Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Sweetpumper

First ‘smart’ pistol hits shelves

24 posts in this topic

SmartSystem_iP1-Pistole_1.jpg?ve=1&tl=1

The first so-called “smart gun” has hit the shelves at U.S. retail outlets, including one of the biggest firearms stores in California, according to the Washington Postexternal-link.png.

The Smart System iP1, a .22-caliber pistol made by the German gun-maker Armatix GmbH, can only function with an accompanying wristwatch, which is sold separately.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/02/20/first-smart-pistol-shelves-in-california/?intcmp=features

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm. I'd rather have a gun that reads my fingerprint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's certainly the wave of the future and I'm sure at some point all firearms will have electronics incorporated into their operation in one form or another.

Of course then there's the KISS counter. The more complicated a firearm, the more likelihood that it's going to fail at a critical time.

Heck, I know guys that still don't trust those newfangled semi-automatic pistols and they've been around for more than a century.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as a proof of concept, it is a good thing, as a target shooter\trainer, also good.

as self defence gun, .22 is useless.

p.s. didn't we have a magnetic ring revolver before?? it did not do too well. i wonder why.

Edited by aztek
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not say useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as a proof of concept, it is a good thing, as a target shooter\trainer, also good.

as self defence gun, .22 is useless.

p.s. didn't we have a magnetic ring revolver before?? it did not do too well. i wonder why.

Agreed, a .22 does not have much stopping power. But I use a .22 pistol for target practice because the ammo is relatively inexpensive compared with higher calibre rounds. You practice with the .22, then when you can make a nice close pattern move up to what you keep for self defense, plus it's easier on the hand (you can fire it for hours) and the ears (yes, I use ear protection).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just give me one of these.

Colt_1911A1_1_.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really get the 'smart' moniker.

For home defense, unless you constantly wear the wrist watch, it really isn't worth the price and effort.

And if you have to wear the wrist watch constantly, is that going to make you any more 'safety concious'.

Smart guns begin and end with the gun carrier.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A properly "smart" gun will detect if the target is armed and not fire if they're not.

Or maybe detect if the holder is drunk.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A properly "smart" gun will detect if the target is armed and not fire if they're not.

Or maybe detect if the holder is drunk.

Won't happen, the NRA will buy some politicians to introduce a bill against that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it wont happen because there is no such tech. NRA, BUSH, PITBULLS, and whatever boogeyman else you have, that you blame for everything, or whatever else that scares bejesus out of you, have nothing to do with it.

also any bill is nothing, untill it signed into law, you mean to tell me your democratic buddies would vote for it?

they would not vote on anything nra suggests even when it is sensible legestlation. just like you blame NRA for any idiot that got illegal gun, or a lawfull gun owner that commited a crime.

same as blame AAA fro DUI

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A properly "smart" gun will detect if the target is armed and not fire if they're not.

I don't think that would work so good for a female against an unarmed assailant who's breaking into her house. If it was a male (and most of the time it is), he could choke the living life out of her because the gun would detect that he is not armed and not allow her to fire the gun for protection.

Edit: I think a tasergun is much better for that anyway, so you don't haft to end up killing someone. Just immobilize them until the police arrive.

Edited by Purifier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit: I think a tasergun is much better for that anyway, so you don't haft to end up killing someone. Just immobilize them until the police arrive.

than they sue you, and may even win, but even if they lose, you still gonna pay your lawer.

tasern gun wont stop anyone, there are ways to deal with it, and no one is scared of it, gun otoh makes most run. just look up cctv footages of robberies on youtube, even armed robbers run when potential victim has one. however, i looked i have not found a single video where taser made anyone run, or saved anyone from being robbed. may be you can link me to one.

another thing, you will have to keep tasing him untill cops come over, (sure you don't think he'll just gonna lay down and let you tie him up, do you?) becase effect will wear off rather fast, and if he dies (quite a few people did die from tasers), you go to jail, becouse he was not an immediate threat on the floor. you will never convict jury you were in even precieved danger. nor to mention if he is drugged up, he'll recover faster than you can change cartrige on your taser.

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Won't happen, the NRA will buy some politicians to introduce a bill against that...

The exact reason people like me will keep funding the NRA.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't we just make guns for home defense which automatically signal the police upon firing? Heck, why not put GPS in it too so any death via the gun can be 100% verified with time, shots fired and exact location?

Or maybe I'm just losing my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't we just make guns for home defense which automatically signal the police upon firing? Heck, why not put GPS in it too so any death via the gun can be 100% verified with time, shots fired and exact location?

Or maybe I'm just losing my mind.

Sounds like you handed your resume to the NSA more than once...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't we just make guns for home defense which automatically signal the police upon firing? Heck, why not put GPS in it too so any death via the gun can be 100% verified with time, shots fired and exact location?

Or maybe I'm just losing my mind.

Nah, GPS in the bullets so they can track the crims after you shoot them.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, GPS in the bullets so they can track the crims after you shoot them.

LOL I'll go for that. But I'm afraid all the cops will be running to the range and out in the woods every time we go shooting for fun!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that would work so good for a female against an unarmed assailant who's breaking into her house. If it was a male (and most of the time it is), he could choke the living life out of her because the gun would detect that he is not armed and not allow her to fire the gun for protection.

Edit: I think a tasergun is much better for that anyway, so you don't haft to end up killing someone. Just immobilize them until the police arrive.

Why should I be the least little bit concerned about killing someone if they're in my home threatening my family and me with violence and/or death?

And do you really want your wife or child fending off a home invader with a one-shot all-or-nothing taser? Not to mention, how many times have we seen a guy take a taser hit from a trained LEO and just brush it off and keep coming?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

than they sue you, and may even win, but even if they lose, you still gonna pay your lawer.

tasern gun wont stop anyone, there are ways to deal with it, and no one is scared of it, gun otoh makes most run. just look up cctv footages of robberies on youtube, even armed robbers run when potential victim has one. however, i looked i have not found a single video where taser made anyone run, or saved anyone from being robbed. may be you can link me to one.

another thing, you will have to keep tasing him untill cops come over, (sure you don't think he'll just gonna lay down and let you tie him up, do you?) becase effect will wear off rather fast, and if he dies (quite a few people did die from tasers), you go to jail, becouse he was not an immediate threat on the floor. you will never convict jury you were in even precieved danger. nor to mention if he is drugged up, he'll recover faster than you can change cartrige on your taser.

And do you really want your wife or child fending off a home invader with a one-shot all-or-nothing taser? Not to mention, how many times have we seen a guy take a taser hit from a trained LEO and just brush it off and keep coming?

Yeah, from what I've been reading from the true-life testimonies of LEO's, they don't do as good as I thought they would. One LEO was saying he had to tase a guy 5 times before it finally brought the dude down. So they're too iffy for me. Besides, you haft be a certified LEO to use some of those particular weapons, from what I understand. Didn't know that beforehand.

Anyway, I'll just stick to a shotgun and aim for the legs/feet at close range.

Thanks

Why should I be the least little bit concerned about killing someone if they're in my home threatening my family and me with violence and/or death?

Me thinking about using a tasergun instead, ain't got nothing to do with you specifically and your moral ethics, Rafterman. I was thinking out loud pertaining to me, so chill, dude..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, from what I've been reading from the true-life testimonies of LEO's, they don't do as good as I thought they would. One LEO was saying he had to tase a guy 5 times before it finally brought the dude down. So they're too iffy for me. Besides, you haft be a certified LEO to use some of those particular weapons, from what I understand. Didn't know that beforehand.

Anyway, I'll just stick to a shotgun and aim for the legs/feet at close range.

Thanks

Not to mention, most home invasions I hear about are done by more than one person. That taser is probably going to get yourself killed. Taser one and the next guy opens up. Nope, I'd rather have a dependable AR-15 or pump action 12 gauge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really get the 'smart' moniker.

For home defense, unless you constantly wear the wrist watch, it really isn't worth the price and effort.

And if you have to wear the wrist watch constantly, is that going to make you any more 'safety concious'.

Smart guns begin and end with the gun carrier.

So when Joe Biden or some other gun controller wants to pass new legislation promoting this technology, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you and those who agree with you on this point won't suddenly turn cloak.

Smart guns begin with the gun owner.. and the market will determine whether this technology is worth the price and effort. Not you or some ruler in his marble hall allegedly speaking on your behalf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like you handed your resume to the NSA more than once...

Yep, because I'm that paranoid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when Joe Biden or some other gun controller wants to pass new legislation promoting this technology, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you and those who agree with you on this point won't suddenly turn cloak.

Smart guns begin with the gun owner.. and the market will determine whether this technology is worth the price and effort. Not you or some ruler in his marble hall allegedly speaking on your behalf.

That would be a turn around for our Vice President given that he thinks folks should just fire through their doors with shotguns.

http://www.fieldandstream.com/articles/guns/2013/02/gun-control-joe-biden-interview

V.P. BIDEN: Well, the way in which we measure it is—I think most scholars would say—is that as long as you have a weapon sufficient to be able to provide your self-defense. I did one of these town-hall meetings on the Internet and one guy said, “Well, what happens when the end days come? What happens when there’s the earthquake? I live in California, and I have to protect myself.”

I said, “Well, you know, my shotgun will do better for you than your AR-15, because you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door.” Most people can handle a shotgun a hell of a lot better than they can a semiautomatic weapon in terms of both their aim and in terms of their ability to deter people coming. We can argue whether that’s true or not, but it is no argument that, for example, a shotgun could do the same job of protecting you. Now, granted, you can come back and say, “Well, a machine gun could do a better job of protecting me.” No one’s arguing we should make machine guns legal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.