Is the 'Smart Gun' Concept Stupid?
Advocates Debate Clinton's Development Proposal http://www.apbnews.com/newscenter/breakingnews/2000/01/04/smartguns0104_01.html
Jan. 4, 2000
By James Gordon Meek
WASHINGTON (APBnews.com) -- Advocates of "smart
guns" believe experimental technology will prevent children
from accidentally firing handguns and criminals from making
use of stolen weapons while allowing adult gun owners to
use them for protection or sport.
But few working prototypes exist for these sci-fi weapons,
which use computer chips to prevent unauthorized users
from firing a gun. They are only a few steps removed from the
idea stage.
President Clinton is pushing for development of the new
technology. On Sunday, White House Chief of Staff John
Podesta said the president wants $10 million for research
and development in his fiscal year 2001 federal budget, due
this October.
But full-scale production is a long way off, and millions in research dollars are needed to make the
sketchy concept a reality, say those on the leading edge of smart-gun development. Some
gun-control advocates join their usual opponents in describing smart-gun research as a waste of
time and money.
"Pouring $10 million into smart guns is like pouring it down a black hole," said Kristen Rand of the
Violence Policy Center in Washington.
'Buck Rogers appeal'
Rand believes workable smart-gun technology is a near impossibility, "but it's got that kind of Buck
Rogers appeal to it that Americans love."
The unabashedly anti-gun advocacy group also objects to smart-gun technology because if ever
perfected it might encourage millions of Americans reluctant to purchase today's firearms to
reconsider in favor of something they perceive as safer.
That's what at least one U.S. gunmaker, Colt's Manufacturing Co. of Hartford, Conn., has banked
on.
The 164-year old company -- which went bankrupt in 1842 and again in 1992 -- received a
$500,000 grant in 1997 from the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to develop a smart gun for law
enforcement; the company also sees a future consumer market.
Colt's delivered two prototypes last spring for a .40-caliber handgun that will not work unless it
receives a radio signal from a user wearing a transmitter in a wristwatch or finger ring. Colt's has kept
one model and loaned the other to the government, which allegedly tested the weapon
improperly and broke the device.
A no-cost extension for Colt's was granted until March 2000, and company spokeswoman Beth
Lavach said the final "proof of concept" was delivered to the Department of Justice Monday,
ahead of the revised deadline. Lavach also said Colt's would likely ask for more research money
from the government, but a decision has not been made.
Money not available for R&D
Bringing the smart-gun product to the marketplace has been hampered by the inability of Colt's to
attract investment capital for its enterprises. Resources have been drained fighting off lawsuits by
U.S. cities against gunmakers, and investors are reluctant to gamble on the company.
Likewise, interest in smart-gun technology has been tepid from the rest of the firearms industry.
Manufacturers evidently find it easier to sell existing conventional arms than to spend millions on
next-generation weapons.
"Manufacturers have not spent much money on smart-gun R&D," said James Chambers,
president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) in Alexandria, Va. "But if
government research money was made available, they would pursue it."
The NSSF is the lobbying wing of the gun-making industry. Chambers said his organization would
not oppose the Clinton administration's efforts to get the funding.
Industry wants to avoid smart-gun mandate
Chambers said the industry would only object if the federal
government attempted to mimic Maryland Gov. Parris
Glendening, who wants to mandate that the only handguns
sold in the state be "smart" ones.
Forcing gunmakers to develop smart guns instead of
encouraging them with incentives will mean many brands will
be cut out of the market because they can't afford the R&D
costs, Chambers argued.
Beretta USA, the Accokeek, Md., branch of the 500-year-old
Italian gunmaker that supplies arms to the U.S. military and
civilian law enforcement agencies, has used outrage over
Glendening's proposal to raise funds for its conservative
political action committee.
'Nothing made by man is perfect'
While gunmakers might be reluctant to drop cash to design
smart guns, the leading developers of the technology have
few investment resources to draw upon, either. Resolving
potential product liability issues may also be a legitimate
problem.
Technology is imperfect and prone to failure, as anyone knows who has ever used electronic
devices ranging from desktop computers to pocket calculators. If a smart gun fails to recognize a
legitimate user -- like an officer whose service weapon employs the technology -- the results could
be disastrous and also costly in the legal realm.
That is a worthwhile risk, said CEO Steve Morton of Oxford Micro Devices Inc. of Monroe, Conn.,
who claims he is a leading developer of fingerprint-imaging technology and can make a handgun
that recognizes one or more programmed users.
"Liability is something that has to be dealt with," Morton said. "Nothing made by man is perfect.
Sooner or later a smart gun will fire when it shouldn't or won't fire when it should. That's the balance
society has to face."
The entrepreneur pointed to vehicle air bags and pacemakers -- electronic devices that have
saved hundreds of lives for every one the technologies have taken.
Product development suspended
Those issues will have to wait. Oxford Micro Devices suspended product development for firearms
last August due to lack of clients or other funding sources.
The company will not count on the White House or the Republican-controlled Congress to step up
to the plate to fund further R&D; it unveiled a Web site last summer that asks for the public's help --
and dollars.
"There's no sense waiting for legislation," Morton said.
James Gordon Meek is an APBnews.com staff writer in Washington
Advocates Debate Clinton's Development Proposal http://www.apbnews.com/newscenter/breakingnews/2000/01/04/smartguns0104_01.html
Jan. 4, 2000
By James Gordon Meek
WASHINGTON (APBnews.com) -- Advocates of "smart
guns" believe experimental technology will prevent children
from accidentally firing handguns and criminals from making
use of stolen weapons while allowing adult gun owners to
use them for protection or sport.
But few working prototypes exist for these sci-fi weapons,
which use computer chips to prevent unauthorized users
from firing a gun. They are only a few steps removed from the
idea stage.
President Clinton is pushing for development of the new
technology. On Sunday, White House Chief of Staff John
Podesta said the president wants $10 million for research
and development in his fiscal year 2001 federal budget, due
this October.
But full-scale production is a long way off, and millions in research dollars are needed to make the
sketchy concept a reality, say those on the leading edge of smart-gun development. Some
gun-control advocates join their usual opponents in describing smart-gun research as a waste of
time and money.
"Pouring $10 million into smart guns is like pouring it down a black hole," said Kristen Rand of the
Violence Policy Center in Washington.
'Buck Rogers appeal'
Rand believes workable smart-gun technology is a near impossibility, "but it's got that kind of Buck
Rogers appeal to it that Americans love."
The unabashedly anti-gun advocacy group also objects to smart-gun technology because if ever
perfected it might encourage millions of Americans reluctant to purchase today's firearms to
reconsider in favor of something they perceive as safer.
That's what at least one U.S. gunmaker, Colt's Manufacturing Co. of Hartford, Conn., has banked
on.
The 164-year old company -- which went bankrupt in 1842 and again in 1992 -- received a
$500,000 grant in 1997 from the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to develop a smart gun for law
enforcement; the company also sees a future consumer market.
Colt's delivered two prototypes last spring for a .40-caliber handgun that will not work unless it
receives a radio signal from a user wearing a transmitter in a wristwatch or finger ring. Colt's has kept
one model and loaned the other to the government, which allegedly tested the weapon
improperly and broke the device.
A no-cost extension for Colt's was granted until March 2000, and company spokeswoman Beth
Lavach said the final "proof of concept" was delivered to the Department of Justice Monday,
ahead of the revised deadline. Lavach also said Colt's would likely ask for more research money
from the government, but a decision has not been made.
Money not available for R&D
Bringing the smart-gun product to the marketplace has been hampered by the inability of Colt's to
attract investment capital for its enterprises. Resources have been drained fighting off lawsuits by
U.S. cities against gunmakers, and investors are reluctant to gamble on the company.
Likewise, interest in smart-gun technology has been tepid from the rest of the firearms industry.
Manufacturers evidently find it easier to sell existing conventional arms than to spend millions on
next-generation weapons.
"Manufacturers have not spent much money on smart-gun R&D," said James Chambers,
president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) in Alexandria, Va. "But if
government research money was made available, they would pursue it."
The NSSF is the lobbying wing of the gun-making industry. Chambers said his organization would
not oppose the Clinton administration's efforts to get the funding.
Industry wants to avoid smart-gun mandate
Chambers said the industry would only object if the federal
government attempted to mimic Maryland Gov. Parris
Glendening, who wants to mandate that the only handguns
sold in the state be "smart" ones.
Forcing gunmakers to develop smart guns instead of
encouraging them with incentives will mean many brands will
be cut out of the market because they can't afford the R&D
costs, Chambers argued.
Beretta USA, the Accokeek, Md., branch of the 500-year-old
Italian gunmaker that supplies arms to the U.S. military and
civilian law enforcement agencies, has used outrage over
Glendening's proposal to raise funds for its conservative
political action committee.
'Nothing made by man is perfect'
While gunmakers might be reluctant to drop cash to design
smart guns, the leading developers of the technology have
few investment resources to draw upon, either. Resolving
potential product liability issues may also be a legitimate
problem.
Technology is imperfect and prone to failure, as anyone knows who has ever used electronic
devices ranging from desktop computers to pocket calculators. If a smart gun fails to recognize a
legitimate user -- like an officer whose service weapon employs the technology -- the results could
be disastrous and also costly in the legal realm.
That is a worthwhile risk, said CEO Steve Morton of Oxford Micro Devices Inc. of Monroe, Conn.,
who claims he is a leading developer of fingerprint-imaging technology and can make a handgun
that recognizes one or more programmed users.
"Liability is something that has to be dealt with," Morton said. "Nothing made by man is perfect.
Sooner or later a smart gun will fire when it shouldn't or won't fire when it should. That's the balance
society has to face."
The entrepreneur pointed to vehicle air bags and pacemakers -- electronic devices that have
saved hundreds of lives for every one the technologies have taken.
Product development suspended
Those issues will have to wait. Oxford Micro Devices suspended product development for firearms
last August due to lack of clients or other funding sources.
The company will not count on the White House or the Republican-controlled Congress to step up
to the plate to fund further R&D; it unveiled a Web site last summer that asks for the public's help --
and dollars.
"There's no sense waiting for legislation," Morton said.
James Gordon Meek is an APBnews.com staff writer in Washington