggerSmart Childproof RFID Smart Gun on YouTube
  18. ^ https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/242500.pdf
  19. ^ http://news.yahoo.com/smart-guns-show-promise-not-readily-available-u-202657039.html
  20. ^ http://biomacfoundation.org/component/option,com_blog/Itemid,84/pid,2/view,comments/
  21. ^ http://biomacfoundation.org/en/organizational-structure/default.html
  22. ^ http://www.armatix.us/iP1-Pistol.779.0.html?&L=7
  23. ^ Gerald Würkner: Würkner-Personal-Weapon-Lock, Webpage of the Inventor, 20. September 2012
  24. ^ http://newtownbee.com/news/news/0001/11/30/sandy-hook-promise-launches-innovation-initiative/10397
  25. ^ Steve Friess. "NRA: Smart Guns Are Plain Stupid". Wired.com. Retrieved 2012-08-04.
  26. ^ "The False Hope of the "Smart" Gun". Vpc.org. 1996-06-12. Retrieved 2012-08-04.
  27. ^ Party, Boston T. (2000). Boston's Gun Bible. Javelin Press. p. 35. ISBN 978-1-888766-06-6.
  28. ^ Forbes: Why You Should Be Concerned About The New 'Smart Guns' (Whether You Love Or Hate Guns)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Smart_gun&oldid=616221163"