Dissecting Smart Guns
by John E. Jasen, MCDL member
The latest rage in the movement to ban firearms is the 'smart gun.' Where, by some
technological mechanism, the firearm authenticates the bearer as an authorized user before
functioning.
It would seem to me that 'smart guns' are an attempt to address two socially-based problems
with a technological solution. Specifically,
1) 'smart guns' try to eliminate the instances of childhood accidents with firearms.
2) 'smart guns' try to keep unauthorized users (criminals) from using firearms they
shouldn't have.
Unfortunately for 'smart gun' technology, we're using a screwdriver that's too big, and is the
wrong tool, to pound in a nail.
In the first case -- protecting the children -- let's try to imagine how many firearms are sold
and available in the United States each year. I don't have that figure readily available, but I
do know that about 25k handguns were sold in MD. To keep things simple, let's multiple by
50 states, and get a working figure of 1.25 million handguns.
Combine that with an existing estimated base of 270 million firearms, and we're looking at
a lot of guns. But, I like math simple, so let's pretend that there are 199 million firearms
owned in America, and 1 million sold this year, for a total of 200 million.
Now, let's correlate that with accidental childhood deaths via firearms, which was ~215 in
1995, an amazingly small number, when you correlate that to the amount of guns out there,
the amount of ammunition fired each year, the amount of gun-owning citizens, or just about
any other metric you can think of using. Never mind that firearms accidents are far behind
cars, bikes, pools, choking and chemicals in child fatality.
However, I digress. Again, I like simple math, so we'll call the number of childhood deaths
by firearm accidents 250, per year. According to that math, 'smart guns' have the potential to
save about 1.25 lives a year. Lotsa effort, little bang.
On the other hand, the NRA has a program, specifically aimed at youngsters, to teach them
about the dangers of firearms without a responsible adult. The message is simple:
STOP!
DON'T TOUCH!
LEAVE THE AREA!
TELL AN ADULT!
The cost? Negligible to schools, organizations or groups. The effectiveness? Childhood
deaths due to firearms accidents has declined steadily every year since 1970. Furthermore,
this is the same program that the FBI endorsed for their agents to teach their children. Lotsa
bang, little cost.
In the second case -- preventing unauthorized use -- let's begin with "what is unauthorized?"
Is 'unauthorized' defined as criminals, who would steal your firearms? Or, would your wife
be 'unauthorized?' Or, your wife would be allowed, but not your seventeen year old
daughter?
In the case that you and your family is authorized, but everyone else is not -- how is this
supposed to actively deter criminal misuse of that weapon? Because it is a 'smart gun?'
Our cars are pretty smart, too, and since they're a lot bigger, we should be able to fit a lot
more 'smart technology' into them, so no-one bad can misuse one. Nowadays, you can either
have keys, numeric keypads, or remote controls to start your car, yet many criminals are
making a quite active and financially rewarding career of car thievery.
In other words, it won't be long before the criminals will learn how to circumvent the 'smart
gun,' turning it back into an effective, dumb weapon.
What happens if your wife and/or daughter aren't authorized? Hopefully nothing, but what
happens if they aren't authorized, you're 2000 miles away, and a criminal has just kicked in
the front door?
To make a long story short, 'smart guns' will generally fail at both their assigned duties --
preventing childhood accidents and preventing criminal access.
To make matters worse, 'smart guns' will have to overcome, at least, the following obstacles
before we can even dream of employing them:
1) ease of use
2) speed of use
3) reliability of use
4) authorization management
1) ease of use -- if it isn't easy to use, no-one will use it. Especially on a piece of life-saving
equipment, such as a defensive firearm! If it is 2'o'clock in the morning, and your worst
nightmare is coming down the hallway to kill you, there won't be time to remember which
button to push, or what exact 'kung fu mojo' grip to use, so it can get a read.
2) speed of use -- authentication has to be quick. The average human can cover 21 feet in
under two seconds, which is longer than most rooms inside a house. If you have to wait for
the gun to approve you, the time just might kill you.
3) reliability of use -- it has to work on time, every time. It's emergency equipment, and it is
useless if it fails. A lifeboat has to float, if you need it, and a gun needs to fire if you need it.
Anything else, you're risking your life on unreliable equipment. This means that the
authentication device can't have a battery, as batteries slowly lose energy and fail. This also
means that the authentication device needs to work in hot weather, freezing weather, bone
dry conditions, right after being immersed in water, or in any other imaginable condition. It
also needs to be immune to magnetic interference, sun-spots, lightning, electricity,
electro-magnetic interference, or any other type of disruption possibly imaginable, or else
the device is categorically unacceptable.
Points 1-3 all, in different ways, say the same thing -- in an emergency, it is best to Keep It
Simple, Stupid [KISS]. In an emergency, time is not a resource you have, and failure is not
an option -- you need results, and you need them now. Any 'smart gun' technology will have
to be KISS easy to use, else valuable lives will be lost.
The last point I bring up is management of authorization. Basically, the owner of the firearm
needs a reasonably expedient way of telling the gun who can use it and who cannot.
Example: If a gun is sold, obviously the new owner will want all authorizations transferred
to him. Example: You want to let a friend shoot with you at the shooting range, because
she's been thinking about acquiring a gun just like one of yours. Example: You want to
remove your ex-wife from the access list, and add in your 18 year old son.
This has to be reasonably expedient, and easily done by the owner -- sending the gun to a
police station, or to the manufacturer, or ordering another magic decoder ring won't work.
As technology progresses, the concept of a 'smart gun' should periodically be reviewed, as
there could well be a case for the military and police to use it, and perhaps some firearms
owners would be interested in it, as well. But, we are not there yet, and a government
mandating the use of technology that is not reliable -- that should concern just about
anyone!
-- -- John E. Jasen // DNRC Ambassador to Earth \\ jjasen1@umbc.edu -- -- My views are
those of the DNRC only. Prepare to be domesticated --
------------------
GUN CONTROL puts THE CONTROL
in the hands of THE CRIMINALS.
--------------------------------
You all have my permision to
use any of these"signatures"
here, if you like!
---------------------------
-They call 'em POLUTE-TICIANS because they POLUTE the MINDS
of OUR CHILDERN with their ANTI civil/firearms RIGHTS SOCIALIST
political agendas. We of the older generations know B.S.
when we hear it.
-----------------------------------------------
In 2000, we must become politically active in
support of gun rights or we WILL LOSE the right
& the freedom.
-------------------------
NO FATE BUT WHAT WE MAKE!!!
----------------------
Every year,over 2 million Americans use firearms
not to take live but to preserve life,....limb & family
.Gun Control Democrats would prefer that they are all disarmed
and helpless and die victims of felony violence,instead.
Protect your gun rights, go to:
http://home.xnet.com/~gizmonic/TheMarch.html
and sign up as a helper or attendee or state organizer.
ernest2, Conn. CAN opp. "Do What You Can"!
http://thematrix.acmecity.com/digital/237/cansite/can.html
by John E. Jasen, MCDL member
The latest rage in the movement to ban firearms is the 'smart gun.' Where, by some
technological mechanism, the firearm authenticates the bearer as an authorized user before
functioning.
It would seem to me that 'smart guns' are an attempt to address two socially-based problems
with a technological solution. Specifically,
1) 'smart guns' try to eliminate the instances of childhood accidents with firearms.
2) 'smart guns' try to keep unauthorized users (criminals) from using firearms they
shouldn't have.
Unfortunately for 'smart gun' technology, we're using a screwdriver that's too big, and is the
wrong tool, to pound in a nail.
In the first case -- protecting the children -- let's try to imagine how many firearms are sold
and available in the United States each year. I don't have that figure readily available, but I
do know that about 25k handguns were sold in MD. To keep things simple, let's multiple by
50 states, and get a working figure of 1.25 million handguns.
Combine that with an existing estimated base of 270 million firearms, and we're looking at
a lot of guns. But, I like math simple, so let's pretend that there are 199 million firearms
owned in America, and 1 million sold this year, for a total of 200 million.
Now, let's correlate that with accidental childhood deaths via firearms, which was ~215 in
1995, an amazingly small number, when you correlate that to the amount of guns out there,
the amount of ammunition fired each year, the amount of gun-owning citizens, or just about
any other metric you can think of using. Never mind that firearms accidents are far behind
cars, bikes, pools, choking and chemicals in child fatality.
However, I digress. Again, I like simple math, so we'll call the number of childhood deaths
by firearm accidents 250, per year. According to that math, 'smart guns' have the potential to
save about 1.25 lives a year. Lotsa effort, little bang.
On the other hand, the NRA has a program, specifically aimed at youngsters, to teach them
about the dangers of firearms without a responsible adult. The message is simple:
STOP!
DON'T TOUCH!
LEAVE THE AREA!
TELL AN ADULT!
The cost? Negligible to schools, organizations or groups. The effectiveness? Childhood
deaths due to firearms accidents has declined steadily every year since 1970. Furthermore,
this is the same program that the FBI endorsed for their agents to teach their children. Lotsa
bang, little cost.
In the second case -- preventing unauthorized use -- let's begin with "what is unauthorized?"
Is 'unauthorized' defined as criminals, who would steal your firearms? Or, would your wife
be 'unauthorized?' Or, your wife would be allowed, but not your seventeen year old
daughter?
In the case that you and your family is authorized, but everyone else is not -- how is this
supposed to actively deter criminal misuse of that weapon? Because it is a 'smart gun?'
Our cars are pretty smart, too, and since they're a lot bigger, we should be able to fit a lot
more 'smart technology' into them, so no-one bad can misuse one. Nowadays, you can either
have keys, numeric keypads, or remote controls to start your car, yet many criminals are
making a quite active and financially rewarding career of car thievery.
In other words, it won't be long before the criminals will learn how to circumvent the 'smart
gun,' turning it back into an effective, dumb weapon.
What happens if your wife and/or daughter aren't authorized? Hopefully nothing, but what
happens if they aren't authorized, you're 2000 miles away, and a criminal has just kicked in
the front door?
To make a long story short, 'smart guns' will generally fail at both their assigned duties --
preventing childhood accidents and preventing criminal access.
To make matters worse, 'smart guns' will have to overcome, at least, the following obstacles
before we can even dream of employing them:
1) ease of use
2) speed of use
3) reliability of use
4) authorization management
1) ease of use -- if it isn't easy to use, no-one will use it. Especially on a piece of life-saving
equipment, such as a defensive firearm! If it is 2'o'clock in the morning, and your worst
nightmare is coming down the hallway to kill you, there won't be time to remember which
button to push, or what exact 'kung fu mojo' grip to use, so it can get a read.
2) speed of use -- authentication has to be quick. The average human can cover 21 feet in
under two seconds, which is longer than most rooms inside a house. If you have to wait for
the gun to approve you, the time just might kill you.
3) reliability of use -- it has to work on time, every time. It's emergency equipment, and it is
useless if it fails. A lifeboat has to float, if you need it, and a gun needs to fire if you need it.
Anything else, you're risking your life on unreliable equipment. This means that the
authentication device can't have a battery, as batteries slowly lose energy and fail. This also
means that the authentication device needs to work in hot weather, freezing weather, bone
dry conditions, right after being immersed in water, or in any other imaginable condition. It
also needs to be immune to magnetic interference, sun-spots, lightning, electricity,
electro-magnetic interference, or any other type of disruption possibly imaginable, or else
the device is categorically unacceptable.
Points 1-3 all, in different ways, say the same thing -- in an emergency, it is best to Keep It
Simple, Stupid [KISS]. In an emergency, time is not a resource you have, and failure is not
an option -- you need results, and you need them now. Any 'smart gun' technology will have
to be KISS easy to use, else valuable lives will be lost.
The last point I bring up is management of authorization. Basically, the owner of the firearm
needs a reasonably expedient way of telling the gun who can use it and who cannot.
Example: If a gun is sold, obviously the new owner will want all authorizations transferred
to him. Example: You want to let a friend shoot with you at the shooting range, because
she's been thinking about acquiring a gun just like one of yours. Example: You want to
remove your ex-wife from the access list, and add in your 18 year old son.
This has to be reasonably expedient, and easily done by the owner -- sending the gun to a
police station, or to the manufacturer, or ordering another magic decoder ring won't work.
As technology progresses, the concept of a 'smart gun' should periodically be reviewed, as
there could well be a case for the military and police to use it, and perhaps some firearms
owners would be interested in it, as well. But, we are not there yet, and a government
mandating the use of technology that is not reliable -- that should concern just about
anyone!
-- -- John E. Jasen // DNRC Ambassador to Earth \\ jjasen1@umbc.edu -- -- My views are
those of the DNRC only. Prepare to be domesticated --
------------------
GUN CONTROL puts THE CONTROL
in the hands of THE CRIMINALS.
--------------------------------
You all have my permision to
use any of these"signatures"
here, if you like!
---------------------------
-They call 'em POLUTE-TICIANS because they POLUTE the MINDS
of OUR CHILDERN with their ANTI civil/firearms RIGHTS SOCIALIST
political agendas. We of the older generations know B.S.
when we hear it.
-----------------------------------------------
In 2000, we must become politically active in
support of gun rights or we WILL LOSE the right
& the freedom.
-------------------------
NO FATE BUT WHAT WE MAKE!!!
----------------------
Every year,over 2 million Americans use firearms
not to take live but to preserve life,....limb & family
.Gun Control Democrats would prefer that they are all disarmed
and helpless and die victims of felony violence,instead.
Protect your gun rights, go to:
http://home.xnet.com/~gizmonic/TheMarch.html
and sign up as a helper or attendee or state organizer.
ernest2, Conn. CAN opp. "Do What You Can"!
http://thematrix.acmecity.com/digital/237/cansite/can.html
