Comment by crikli | Hacker News Reader

Comment by crikli | Hacker News Reader

I'm an engineer, gun owner, and former NRA member[1].

I hate the idea of smart guns, but politics are a distant secondary concern.

Firearms fail all the time, even the simple reliable ones. Bad primers, failure to eject, failure to cycle, stovepipes, etc. It takes education and then repeated training to know how to deal with failures. In a pressure situation you revert to your lowest level of training; muscle memory will give you the best chance to respond appropriately.

Just dealing with mechanical failures quickly and correctly takes very intentional practice.

The last thing I want to have is another thing that can fail in a pressure situation that can't be resolved via trained response. E.g., for a bad primer or failure to eject I can do what's called a tap/rack/bang drill. But there's nothing I can do to train for some type of software failure or battery being dead or some other type of non-mechanical failure that bricks my firearm.

[1]Former because the NRA"s lobbing efforts and powers are ridiculously overstated. Their entire entire existence as near as I can tell is to sell their member's names to third parties. I've never received as much crap snail mail and email as I did during the year I belonged to the NRA.

Exactly! If the fingerprint scanner on the gun works like the one on my phone, many people will unnecessarily die. What do their families do then? Sue Congress?

Seriously, the idea of smart guns is really stupid. Can you build a system that's 100% reliable? No. Then people will die unnecessarily because of this legislation and, of course, no gun owner will want this optional piece of equipment with a nonzero failure rate. I'm glad no gun company wants to make this idiotic and dangerous technology.

They have a "do not promote" list that you must request to be added to which solves the spam/marketing mail problem. That you have to ask is problematic but there is a solution if this was the only problem.

Eh, that Ackerman McQueen allows even that is a major thing.

(For those who claim the "gun companies" run the NRA, no, more than anyone else, it's run for the benefit of its PR firm (and of course the current entrenched executive leadership, who have made sure another Cincinnati revolt is impossible).)

It wasn't just that. Ultimately I decided that there were more effective 2A organizations that I preferred to support.

I'm saddened to hear your feelings on the NRA and its effectiveness.

While they, thankfully, haven't had to fight any big national gun control initiatives for some time, they are still very active at the state and city level. See their recent lawsuit against the City of Seattle and its new gun tax.

Well, if you want to fund lawsuits, the Washington state based Second Amendment Foundation is a better bet, and I'll bet they're a party to that lawsuit as well.

They are the only other effective one as I count them, but you have to donate money to them, a simple membership will just line the pockets of whomever is mailing out their stuff.

The value, as I see it, of the NRA is more its ability to efficiently mobilize 5 million members around key issues. I liken relying only on smaller, fractious orgs to when we had small state militias and no formal army.

Another aspect I suspect is that gun owners already have the fundamental gun safety rules that are respected like gospel. All gun owners I've met are extremely serious about safety, and treat safety with great reverence.

I saw a reddit post of a guy who accidentally shot his foot: known as a Negligent Discharge. In the comments the general conclusion was not to blame the gun maker, but rather to blame the poster for failing to abide by the fundamental rules: 1. keep the gun pointed in a safe direction 2. keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot 3. keep the gun unloaded until ready to use 4. treat all guns as if they are loaded

I suspect that gun owners feel that smart guns also "cheapen" the safety ritual (which could be disastrous).

You're close on the four rules. :)

1. Every firearm is loaded. 2. Don't point it at anything you don't want to destroy. 3. Trigger finger stays indexed until sights are engaged with target. 4. Know your backstop.

I can't say as I've thought that these guns (I just cannot bring myself to use the adjective "smart" in reference to this idea) would cheapen these rules.

It's more that it's yet another idea proposed by people that don't have enough experience with firearms to present an educated opinion coming up with a scheme that to other ignorant parties thing sounds like, to quote amother commenter "a gimme."

4: Be certain of your target and what's behind it.

The former is critical for all sorts of things like hunting and self-defense, although a few of the "accidents" I've read about sure smelled like murders to me.

We're about 10-20 years from self-driving cars. Smart guns seem like a gimme.

Automated defense turrets for area denial perhaps, but 'dumb guns' will exist until a weapon superior to the gun is devised.

Smart guns in the context of this article. They are not self-firing, they just identify their operator.

See, I actually like the idea of smart guns. The only thing it really does (or should do) is prevent you from getting shot with your own gun. If someone steals your gun out of your house, they could remove the smart part. If you're thinking about logging gun usage, you could probably edit the logs or corrupt them beyond usability.

I think you could make the system work. It's not complicated, maybe just an RFID reader and a solenoid. The issue is that if politics try and stick a bunch of extra crap onto it. All that extra stuff is what can cause failures, and cause an otherwise good idea to become vilified.

Where do I keep that RFID? An implant, a ring? What if it gets damaged in a scuffle and I'm SOL when I try to shoot?

Technology fails.

If it's about politics, a lot of that extra stuff will be to make it non-bypassable. That said, just how many people are getting shot with their own gun as a component of overall firearm murders?

Don't forget the power supply, and don't undercalculate antenna design needs (it probably won't work incorporated into the handle of a pistol). The electrical draw will probably need to be pretty beefy in order to be as reliable as the rest of the gun's mechanisms, and what happens when the gun is being carried or stored in -20C temperatures? What about off-hand shooting when your normal shooting hand is unusable or it's dangerous to shoot from your normal side?

In order to be both universal and not introduce unreliability, the solenoid would likely have to be introduced as a secondary safety. How many firearm designs would even support a secondary safety?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com