With $2 million in grants from the feds, scientists have developed a handgun with 32 sensors built into the handle. The prototype was unveiled last month and has a current failure rate of 1 in 100 trigger pulls. The military calls for 1 in 100,000 so the teams hopes to eventually reduce fire rate failure to this number using possibly hundreds of sensors. Donald Sebastian, vice president NJIT the company that developed the technology for this handgun, says if all goes well that NJIT plans to market and sell the gun by 2008.

"Fingerprinting" the gun, or making the gun recognize its owner, will probably be done via shooting it at a local range 10 times upon being purchased.

SOURCE:
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/technology/ge...ecbccdrcrd.html

This post has been edited by nations: Aug 1 2006, 04:54 AM

That is a really cool idea. That way no one can frame another person in a shooting because the gun won't fire unless the owner is holding it but you know they could always force the owner to hold it to and what not or find a way to make it work without having proper owner holding it. I like the idea though and hopefully they will perfect it. Enemy lines won't be able to use our guns lol. I think that hopefully this can help find more real bad guys in cases involving framing. Although expensive that is probably the type of technology I would want with my gun if I were to buy one because you know that will also keep children from being able to fire them off as well.

very true, plenoptic. I especially agree about how someone could be framed by forcing them to hold a gun... And a really interesting idea, nations... thanks for the read... I definately want a gun that has this technology... Though even 1 in 100,000 seems like an awfully hight failure rate if it can be achieved... what if you were framed and you were that 1 in 100,000 failure... that would suck because nobody would believe that you're innocent...

then again, I can't really think of a better way to make sure only a gun's owner shoots it...

and what about if a criminal brings their gun into your house and you manage to grab it from them - you can't shoot them in self defense...
*sigh* - nothing's perfect...

It wont work in the end. What happens when the day comes that a stranger has to use your weapen to save your life but cannot because only the weapon's owner can use it. Goodbye to you.

This new technology will definitely stop most of the accidental deaths caused by guns when it falls into the wrong hands of children trying to play with them.

It will by no means replace all guns ever sold, and is also not in its final stages. One thing we may see in the future is being able to program multiple people. That way, the army could program all the guns in a squad to all the people in it, thereby only excluding the enemies. I also doubt it won't be re-programmable if necessary, through a keycard or code.



This is a very good point - many children have died for that reason. It could be programmed to the parents for the sake of safety, and remain completely unusable to the kids, without a safety lock that could rather easily be removed.

the idea is good but its not perfect. of course people will modify weapons or just buy illegal weapons without those sensors... and some will keep producing weapons without sensors even if its forbidden.

I think that for commercially available weapons, by that I mean the majority of those in the US, it would be a great idea, because it will stop people's children using their weapons, which is good.

Although I think for military weapons it should certainly NOT be developed. I am a soldier in the Army and I know the dangers that you face on the front line, more importantly I know the fear that you get, even when only on training, when your weapon jams and the enemy is only a few tens of metres in front of you. When I get into a situation like this, which happens more than anyone would like, once is certainly more than I would like. I would certainly vote against this technology, because without it I can grab any other weapons, or more likely the weapon of a fallen comerad (or even a living comrads sidearm) and be able to use that. Imagine if it was that situation and he couldn't lend me his sidearm because of similar restrictions! Madness.

If this technology does get developed I would vote STRONGLY for it to be disabled on all frontline military weapons. I want a backup plan.

Even if your not a soldier, you may be able to feel what I trying to portray. Anyone ever been paintballing here? On a frosty morning? The paintball guns (called markers) jam quite easily it's frosty out. I've been known on a number of occasions to switch markers with another person who gets 'killed' in the field if their weapon is jamming less than mine.

Again, I want a backup plan here.

Grey.

Nice Technology