First-ever ‘smart gun’ with fingerprint and facial recognition unlocking system hits the market

[ColoradoMinuteMan]

Threads like this sort of drive me a little crazy. You can be BOTH critical of a new technology while still seeing the positive potential of the new technology... IF this was 100% reliable or at least as reliable as my guns I would want it on everyone of them.

Sigh... there was a time when all the arguments above in this thread, against this potential smart guns were made in a similar manner about firearms in general. Firearms were finicky, unreliable, slow to load, sensitive to rain and other bad weather and inaccurate compared to the long bow...

No wonder modern firearm development has nearly stopped advancing as a technology. The only change is the last 100+ years was the grudging acceptance of polymer as a viable building material.

Give me a "phase plasma rifle in the 40 watt range"...

Firearms don’t have revolutionary advances because they are relatively simplistic devices that have already reached diminishing returns in technological advances. Same with hand tools, knives, blow driers, toasters and other low complexity devices. This isn’t the result of some sort of lack of appetite or adoption for vastly improved products. The primary purpose of a firearm is, in the end, to provide sport or defense. These electronic safety devices do virtually nothing to increase the reliability, utility, or capability of their primary purpose. At best this technology would have the same reliability, utility and capability of their primary purpose at the cost of complexity, repairability, weight, need for batteries, etc. In addition, I disagree with your premise a bit in that there has been quite a bit of innovation in the past few decades as it relates to accessories for firearm, which essentially improve capabilities of the firearms without compromising the integrity and simplicity of the primary operating mechanisms of the firearm. You see very wide adoption of innovative and low cost optics including infrared and thermal. It simply isn’t the case that firearms users don’t want to adopt new technology.

 

[wayneinFL]

There are only two kinds of electronics. The ones that have failed already, and the ones that are going to fail.

I heard that about cars in the 70s and 80s. This is back in the day when there was one computer running a carburetor or fuel injection system. Not a dozen of the running the whole car.

This is just the Chrysler Lean Burn of smart guns.

I felt this way about red dots on handguns in IPSC, practical shooting woth impractical guns. Why put a big clunky sight on there that depends on batteries working and the dot adjusted just perfectly, when there is a perfectly good pointy thing on the front of the slide that works fine? Now people are using them on carry guns.

I'm sure in my lifetime there will be reliable smart guns. Maybe good enough to use for defensove purposes. And there will be ways to work around the technology. And there will be new safeguards, them more ways to work around that technology.

I'll probably still be carrying a revolver or a single action auto.

 

[bdickens]

Think how much easier this gun would be if the EtronX primer system had made it as a commercial product. You would need no electro-mechanical mechanisms in the system at all. Another technology killed by peoples inability to see what the technology could have enable if matured...

More bovine excrement. It was killed because it was too expensive, unreliable and offered no substantive advantages over traditional firearms technology.

 

[AlexanderA]

If the "smart gun" technology works flawlessly (a big "if"), then the inevitable next step would be to mandate it legislatively. What happens to the millions of existing guns? Would they have to be turned in, or made inoperable?

This is the real danger. Kill the idea before it destroys us.

 

[mcb]

More bovine excrement. It was killed because it was too expensive, unreliable and offered no substantive advantages over traditional firearms technology.

And yet Remington (now Vista) is still making EtronX primers for defense contractors... EtronX is still being used is some smoke grenades and less lethal weapon systems on military vehicles. Nearly all military weapon system 20mm and above use some type of electrically primed ignition.

Electric ignition offer huge advantages in a handgun. With electrically primed handgun ammunition you no longer need have a mechanical connection from the trigger in front of the magazine well, around the magazine, to a sear behind the magazine. We no longer need to have room in the slide for a striker and its spring or firing pin and its hammer and any other safety blocks and disconnectors. We can replace the entire mechanical fire control and disconnector with a single switch and one wire.

And in the context of the Biofire weapon this means all the safety interlocks can all be solid state electronics since no electromechanical actuators would be needed to enable/disable the fire control. This would make it more reliable, less power hungry, and more shock tolerant.

ETA: The other interesting part of eclectically primed semi-auto firearms is the distinction between semi-auto and full auto is determined by code not mechanical hardware.

 

[mcb]

If the "smart gun" technology works flawlessly (a big "if"), then the inevitable next step would be to mandate it legislatively. What happens to the millions of existing guns? Would they have to be turned in, or made inoperable?

This is the real danger. Kill the idea before it destroys us.

How would this bi-lock technology be mandated? There are more "dumb" guns than people in this country. They might want to mandate this technology but there is no practical way to do it. This technology if allow to mature will be a boon to the pro-2A side not a liability.

 

[JmacD]

I wanted to read this yesterday. But my hands were dirty so I couldn’t use the fingerprint recognition to open my phone. My face was dirty and I’d worn my contact lenses instead of glasses, so it would not recognize my face. Then the battery died. Ah… I may possibly see some common denominators…

 

[JN01]

How would this bi-lock technology be mandated? There are more "dumb" guns than people in this country. They might want to mandate this technology but there is no practical way to do it. This technology if allow to mature will be a boon to the pro-2A side not a liability.

The gun control crowd doesn't care about "practical". When they enact gun bans, they may not be able to get rid of the currently owned banned guns, but they can greatly curtail their use. How many people will concealed carry a restricted weapon or take it to a range if they are risking being charged with a felony for doing so?

No one is stopping these companies from developing products. Firearms have failure potentials with feeding, extraction, etc. This new iteration has those combined with the potential for failure of multiple electronic systems which will render it unusable with no possible immediate action to mitigate the failure. It is up to the developer to prove their product is near infallible, most people reasonably don't want to risk their well-being to be a beta tester.

 

[ColoradoMinuteMan]

How would this bi-lock technology be mandated? There are more "dumb" guns than people in this country. They might want to mandate this technology but there is no practical way to do it. This technology if allow to mature will be a boon to the pro-2A side not a liability.

That hasn’t been a barrier to all sorts of ridiculous mandates such as magazine capacity restrictions, requirements to secure firearms with safes and locks, etc. Where do you see examples that illustrate this point?

 

[mcb]

The gun control crowd doesn't care about "practical". When they enact gun bans, they may not be able to get rid of the currently owned banned guns, but they can greatly curtail their use. How many people will concealed carry a restricted weapon or take it to a range if they are risking being charged with a felony for doing so?

No one is stopping these companies from developing products. Firearms have failure potentials with feeding, extraction, etc. This new iteration has those combined with the potential for failure of multiple electronic systems which will render it unusable with no possible immediate action to mitigate the failure. It is up to the developer to prove their product is near infallible, most people reasonably don't want to risk their well-being to be a beta tester.

No one is asking you to beta test this product with your life. If you don't trust it don't use it. But there are those in this thread that not only don't trust it but want to make it so someone else can't choose to trust it if they want too. At least one person in this thread has already called for killing this fledgling technology (the person my reply was too) before it's had a chance to prove itself and mature. My point here it not that everyone should accept this but we should allow it to mature and prove (or not) itself as a viable technology. Its already a difficult path for this technology purely on the tech side without a large percentage of the pro-2A community attacking it on aspects many of which are unsupported fears.

 

[Styx]

How would this bi-lock technology be mandated? There are more "dumb" guns than people in this country. They might want to mandate this technology but there is no practical way to do it. This technology if allow to mature will be a boon to the pro-2A side not a liability.

You're looking at it through rose colored glasses while everyone else is looking at it from a realist point of view. It depends on batteries, the more parts and tech you add to something, the more things can brake and go wrong. Others have bought up completely valid points about what happens if your injured, you have debris on your hand, or if other friends or family need to use the gun? IMHO, I can not see a way a "smart gun" can't easily have altered, e.i, it's still functions like a regular maniacal gun thus any tech could be taken out. It adds a plothera of failure points, and things that can go wrong.

Last but not least, Democrat states have already mandated "smart guns." Not because they think it will work but rather because they know it will drive up cost and will won't work well. Plus Blue states, gun control groups, and Democrat members of Congress have and are pushing for there to be a regulatory body invented for firearms simular to the EPA and automobiles in which they can mandate safety features on all firearms nationwide. We all see the writing on the wall and that "smart guns" are not only a liability, but also a Trojan hohouse.

I tried to state a discussion about this the other day, but a mod didn't like the topic and others were fixated on the P320:

Significantly, the report from the Post and The Trace reminds us that “Firearms are one of the few products that are exempt from federal consumer product safety regulations. No regulatory body has the power to investigate alleged defects or impose a mandatory recall of guns.”

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/amp/rcna79245

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/04/11/sig-sauer-p320-fires-on-own/

 

[Styx]

No one is asking you to beta test this product with your life. If you don't trust it don't use it. But there are those in this thread that not only don't trust it but want to make it so someone else can't choose to trust it if they want too. At least one person in this thread has already called for killing this fledgling technology (there person my reply was too) before it's had a chance to prove itself and mature. My point here it not that everyone should accept this but we should allow it to mature and prove (or not) itself as a viable technology. Its already a difficult path for this technology purely on the tech side without a large percentage of the pro-2A community attacking it on aspects many of which are unsupported fears.

No matter how much it is improved or "matures", the reasons given for not trusting or supporting it will still remain true. I see nothing wrong with gun owners who know better attacking what is clearly a bad idea.

As for those who want the product killed, that's a moot opinion that they're allowed to have. It's going to continue to be pushed irregardless of how they feel about it. Personally I believe any company investing in this tech is throwing away money because I don't see any every catching on, and it would have to be mandated to sell.

 

[mcb]

No matter how much it is improved or "matures", the reasons given for not trusting or supporting it will still remain true. I see nothing wrong with gun owners who know better attacking what is clearly a bad idea.

There was a time when the idea of delicate optics on a service rifle would have been deemed a "clearly a bad idea" that is becoming a common thing in many militaries.

There was a time when flying a plane purely by digital control with no mechanical linkage between pilot and the flight control surfaces would have been deemed "clearly a bad idea" . We fly-by-wire both commercial and military planes all the time now. We are even doing helicopters now.

"Clearly a bad idea" is sometimes an opportunity to those with a little optimism and the desire to innovate to do something new and better.

Electronicly control weapons are the future, how far in the future is still to be seen I hope I am still alive to play with them.

 

[JN01]

No one is asking you to beta test this product with your life.

Biofire is apparently telling potential buyers that they can trust their product to save their life. Maybe they will figure it out. Or maybe it will join the Gyrojet, Dardick tround revolver, and every other failed attempt at "smart-gun" technology.

 

[JN01]

Electronicly control weapons are the future, how far in the future is still to be seen I hope I am still alive to play with them.

Do you plan on getting a Biofire when it hits the market?

 

[mcb]

Do you plan on getting a Biofire when it hits the market?

I just might if it looks to be as reliable as I require.

ETA: Surprisingly it's not priced too bad. ~$1500.

 

[Styx]

There was a time when the idea of delicate optics on a service rifle would have been deemed a "clearly a bad idea" that is becoming a common thing in many militaries.

That's apples to oranges as the gun doesn't stop working if the optic malfunctions, and with suppressor height sights, flip-up sights, and co-witnessing, the failure points of optics are minimized. That's not the case with smart guns. Even if one only relied solely on optics, they still have the option to point and shoot... Plus, optics still fail regularly whether it's a Trijicon RMR or Holosun. I can cite dozens of forum post.

There was a time when flying a plane purely by digital control with no mechanical linkage between pilot and the flight control surfaces would have been deemed "clearly a bad idea" . We fly-by-wire both commercial and military planes all the time now. We are even doing helicopters now.

And planes still regularly fail and have a team of mechanics and engineers regularly checking to insure everything is on order before the aircraft takes off. Someone can not ask a treat to wait while they change the batteries, wash their hands, heal from an injury, fix an issue that arises, or go and get a backup firearm while in imitate danger whereas a defective plane cam be grounded, they have all the time in the world to fix the problem, and passengers can simply catch another flight. Again apples and oranges.

"Clearly a bad idea" is sometimes an opportunity to those with a little optimism and the desire to innovate to do something new and better.

Electronicly control weapons are the future, how far in the future is still to be seen I hope I am still alive to play with them.

I disagree that electric small arms at least are the future, and yes, they are a bad idea for all the plothera of reasons already mentioned as well as for political reasons. It adds too many liabilities, much more cost, and for those reasons alone I don't see any L.E., military, or gun owners adopting it. It's a gimmick and always will be IMHO.

 

[Englishmn]

I want to see something like the metal storm pistol with biometric lockout operator and target cameras that send video to a off site nvr mounted on a wall charger in every classroom.
Could even do 2way audio so responders can verify conditions with the operator.
Could also help with clearing as you could disable gun before tac team enters room so no friendly fire.
The possibilities are pretty exciting . Plus they can all be disabled by default unless a lock down alarm is triggered.
But I only support the required use in gun free mass murder zones.
And I would like to require all teachers to be proficient in use with regular training.
If you are not willing to use deadly force to protect children you probably shouldn't be teaching them.
Sorry for the amout of text.

 

[mcb]

I just might if it looks to be as reliable as I require.

That's apples to oranges as the gun doesn't stop working if the optic malfunctions, and with suppressor height sights, flip-up sights, and co-witnessing, the failure points of optics are minimized. That's not the case with smart guns.


And planes still regularly fail and have a team of mechanics and engineers regularly checking to insure everything is on order before the aircraft takes off. Someone can not ask a treat to wait while they change the batteries, wash their hands, or fix an issue that arises, or go and get a backup firearm while in imitate danger whereas a defective plane cam be grounded, they have all the time in the world to fix the problem, and passengers can simply catch another flight. Again apples and oranges.


I disagree that electric small arms at least are the future, and yes, they are a bad idea for all the plothera of reasons already mentioned as well as for political reasons. It adds too many liabilities, much more cost, and for those reasons alone I don't see any L.E., military, or gun owners adopting it. It's a gimmick and always will be IMHO.

By nearly any metric flying is the safest mode of motorized transportation we have.

Nearly every weapon system above the small arms and smallest of the crews served weapon system like M2 and M19 is directly dependent on electronics in both its aiming control loop and fire control loop.

We all complain that electrics gadgets are cheap and disposable but are somehow going to make guns expense? The Biofire is cheaper than some higher end "dumb" guns. We make electronics for the military that can sit on the shelf for 20+ years and then power up in a moments notice with no charging (there are batteries with 20+ year shelf life) and survived the trip down a large caliber gun tube in smart munitions like Excalibur and PGK.

It's not if, it's when...

 

[bdickens]

There was a time when the idea of delicate optics on a service rifle would have been deemed a "clearly a bad idea" that is becoming a common thing in many militaries.

There was a time when flying a plane purely by digital control with no mechanical linkage between pilot and the flight control surfaces would have been deemed "clearly a bad idea" . We fly-by-wire both commercial and military planes all the time now. We are even doing helicopters now.

"Clearly a bad idea" is sometimes an opportunity to those with a little optimism and the desire to innovate to do something new and better.

Electronicly control weapons are the future, how far in the future is still to be seen I hope I am still alive to play with them.

False analogies.

Firearms don't quit working if the optics fail. They don't even stop working if the iron sights get broken.

Fly-by-wire systems don't require flaky, not-ready-for-prime-time biometric authentication schemes to operate. Nor do they fail to operate if one's hands or face are wet, dirty, bloody...

Drive-by-wire systems in automobiles are quite robust and function over a CAN bus that has built-in redundancy and is resistant to interference. I imagine that aviation systems are similar.

They are hardly failsafe, however.

Nor are the anti theft systems. But when your car won't start because the electronic security system fails you don't get injured or killed. When the one on your handgun fails in the middle of the fight for your life, you do.

 

[theotherwaldo]

I clock in at my workplace using a fingerprint reader.
It fails about one time in four.
This does not inspire me with faith in this form of technology... .

 

[AlexanderA]

Electric ignition offer huge advantages in a handgun.

The "smart gun" controversy is not about electric ignition. It's about electronic interlocks that would prevent firing unless certain conditions were met. The first step would be that the gun could only be fired by the registered owner. (Biometric identification.) Later, other conditions could be added, such as that the owner had not been drinking. (A breathalyzer could be built into the gun.) And ultimately, an OK from a government agency, transmitted electronically, could be required before a gun could be fired. This opens the door to total control -- an antigunner's fondest dream.

How would this bi-lock technology be mandated? There are more "dumb" guns than people in this country. They might want to mandate this technology but there is no practical way to do it. This technology if allow to mature will be a boon to the pro-2A side not a liability.

Exactly like how "assault weapon" bans would be mandated. First, they would prohibit the manufacture of anything except "smart guns." Then, they would make it very inconvenient and expensive to own anything except a "smart gun," by taxing it, requiring unobtainable insurance, disallowing a self-defense plea if such a gun was used, etc. Then they would start collecting them whenever the police ran across them. Just a huge step in the demonization of gun owners. Don't be beguiled by this idea.

 

[AlexanderA]

I want to see something like the metal storm pistol with biometric lockout operator and target cameras that send video to a off site nvr mounted on a wall charger in every classroom.
Could even do 2way audio so responders can verify conditions with the operator.
Could also help with clearing as you could disable gun before tac team enters room so no friendly fire.
The possibilities are pretty exciting . Plus they can all be disabled by default unless a lock down alarm is triggered.

I hope that this is sarcasm. But this is exactly the nightmare scenario for gun owners (and for all of us, really). The really bad part is that all of this will be technologically possible in a few years. At the risk of being called a Luddite, I say we should shut down this development now. Not all technology is "progress."

 

[CapnMac]

Yeah seems like a gun for non-gun people who are in a less than ideal environment.

Ian brings this out in his video--from when he visited the actual company making these.
They are meant for people who want a gun in the nightstand, and have to wonder about who might come in and rummage in said nightstand.
The Company execs have no illusion that this is meant for a general gun-buying audience.

Contrary to the OP article, this is not "on the market right now." BF had to "ground up" the entire firearm, magazine and all. It has bugs to work out. It is, in the terms of the tech world in "alpha" testing at best.

Per Ian, there's not an actual mechanical connection between the trigger and the sear; this pistol is 100% reliant upon its electronics.

Now, whether BF will fork over the cash extortion required to test for inclusion on the CA Safe Pistol list (presuming said list survives its present Court scrutiny, of course).

(Except maybe the folks who are okay that Google tracks everywhere they go when they leave their house.)

Actually they are tracking you inside the house as well. There are just too many always-on mics and cameras anymore.

They might want to mandate this technology but there is no practical way to do it.

Practical has nothing to do with fiat or mandates, sadly.

If, as claimed, the market is meant to be nervous urbanites wanting a talisman rather than a tool they train with, and strive to master, the steep entry-level price is going to be an issue.
The fact BioFire is claiming the thing is un-hackable, will make for an interesting DefCon, as Deviant Oldham will want to be first in line.

It's really far too early to judge this.

 

[GEM]

Might be targeted at upscale, more affluent families who want a 'safe' gun. So price isn't that much. Look at the prices of current cars. Or folks buying Staccatos - for self-defense that price, compared to a standard Glock 19? The money is out there.