Show of HandsShow of Hands

44YY November 29th, 2017 5:52am

Do you support smart gun technology such as fingerprint readers on the grip so that it only fires for registered owners of the firearm?

7 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

Hogoke Constitution
11/29/17 1:18 pm

As long as it's not required by law.

ARMinarchist Arkansas
11/29/17 11:37 am

Sure. the more options on the market the better. I personally would never use it. Too slow, and too much risk of failure. If somebody else wants to put thier life in the hands of new technology, be my guest.

11/29/17 10:54 am

I support making it available for people that want it. I don’t support making it mandatory. And I don’t support “registration” for firearm owners at all, that’s just a way for the gov’t to know where to send their goons when they want to seize your gun.

krayzewolf New Hampshire
11/29/17 9:44 am

Nope. Too much risk of failure. I wouldn't use it.

Finny Conservative Lesbian
11/29/17 7:07 am

No. Consider a father heard an intruder. The intruder ended up taking down the father and his gun. An older son knew where he kept his other guns. He couldn't use it because it would be registered to his father.

Consider the same situation in a shooter situation. A shooter sees a guy has a gun on his belt and shoots him first. Now, nobody can use that gun to save themselves from the shooter.


44YY Boston, MA
11/29/17 9:56 am

Multiple people can be registered to the same firearm

44YY Boston, MA
11/29/17 9:57 am

Consider this situations: a robber tried to mug you but you have a gun so you’re safe but he manages to disarm you and tried to shoot you with your gun and can’t or just takes it and tried to use it in further crimes and can no longer

Finny Conservative Lesbian
11/29/17 10:14 am

Sure but I rather that be a possibility than the adverse

11/29/17 10:55 am

Seems like it should be up to the gun owner.

44YY Boston, MA
11/29/17 10:57 am

I would agree with that if the gun owner was the only one affected by that decision

11/29/17 11:00 am

That’s true. Criminals are affected by lawful gun owners. It makes lawful gun owners far harder to rob, rape, and murder. I forgot to think about the criminals’ interests.

44YY Boston, MA
11/29/17 12:53 pm

Criminals don’t want these because then it makes it harder for them to purchase illegal guns that they can actually use

11/29/17 1:18 pm

Criminals could easily get around them. Otherwise no iPhone would ever be stolen (they have similar fingerprint recognition technology). If you want to test the theory leave your iPhone unattended at a bus stop or other public place. Surely the criminals won’t bother stealing it if it’s locked with print recognition.

11/29/17 7:06 am

That’s all well and good but will illegal weapons be equipped with this tech too?

abusara i drink and i know things
11/29/17 4:36 pm

Here's the thing. Almost all illegal guns begin life as legal guns, and only become illegal when stolen. So if a legal gun is equipped with this technology, it would be difficult (albeit not impossible) for it to be used illegally if stolen.

11/29/17 5:09 pm

We’d have to taken into consideration all the guns currently illegal and those that will be replaced with the new tech. Where will all those go?

lightsabr2 The Big Sky
11/29/17 6:32 am

There’s an inverse relationship between the complexity of a firearm and its reliability.

44YY Boston, MA
11/29/17 10:00 am

Is that necessarily a bad thing?

lightsabr2 The Big Sky
11/29/17 10:17 am

Yes. When you carry for personal protection, reliability is a very important consideration.

44YY Boston, MA
11/29/17 10:25 am

It works when you’re holding it. It doesn’t when you aren’t. It’s that simple

lightsabr2 The Big Sky
11/29/17 11:40 am

That’s how it’s designed. In reality it adds a critical failure point that would only be more finicky in an emergency clutch situation. You do realize most CCW owners prefer to not even have a manual safety switch?

ReligiousCommie No Longer Active
11/29/17 5:37 am

I support it existing and being voluntary

jfish82285 Tennessean in Colorado
11/29/17 4:11 am

I like the innovation, but I’ve never been a fan of the fingerprint idea.

11/29/17 1:53 am

I would like to be able too, but there are too many concerns with the technology for the situation

Mackinaw Wolverine State, est.1837
11/29/17 12:45 am

I support the technology, sure. However, I would not support the government demanding and enforcing its exclusive use.

theNobamist Silicon Valley
11/28/17 11:56 pm

If they were so great, why does the iPhone have the "emergency call" prion while the phone is still locked?

The last thing to deal with in a danger situation, likely dark, possibly with blood or something on my hands from a fight with an attacker, is a fingerprint reader.

abusara i drink and i know things
11/29/17 4:37 pm

Uh, the iPhone ain't a gun.

Just sayin'

LaBruzzi America
11/28/17 11:47 pm

Really??...unreal how stupid this is

UniversePlan Michigan
11/28/17 10:58 pm

This user is currently being ignored