Holy heck. That's a great development in guns. Why would anyone object to that?

Seat belts save lives, but cars built before 1966 got grandfathered in. A similar rule could be made for guns.

These guys have something in common with the gays who were outraged at campaigns to wear condoms and maybe think twice about picking up randoms. Something about the visuals?

And actually, there's bike advocates who get a lot of respect, like Grant Petersen or Eben Weiss who think helmets are bad for bicycling because they send the message that bicycling is dangerous. Ya think? Or something. Helmets make bicycling look bad. Or bicyclists look dorky?

All I'm saying is, these gun lobby kooks have a lot in common with some of the kooks we know pretty well. Maybe our kooks can help us better understand what's going on in the heads of those kooks.

they object because it's a step down a slippery slope to "infringement".

You know, I'd be more supportive of firearms rights legislation if this kind of technology came standard. A gun that only fires if it's in its owner's hand? Fucking A+.

"Armatix ... its iP1 pistol, which can be fired only after the owner enters a five-digit PIN into a watch that transmits a signal to the gun."

It sounds like they do not understand the people who buy guns.

"The manufacturers argue that these new technologies could prevent suicides, accidental shootings and the deaths of police officers whose guns are wrested away in a struggle."

Mandate that the cops use them and you'll see why they won't sell.

Except the gays who didn't want to wear condoms didn't assassinate doctors, kill their own toddlers, wives, mothers, husbands, children, teenagers or neighbors' kids

Or shoot up schools and military bases or threaten to harm those who developed anti-viral drugs.

Like penis-substitute gun nuts over their fucking hobby.

But otherwise just the same::something that happened, briefly, 30 years ago, and the decades upon decades of gun nuts frothing at the mouth and dead stopping any safety measure and insuring countless killing sprees.

Uhh, can somebody point out exactly which 'killing sprees' would have been prevented with this technology?

@10

So people who lobby and advocate for a thing are guilty of the harm caused by those who misuse the thing? Because we could apply that (hysterical) standard to the anti-condom and anti-helmet people too.

But never mind. If you're going to circle the wagons and get defensive, then it's a waste of time. I just thought maybe some people could learn a little. But maybe not everyone.

@8: i'd imagine you enter the code when you leave the cop shop so you're ready at a moment's notice, not when you want to fire the gun. duh.

@11: maybe the one where crazy autistic asshole adam lanza took the weapons registered to his negligent mommy and used them to slaughter dozens of little kids. you may have seen this one in the news?

if those guns had been so equipped, and she'd kept the control stopwatch in a safe and the PIN code to herself, maybe they'd be alive. yes, there is no 100% guarantee that he wouldn't have entered all 100,000 possibilities and gained access. that's why you keep the watch away from him, too.

"We believe the market ought to work, that's why we harass and personally target the individuals behind the product to intimidate them into taking it off the market entirely. Capitalism!"

@13
You seem to be confusing the question of "how does this work" which was not asked with the point that the cops will not want that gun.

Since Dan has pointed out that "stupid" people oppose that gun that means that the cops are "stupid".
Why don't you call your local government and tell them that you want the police using those guns ASAP.

@15

You don't know what an argument is, do you?

@15: and your OPINION is drawing a conclusion based on facts not in evidence. why wouldn't a cop want a gun only they can fire?

go re-read dan's headline. that's not what he said. maybe he said/implied it somewhere else and you can't let go of that bone?

@17
"and your OPINION is drawing a conclusion based on facts not in evidence."

"Smart" guns have been in development for over 20 years.
Police departments have refused to adopt any of them.
So the facts are "not in evidence" because you do not know the facts.

"why wouldn't a cop want a gun only they can fire?"

The question is more why do you not know why the police have already refused the other "smart" guns.
It's been 20 years.
So why aren't you calling your local government and demanding that the police use this latest "smart" gun?

&19: Could you link to some if these "smart guns" that you mention? Is there any data on why they were rejected and by which police forces?

So because the police don't use smart guns, even though this particular smart gun is completely new technology, for vague and unknown reasons then smart guns are bad?

According to this article, law enforcement is worried about the reliability of the guns and about their ability to use other officers' guns in an emergency. Note: I have no clue what UPI is or how authentic, but as much as I'd love to see smart guns gain favor those are valid points. http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2014/03/1…

@13

Do you seriously think Adam Lanza wouldn't have taken the activation device after he killed his mother and stole her legally registered guns?

If she locked the device in a safe, then why not her guns as well?

@15: Mental gymnastics wow! You claimed that in your opinion cops probably won't want the guns...therefore cops don't want the guns...and because Dan said that stupid people are attacking the manufacturer...therefore Dan called cops dumb. Close enough!
@19: Maybe police departments haven't adopted these "in development" guns...because...THEY'RE IN DEVELOPMENT :O
Dude, nuclear fusion reactors have been "in development" for decades too. They haven't been adopted yet because they're still just concepts and prototypes. You moron.

@24: But without the code he wouldn't have been able to use it.

You people are all missing the point. The woman is hot. Stop talking, and agree with her!

Police have had the option of magnetically-locked handguns since the late 1970's which have proven reliable. They wear a ring on their shooting hand (or on both hands, if desired) and the gun only fires when a shooter has such a ring on. This would include anyone else on duty in their department. My town's PD only officer fatality ever (a scuffle, perp grabbed the officer's gun, shot him point-blank in the head) would have been prevented by such 35-year-old technology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personalize…

It is interesting that the objections hinge on low-probability faults with any such system, even though misfires are a normal part of repeatedly firing any gun. Shooters know what they are, that they happen, and how to clear them. Any NEW, highly unlikely fault is untenable, while the FAMILIAR more likely fault is widely accepted. Are we really surprised that frightened people are frightened by new things?

More hyperbole and clickbait Dan? It really doesn't matter whether it's Fox News or The Stranger - bad journalism is bad journalism.

There are issues with implementing this technology - how are you helping to further the rational discussion which could lead to a successful deployment?

Oh, right http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_jour… is an easier way to achieve advertising revenue. It works for Rupert Murdoch after all.

@28
"Police have had the option of magnetically-locked handguns since the late 1970's which have proven reliable."

So the police should have adopted those by now.
Are they "stupid" as Dan suggests.

"Any NEW, highly unlikely fault is untenable, while the FAMILIAR more likely fault is widely accepted. Are we really surprised that frightened people are frightened by new things?"

So you claim that the reason the police have not adopted any of the models is because the police are "frightened people".

The real problem is that people like Dan do not know anything about guns except for the fantasy they've seen in movies and TV shows.

@31: Magnetic locks are thoroughly different (mostly in bad ways) from more advanced systems like the ones currently being proposed. For one thing, anyone can take the ring and the gun and fire it, and most systems only require the ring to be nearby initially, after which the gun can be locked to an ON override position. Since no information is needed to bypass the failsafe, that system would be much less effective at preventing accidental shootings. Additionally, there are serious issues involved with carrying powerful magnets around everywhere. Do you really want your shooting hand sticking to paramagnetic objects everywhere you go? Not to mention, nothing distinguishes your magnetic ring from anyone else's; anyone else with a ring could fire your gun just as well as you can. Using individually-tuned RF signals that require that a PIN be entered for activation eliminates these problems.
Now, fairly.unbalanced, please get this through your thick head: JUST BECAUSE POLICE DEPARTMENTS HAVE NOT SWITCHED TO USING THESE PROTOTYPE UNTRIED WEAPONS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY ARE IN OPPOSITION TO THEM. There's a difference between waiting for the guns to be verified safe and reliable (as police departments have done thus far) and offering knee-jerk reactionary opposition (as you and your ilk have done). Commit sudoku, inb4 internet stalker copypasta.

@32
"Do you really want your shooting hand sticking to paramagnetic objects everywhere you go?"

You really have no idea how that model works, do you?

"Maybe police departments haven't adopted these "in development" guns...because...THEY'RE IN DEVELOPMENT :O"

You really have no idea how any of those work, do you?

@33: Do you know what a magnet is?

@34
"Do you know what a magnet is?"

Yes, I do know what a magnet is.
Now tell me what the largest "paramagnetic objects" are that you can pick up with the magnetic strip on a credit card. Or an Orca card.
Because, counter to your uninformed claims to the contrary, that is the degree of magnetism that is used in those rings.

You really have no idea how any of those work, do you?

@35: You nitwit, magnetic strips use the orientation of domains to encode a signal. That means that the different domains pretty much cancel each other out, since about half of them are antiparallel to the other half. You could build such a strip out of slivers of rare-earth magnets and still not be able to pick anything up. However, that's not the issue at hand here.
Magnetic strips work by inducing small electrical currents in an electronic reader. Magnetic locks work by producing a magnetic force that acts on the locking mechanism to physically move it out of the way. At the very least, such a lock needs to be able to produce enough force to counteract that of gravity. If it can move a lock mechanism out of the way, it can pick up an iron pin.
You seem unaware of how physics works.

fairly_unbalanced your seriously unbalanced on this one. The problem with making safer guns is not the Government or technology. It is the NRA, pushing through legislation that protects gun manufacturers from product safety litigation.

Chain saws are safer today then guns are. Why? Product safety litigation.

Why the fuck do you hate Capitalism, the free market, and the rule of law so much? You goddamn Socialist, Commie, Nazi. UnAmerican that's what you are. Gun manufactures have been getting away with murder for way too long. Sue the bastards force em to make a well regulated product as the second amendment requires.

@36
"You nitwit, magnetic strips use the orientation of domains to encode a signal."

Looks like you just discovered wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_st…

"Magnetic locks work by producing a magnetic force that acts on the locking mechanism to physically move it out of the way."

Yes, that is how magnetic locks work.
You certainly are giving wikipedia a workout.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagn…

"You seem unaware of how physics works."

I work at a secure site.
I have a card with a magnetic strip that causes the magnetic locks on the doors to open.
That card cannot pick up anything.
You do not know the difference between the authentication system and the locking system.

You really have no idea how any of those work, do you?

@38 so what? The gun lobby actively enables the gun manufactures to continue to produce a poorly regulated product given today's technology.

You can buy a Model T Ford to this day and even drive it on public roads, although no sane person would want to do so regularly. Why? They are unreliable hard to drive and unsafe by today's standards. Yet gun manufactures get a pass on being required to make even a token effort at making their product safer. Guns are no longer a "well regulated" product as per your definition of "well regulated".

@38: Are you sure you don't mean that you live In a secure facility..........?

@36
I will go through that again for you.

"You nitwit, magnetic strips use the orientation of domains to encode a signal."

Yes they are. Wikipedia has served you well in that regard.
Although phrasing it that way is similar to claiming that information in a book is encoded in the ink.

"That means that the different domains pretty much cancel each other out, since about half of them are antiparallel to the other half."

No. It seems you did not understand the wikipedia page you were reading.
A magnetic strip on a credit card contains millions or billions of magnetic domains.
Data is written when the magnetic domains in a section of the strip are aligned.

"You could build such a strip out of slivers of rare-earth magnets and still not be able to pick anything up."

It would be able to pick up items.
This is simple to demonstrate.
Get a piece of iron and put 2 magnets on it.
The magnets will stick to the iron even regardless of which pole was used.
Although your example would not contain any data.

@38, 41: You're thinking of an entirely different sort of magnetic lock. And for the record, everything I wrote in there about magnetism was from memory. No Wikipedias were harmed in the making of that post. When you have a hard-science education from one of the best universities in the world, you tend to just know these things.

The magnetic lock on the door to...wherever you live uses magnets in two completely different ways. The card you swipe has a signature or passcode encoded in the arrangement of stripes of boolean magnetization. (Think of it like a bar code, only instead of ink or no-ink, it's magnetic field pointing up or magnetic field pointing down.) A simple computer, or integrated circuit if you prefer, checks that the electrical signal induced by swiping the magnetic strip through the reader is correct. If it is, a signal is sent that cuts power to a solenoid, a powerful electromagnet on the doorframe that sticks tightly to a magnet on the door itself, holding it closed. With the current deactivated, the electromagnet ceases to hold the door shut, and you may enter.

Magnetic gun locks use a system more akin to the solenoid than the card reader. A post or plate within the grip of the gun blocks the trigger from being fully pulled. However, when a magnetic ring is properly near the grip (worn on the shooter's finger), the magnet produces a force acting on the blocking plate to push it out of the way of the trigger, allowing the gun to be fired. It takes a comparatively much stronger magnet to physically move a magnetized object than to induce a weak current in a metal wire.
Do you understand?

To clarify your misconceptions on the issue of the magnetic strip, not all of the domains are pointing the same way. Recall the analogy to the bar code? Within each stripe, all the domains will be parallel to each other, but those in an adjacent stripe will be antiparallel (pointing the opposite direction) to them. About half the total area will have its domains pointing one way, and the remainder will have domains pointing the opposite direction. Since the stripes are interleaved on a very small scale, and in light of how opposing magnetic fields destructively interact, the overall magnetic field of the strip will be much weaker than that of a single magnet with equal mass.
Also, "data" is a plural noun. I thought I'd let you know, so long as I'm schooling you in simple electromagnetism.

@42
"And for the record, everything I wrote in there about magnetism was from memory."

No. It was from wikipedia pages that you did not understand.

"When you have a hard-science education from one of the best universities in the world, you tend to just know these things."

You can make any claims you want to.
But your postings suggest a different story.

"Since the stripes are interleaved on a very small scale, and in light of how opposing magnetic fields destructively interact, the overall magnetic field of the strip will be much weaker than that of a single magnet with equal mass."

Now what was your previous claim?

"That means that the different domains pretty much cancel each other out, since about half of them are antiparallel to the other half."

So you've learned something from wikipedia.
Because your original claim would indicate a segment of tape with no magnetic charge.

"Maybe police departments haven't adopted these "in development" guns...because...THEY'RE IN DEVELOPMENT :O"

Maybe.
But since they've been available for a while, more likely you did not know what you were talking about and you've been hitting wikipedia and changing your claims.

"Dude, nuclear fusion reactors have been "in development" for decades too. They haven't been adopted yet because they're still just concepts and prototypes. You moron."

Have either if you gone to their website to see how it works?
I did, and according to their FAQ it's an actual magnet, so big surprise, FU you're wrong about how the technology works, but it doesn't appear that it's so strong a magnet that the ring would stick to things willy nilly as Venomlash feared it would, so he's wrong about that.
Police forces have not adopted that particular tech, but the system Arnatrix is entirely different. So maybe you should be fighting about their idea?
And as far as I can see Armatix, and Padilla personally, are under attack for even trying to develop any kind of smart gun.
There is no evidence that the people stalking and threatening Padilla are members of law enforcement, and Dan never said they were. He said Stupid Gun Nuts were attacking Padilla, not cops.
You are the one that lumped law enforcement in with the folks threatening her.

Why do you think cops are stupid gun nuts who would engage in harassing a gun manufacturer over this technology?

Oh and here is a link to Smart Lock who make the magloc smart gun you've been fighting about

http://smartlock.com

And a link to Armatix, so you can fight about the actual system in question.
http://www.armatix.com/Smart-System.778.…

I'm posting from my phone, so if the links don't work I apologize, and the two of you should just google them.
Have fun boys!

@44
"I did, and according to their FAQ it's an actual magnet, so big surprise, FU you're wrong about how the technology works, but it doesn't appear that it's so strong a magnet that the ring would stick to things willy nilly as Venomlash feared it would, so he's wrong about that."

You're posting another straw man.
Why don't you post a direct quote from me saying what you claimed I said?
I can post a direct quote from him.

#32 "Additionally, there are serious issues involved with carrying powerful magnets around everywhere. Do you really want your shooting hand sticking to paramagnetic objects everywhere you go?"

Want to see another?

#25 "Maybe police departments haven't adopted these "in development" guns...because...THEY'RE IN DEVELOPMENT :O
Dude, nuclear fusion reactors have been "in development" for decades too. They haven't been adopted yet because they're still just concepts and prototypes. You moron."

Your turn.

Magnetic strips are not the same as magnets, and do not work in the same way even though they both have "magnet" in their name which is what Venomlash is talking about which you don't seem to get.
BUT! Even if you do think that magnets and magnetic strips are and work the same, you were CORRECT that the magnets used in the Magloc rings aren't as strong as Venomlash first asserted.
So good for you.

Now why do you think cops are stupid gun nuts who would harass a gun manufacturer over smart gun technology?

@47
"Magnetic strips are not the same as magnets, and do not work in the same way even though they both have "magnet" in their name which is what Venomlash is talking about which you don't seem to get."

Yes they are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_s…
A magnetic stripe card is a type of card capable of storing data by modifying the magnetism of tiny iron-based magnetic particles on a band of magnetic material on the card.

magnetic
magnetism
iron-based
magnetic
magnetic
And you claim that it is not a magnet.

It's word salad at this point. All he does is accuse me of copypasting content from Wikipedia articles when I actually do know the material backwards and forwards. (Which is funny, because he's the one actually quoting Wikipedia articles. I hope he's not editing them, since he doesn't seem to know what he's talking about.) And then he posts some randomly selected quotes, says they mean what he wants them to, and calls it a day.
Lissa, where did you get the information on the strength of the magnetic ring? I can't seem to find it on the site. I do appreciate your fact-checking, though.

@48: Saying that a magnetic stripe card (tiny bits of iron embedded in organic matrix) is a magnet is like saying that Wheaties (tiny bits of iron embedded in organic matrix) is a bar of iron. A defining characteristic of a magnet is that all (or suitably close enough to all) of the magnetic domains within one are aligned in the same direction (which produces constructive rather than destructive interference, amplifying the overall magnetic . This is NOT true of a magnetic stripe card.
Allow me to present the following diagram representing a magnetic stripe card:

^^v^^vv^^vvv^v^^v^v^v^^vv^vv^vvv^^v^v^vv^^^v^v

In the diagram, each character represents a magnetic domain. If the character is 'v', the magnetic field of that domain is oriented downwards. If the character is '^', the magnetic field is oriented upwards. Each string of like characters, such as "^^^", constitutes a magnet, since all the domains are parallel to each other. However, the diagram overall does NOT have any net magnetism, since an equal number of domains are pointed up and down, resulting in destructive interference reducing the overall field to negligible.
Wrap your mind around this: it is possible for something to be made of magnets and yet not be a magnet itself. Duuuude.

@49
Let me remind you of your claims, again.

#32 "Additionally, there are serious issues involved with carrying powerful magnets around everywhere. Do you really want your shooting hand sticking to paramagnetic objects everywhere you go?"

#25 "Maybe police departments haven't adopted these "in development" guns...because...THEY'RE IN DEVELOPMENT :O
Dude, nuclear fusion reactors have been "in development" for decades too. They haven't been adopted yet because they're still just concepts and prototypes. You moron."

"Each string of like characters, such as "^^^", constitutes a magnet, since all the domains are parallel to each other."

They are only parallel because they were intentionally aligned that way.

"Wrap your mind around this: it is possible for something to be made of magnets and yet not be a magnet itself."

You are claiming that an array of magnets becomes a non-magnet because it is an array of magnets.
Looks like you still have trouble with wikipedia.