Recap of a post in GD

[AndyS]

29. It's okay if you missed my points, it's a gun related affliction.

There's a awful lot of willful blindness when it comes the World's Great Religions the greatest of which in America seems to be GUNZ!

That aside I enjoy these exchanges. Don't agree, won't change your mind but at least you put thought into them unlike some others who simply vomit talking points and introduce so may red herrings that they can't all be addressed--a popular tactic on the far right.

I pointed out the issues with RFID, namely that the fob/ring/bracelet can be stolen along with the gun. I also pointed out that your gun can still be used against you if the perp is close enough. Biometrics is more secure in that there is no RDID device that can be stolen and a grabbed gun can't be used against you, but rapid, reliable, and accurate detection of biometric information is problematic.

So, let me get this straight: you object to RF technology because a 'bad guy' would have to steal TWO devices to use the gun against you. Really? WTF kind of reasoning is that? Oh well at least we're past the 'it doesn't work' bullshit argument.

It's not a bad idea. I'm not against the technology emerging into the marketplace but at this point I am against it being mandated. Once the cops start using it, you'll see it trickling into the marketplace.

There is sooooo much wrong with that approach. How many safety features on any product are adopted voluntarily? Uh, none. If all of the innovations that make cars so much safer then they were is '60s were strictly voluntary how many would car makers build into their production? NONE. Everything that makes our lives safer is the result of government FORCING business to adopt them. Child proof caps on medication? Air bags? Driver's education? Not a single one and we have hindsight to rely on. If you're concerned about reliability keep in mind that the same agencies that mandate adoption also mandate reliability standards. That whole 'mandate' fear is just a red herring.

But since you brought up the reliability thing let's talk about that, shall we? There are no standards for firearm reliability. None, nada, zip, zilch and any other name you can give to less than none. However the accepted 'goal' or 'aspiration' is to fire 5000 rounds with no more than 20 misfires (aka failure). The Armitix iP1 was tested to 10,000 rounds with less than 10 failures. (This 'standard' is from comments made by the chief design engineer for H&K for over 30 years.)

Given that background would you fly in a commercial airliner if every 250 landings the wheels didn't come down? Or if it were an Armitix plane one of every 1000 landings? Yet you're perfectly ok with something that you believe you need to protect your life that operates at that reliability level? What the hell's wrong with you?

When there's a problem with a mandated safety feature a recall of the product is issued and the manufacturer will repair/replace the product. Like what happened with airbags recently. Except for GUNZ! No agency can force the recall of a defective firearm. Guns are exempt from oversight. The Remington model 700 is the poster child for that very special status of GUNZ. It had a safety defect that caused it to discharge when engaging or disengaging the 'safety' (safety? Hell, guns ain't safe!) mechanism. Killed a half dozen people. A production line fix would have cost .17 cents.

If that's not insulting enough only a gun manufacturer can define a defect. If a gun discharges 'accidentally' because the trigger creep is short and pull is light, just call it a design feature!

Finally to address all the hoops and exercises you think a smart gun has to go through to maybe sorta possibly have a chance to be accepted I call bullshit. That's not the issue. The issue is the gun industry that doesn't want to change from the 1840s technology. The NRA (soon to be RIP), NSSF, GOA and individual manufactures have created an atmosphere of fear among gunners such that no new technology will ever go into production. In 2014 Andy Raymond put the Armitix iP1 in his gun store because he thought there might be a market for it. He got so many DEATH THREATS that he sent the inventory back. Death threats? Yeah, that's the way gunners react to anything they don't like. The NRA and many gun owners say it’s a government Trojan horse intended to open the door for laws that will mandate “smart” technology in new guns in order to identify gun owners – a notion that’s widely seen by gun owners as a threat to Second Amendment rights.

So if you sometimes think there's a culture war against gun owners remember DEATH THREATS every time gunners get upset. I personally think that's a culture worth going to war against.