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.
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.
Like if you need to use your gun, you probably need to in a hurry. What if you have grease or dirt on your hands when you need to scan your finger?
There's already bio-metric safes if one wants it, and you're almost always going to need a gun safe anyways if you own a firearm.
"Homeowner stops break-in" is exceedingly rare as to be statistically insignificant, and it really needs to stop being cited by everyone as a reason for everything from permissive gun legislation to arguments against technologies like this.
Incorrect. You have any stats to back that up?
This is why a lot of people still use revolvers instead of automatics. Doesn't get much simpler.
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.
Ie lets say the biometrics fail. Well if i want a safe with fast access, maybe i have biometrics on that and it also fails. A child looking for a gun has it in both scenarios, but there is a slight delay between auth failure and weapon access.
It's just a difficult slope of competing priorities. On one hand you want fast access. On the otherhand you want fail-proof child-proof safety. It's really difficult to get both, no matter what the solution.
I'm kinda glad i'm not having kids because i can imagine this is not a fun decision to make. I don't envy those who have to make it.