$10,000 Gun Needs Matching Wristwatch to Fire

[JohnnyLucky]

It is an interesting concept. It could be the beginning of an evolutionary process. The end results might even turn out to be useful for something other than weapons. It's happened before.

 

[sliem]

Nice concept but too expensive unless you are batman.

 

[JohnMD1022]

What a stupid idea

 

[pswenne]

"Needs biometrics on the handle and that is all. Screw the wireless crap."

Hum.. yeah sure and then your evil twin brother you didn't know you had steals the gun and fires... you get to be the suspect...

sounds familiar....

 

[pswenne]

[citation][nom]CptTripps[/nom]Needs biometrics on the handle and that is all. Screw the wireless crap.[/citation]


Hum.. yeah sure and then your evil twin brother you didn't know you had steals the gun and fires... you get to be the suspect...

sounds familiar....

 

[tsnorquist]

With today's technology, I'd think someone would be able to create a system much like in the "Judge Dredd" movie with a biometric reader for the pistol grip.

If you look at something like "Metal Storm", it's already using electricity to fire the bullets - why not add another layer of security?

This would work much better, unless of course, you have an evil twin brother intent on running the government. Then all bets are off...

PS: Big Bad A** cigar smoking robot too...

 

[tsnorquist]

Ah man... i posted a hair too late. Someone is stealing my thoughts! @ pswenne

/tinfoilhaton

 

[Gin Fushicho]

I'd say that would make you feel like a dumbass if someone grabbed your gun then your arm at point blank and fired.

 

[flaminggerbil]

That is without a doubt the shittest looking gun I have ever seen.

 

[Computer_Lots]

I can see this play out...
Thug attempts to carjack you...
You grab your $10,000 gun and... Click...click, click, click.
Oh, crap, the battery is dead.

Besides that, I think .22 must be just for the test gun. You don't wanna use that for self defense. You want your attacker to die, not just say "hey, that hurts" and keep coming.

 

[jerreece]

FYI: This is NOT new. This has been around and in development for several years. 😉 They've been trying to market this type of thing to Law Enforcement for quite a while, in hopes it could prevent people from taking a gun off a cop and shooting them with it (since a lot of cops shot to death are shot after a struggle for their own gun).

Not new.

 

[c4v3man]

If you can't be bothered to learn or teach gun safety effectively, what's to keep a lazy person from simply wrapping the watch around the grip of the gun?

What if you had to use the other hand? It's happened before... If you are seriously carrying for personal defense you train firing with the other hand, reloads, etc.

Why not simply get a locking holster that requires a certain movement to get it out... can be easily trained, and is less likely to fail. Alot cheaper as well. When you get home, use conventional safety measures like the locks built into guns (damn anti-gunners, adding more complexity to firearms) or use a traditional cable lock through the action?

 

[milktea]

I guess the wireless feature would also allow the operator to enable or disable your gun (from a remote location)? Just incase you go crazy in the field.

 

[JMcEntegart]

[citation][nom]Currier[/nom]"Now already, we can see a little bit of a problem; if it's just a wireless signal, couldn't somebody else fire your gun if they got close enough to you?"No, somebody else can't fire your gun wirelessly, it's just a wireless safety using the matching wristwatch. Somebody still has to pull the trigger. You're so dramatic.[/citation]

I didn't say that. I meant if someone had your gun, and got close enough to you and your watch, could they fire.

 

[Socnom]

It seems like every market segment is getting their own 'Apple' products. Its expensive because of the 'software' not the hardware!

 

[one-shot]

[citation][nom]JMcEntegart[/nom]I didn't say that. I meant if someone had your gun, and got close enough to you and your watch, could they fire.[/citation]

That is a very good point. I wonder the distance from the watch can be with the gun still able to fire. If someone took your gun and fired it at you point blank the watch isn't going to help. The price is way too high. The gun is very cheap looking and they need some larger calibers before this is considered useful. 357 Magnum is the minimum I'd consider for home defense. A .40 S&W or .45 ACP would be much better.

 

[demonhorde665]

forget biomectrics and wireless control, give me a gun like what teh aliens had in district 9 IE gun is tied to geentics , but go further and make it require a specific persons dna 😛

 

[ichbinyogi]

EMP would render this gun useless. Jamming, false signals, battery dies? No thanks

The Idiots who shoot themselves and friends by accident will still do so. I can allready se the first accidental shooting. When a friend pulls the trigger on the owner wearing the watch and he kills him by accident, saying "I thought it was only suposed to shoot if you wore the watch".

 

[datawrecker]

In a struggle, the gun could be wrestled from the owner and turned on the them so long as the gun remained within two feet of the watch. Which in the scenario they are try to prevent is more common than not. Unfortunately that makes the technology useless.

Also, what frequency is the signal broadcast in? If it is a standard signal such as 800, 2.4, or something simiar how does the safety mechanism act? Similar signals could block the true signal from reaching the gun. Basically leaving the own disarmed when in range of a wireless signal.

 

[Guest]

Armatix smartgun: system benefits.

There is no doubt amongst experts that a SmartGun solution is only a good idea if combined with biometrics. The modular construction with a biomteric sensor in the wirst band offers a wide range of benefits.

Arming and disarming the weapon is a hands-free operation that takes just a matter of seconds by moving towards and away from the weapon. As soon as the biometric transmitter is activated, the user need do nothing else to arm the weapon. Similarly, the weapon is diarmed automatically when it is moved away from the hand.

A biometric transponder eneables any number of weapons to be activated. Likewise, several users can be authorized to use a single weapon (e.g. all members of a police unit). A record is made every time the weapon is activated, and a transponder can be deactivated in seconds.

If the wrist band is ripped off or removed for example, both transponder and weapon are deactivated automatically. After a set period of time, the weapon is totally deactivated, even if its still near a transponder.

Firearms can also be used when wearing gloves or with very dirty hands. Biometric sensors are sensitive and relativly expensive components, therefore it makes sense not to build one into the weapon itself.

The benefits of biometrics (sole allocation to specific people) are also combined with those of Radio Frequency Identification ( split- Seconf activation, hands-free operation.