Smith & Wesson One step closer to smart gun

M

Master Blaster

New member
Thursday February 3, 11:26 pm Eastern Time
Mytec stock soars on Smith & Wesson 'smart' guns
TORONTO, Feb 3 (Reuters) - Shares of Canadian biometric technology firm Mytec Technologies Inc. (Toronto:MYT.TO - news) soared on Thursday after the company said it had integrated its fingerprint scanning technology into ``smart'' guns made by Smith and Wesson Corp.

Mytec's shares shot up 76 percent, or C$2.21, on the Toronto Stock Exchange to close at C$5.10.

This establishes for investors the credibility of our technology because Smith & Wesson looked at other biometric encryption systems and ended up choosing Mytec's technology, said Mytec's Executive Vice-president Frank Chen.

The announcement coincides with a plethora of anti-gun lawsuits filed by 29 U.S. cities and counties against the gun industry, alleging they are partly to blame for inner-city violence.

Smith & Wesson, owned by the British conglomerate Tomkins PLC, holds about 25 percent of the U.S. handgun market and has invested about $5 million over the past four years to develop so-called smart-gun technology.

The U.S. government is pondering whether to give $10 million in federal grants to gun manufacturers to develop smart guns.

Chen said Mytec has been working with Smith & Wesson for the past nine months to develop a gun that can be fired only by the registered user.

``The gun will not fire until the fingerprint of the registered owner pulls the trigger. The trigger re-scans the fingerprint and in a millisecond will be able to tell if it's the registered owner,'' said Chen.

($1=$1.44 Canadian)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------
Master Blaster
 
I'm curious if the system allows someone else (spouse, parent, partner, etc.) to use the gun in an emergency? John
 
I'm curious if the system allows someone else (spouse, parent, partner, etc.) to use the gun in an emergency? John

P.S. - What about trading guns at the range with friends?
 
But they didn't "force" the electric car down people's throats (even Kali backed down) - largely because most people drive cars. Gun owners are the minority, gun ownership is demonized. They may have some luck passing this "reasonable" law.

Battler.
 
So that means I have to take the time to remove my gloves before I can draw and fire? Dangerous stuff. What about weak hand shooting, will it allow all your fingers to be scanned or just your strong hand? What if I have a blister on my fingertip the day my home get's invaded, I guess I can throw my gun at them and hope they leave without hurting anyone.
 
another what if.....
what if you sell it?....who changes the print and if it can be changed why cant it be stolen and changed then as well?...maybe it will require a corresponding chip implanted in the original purchaser...what crap...and boy does it allow for a lot of possibilities all negative.....
have any of you ever heard of a person losing a finger in a robbery because the ring wouldnt come off? A gruesome thought but if all that is around is smart guns, they could make a silicone print of your finger that would fit over there finger and heck it might work that way.....we all know that software or hardware never has a glitch....you know like if you pick the pistol up after have a few swirls filled in by grease or dirt surely it'll be able to read throught that or hell mud might even block it up..........bleeping politicians...fubsy.
 
There are a number of problems with "smart gun" technology:
<OL TYPE=1>
<LI> As already mentioned, what happens if I have a cut or burn on my trigger finger? The fingerprint will not match and the gun will not fire because it thinks that it is someone else.
<LI> What happens if I am out of town on a business trip (or even just running an errand at the local store) and my wife needs to defend herself and our children? The gun will not work because her fingerprints and mine are different. I guess that this means that we have to own more guns.
<LI> Perhaps the most important point, I would not want to trust my life and that of my loved one to anything electronic in nature.
<LI> Brand new batteries may not hold a full charge and the gun might not be operational when you need it the most. (I once had a brand new battery on my cell phone that was suppose to have 30 hours of standby time but when it was fully charged, it was only lasting 14-18 hours even though each morning it indicated that it was at full power. Having a cell phone die is one thing but not having your gun operational when you are defending your life and that of your loved ones is something else.).
<LI> Tiny circuits can burn out when you need them most. Those little things are fragle and if a gun is dropped during a struggle, they may fail to properly operate. Or, a slightly overchraged battery might burn out a circuit, thus leaving the gun unoperational.
<LI> What about if the trigger gets dirty from either dust, or gun powder, or even from blood in a violent confrontation? Again, the gun will be useless.
</OL>
All of these points leave me with the conclusion that SMART Guns are a DUMB Idea.

------------------
Share what you know, learn what you don't -- FUD.

[This message has been edited by FUD (edited February 08, 2000).]
 
I'm not sure which is more ludicrous, the "ring" or the "fingerprint".

Antis will love both - ring is jammable, fingerprint recognition, WAY expensive. Let alone in a package that can absorb the abuse of recoil.

Crime control? Nonexistant. Anyone with guns (except REAL novice types) at least field strip their guns, and probably pull them down and smith them. Anything like this can be bypassed if the ignition is still mechanical (and even not). This will come down to a wire driving a solenoid that's in plain view, that pushes a "blockage" of some sort out of the way. A stole gun can just have the "blockage" removed, or the wire made "live".

The antis have the advantage here that they WANT the guns to be unreliable, costly and suck. How can you read a fingerprint on a trigger anyway? Which part of the finger?

I see it coming though. And it ain't pretty.


Battler.
 
Right now we are seeing all those issues being raised in Maryland. It seems possible that, with a heavy Democratic majority in the legislature and a monomaniacal governor using a combination of cajolery and threats, such a bill might pass.

The governor has already exempted LEOs from "smart gun" use because according to a State Police spokesman, police lives are "too valuable to entrust to untried technology." The lives of others, of course, have no value.

Jim
 
I saw a show on the tube last year where Colt's smart gun was being demonstrated to the public. Turns out it had a "bug" and wouldn't work. They quickly fixed the problem right there on T.V. There was a pile of electronic junk in that gun! I wondered if your were walking down the street and someone beside you turned on thier cellphone,could that make the gun go off? I would never trust that garbage!
I have a smart gun. It's smart enough to go off when I pull the trigger!! :D
CALVIN
" want more gun control? use both hands! "
 
Jim: you got a reference or url on the
governnor exempting cops. That's a damning
statement if there ever was one.

Question:

Is it ambidexterous? If so, then it can
store other prints and let members of the
family use it? How many?

No gloves for cold weather folks.

The real reason for exempting cops:

Powdered sugar from donuts!

Sorry - I apologize
 
Having spent several of the past few years working on fingerprint sensor technology and being familiar with all of the various products out there, I can assure you that this company, if still using optical technology for their fingerprint sensor, is opening themselves for a lawsuit bigtime. Optical technology in fingerprint acquisition is weak because it is only capable of capturing the surface image of the print; therefore, the finger can be damaged, sanded, cut, etc and it will not be capable of capturing a proper image. The typical fingerprint template, as used by most fingerprint sensors, consists of minutae points and scores are given as to how closely a captured print's minutae matches the stored template. With the optical technology, a damaged finger will, in all likelihood, cause a false reject if there are insufficient data points captured on the acquired print. Other technologies are available. The one I used to work on implements a small rf voltage applied to the fingerprint surface and the subsurface/live skin layer of the finger is captured. This is really the only reliable print technology available today and it is an ic based system. Currently, the cost is quite prohibitive and would add about $200 to the cost of a product if implemented. I really don't care to see it used either, even though it would make me a very wealthy man.

[This message has been edited by slickpuppy (edited February 08, 2000).]
 
Oxford is a nonplayer. In it for the r&d money. Morton, the owner, is ... well, I don't need a lawsuit. I've met the guy and he is well... f..... up is an understatement. God knows thats the only way Oxford would ever be able to make money is through leaching off the government or a lawsuit. Also, Oxford uses an inferior thermal sensor from Thomson(or used to). Problem with thermal sensors is that similar temperatures between the sensor and finger will cause the image to be nonexistent. Also, the algorithms required for a sweep sensor are a computing nightmare. Not something readily available at reasonable cost in the embedded computing world. Not really any better than an optical sensor. The capacitive sensor from Veridicom and Infineon are also weak and suffers from the same inadequacies as an optical device since the capacitive sensor can only read the surface skin layer.




[This message has been edited by slickpuppy (edited February 09, 2000).]
 
Morton was on the Early show last fall

ever get a gun pointed at you for 5 minutes on tv?
the man is clueless yet is seen as an expert
He is so clueless he has the interview on his website: http://www.safergunsnow.org/video_gallery.html

ED Schultz from S%W was on NPR this AM...
here is what Morton safergun says about S&W:

Smith & Wesson Corp., Springfield, MA, tel.
800-331-0852, 100+ year-old gun company.

Status: Prototype but not publicly
demonstrated.

Company is reportedly looking for Federal
funding and has hired Washington lobbyists
to try to get it. Incongrously, company has
stated that personalized guns have a large
market but it may drop the project if it cannot
get government funding for it.

According to a press release, module uses a
"FingerTip" fingerprint sensor made by
Infineon, a German semiconductor company.

Comments: The construction and large size
of this sensor appear to make it difficult to
eliminate the separate fingerprint module and
put the sensor into the handle of the gun.
Furthermore, if the size of the sensor were
reduced, the size of the fingerprint image
would be reduced and it would be much more
difficult if not impossible to distinguish one
user from another.
http://www.safergunsnow.org/safety_technologies_summary.html
 
It's refreshing to know that some gun makers also agree that SMART Guns are a DUMB Idea.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NationalCCW on the "Weapons Forum" web board (<A HREF="http://www.weaponforums.com/Ultimate.cgi" TARGET=_blank> http://www.weaponforums.com/Ultimate.cgi):[/url]
Beretta has shown itself as a pro-gun firearm maker, unlike some others in the industry. They have also rejected a bribe offer by anti-gun politicians. For the story go to the "money" icon at:
National CCW Reciprocity Foundation http://www.homestead.com/njccw/nationalccw.html
[/quote]
 
I think it's pretty smart to have a gun that will fire when you pull the trigger! My S&W revolver will do that every time already. The one thing you can be confidant about ANYTHING electronic is that it WILL malfunction at some point.
 
IF the press hypes, it the liberal politicians embrace and endorse it, and we do nothing about it the smart gun will exist but only in the minds of people who don't own guns. I am certain that their faith in an illusory answer to their media created fear will result in the ban of all dumb guns.

In other words we will be required to purchase smart guns if we are allowed to own guns at all!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top