If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Latest Bond movie features weapon we should actually make   (slate.com) divider line 179
    More: Interesting, golden gun, james bond movies, atomic bombings, personalized medicine, H.G. Wells, New America Foundation  
•       •       •

17925 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Nov 2012 at 2:46 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



179 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-15 03:10:18 PM  
Personally, I enjoyed seeing Trump's wig make a cameo appearance.
 
2012-11-15 03:10:45 PM  

dittybopper: madgonad: This has been available for at least 20 years. The cheapest way to do this is to have the user wear a ring which must be held next to the weapon for it to fire. The NRA lobbied heavily against it.

Little known fact: The police agencies also lobbied against it being a requirement for them. Why is that?


I would guess: because any technology will fail due to user error or outright flaw some percentage of the time, and that could cost a cop their life.

If I owned a gun (which I don't) I would absolutely not want a biometric lock. It seems like a truly horrible idea.
 
2012-11-15 03:12:24 PM  

Mock26: EdNortonsTwin: [ts3.mm.bing.net image 300x208]

Here's my trigger safety right here.

/take a hunters safety course to heart and you'll be just fine.

You should use your middle finger. Seriously. I forget the name of this style, but the idea behind it is to lay your index finger alongside the barrel, pointing forward, and use your middle finger to fire. The idea is that humans have the innate ability to point their middle index finger accurately at just about anything. It is not good if you are trying to shoot coins or nail that bull's eye ring, but for larger targets it is supposed to be quite accurate.


Fixed that for myself.
 
2012-11-15 03:12:34 PM  

Terrydatroll: I guess they completely missed the Judge Dread movie or 16 others that had guns recognizing dna/fingerprint/vocal commands etc. No, just the James Bond movie. Idiots.

Secondly, I am sure that the guy breaking into my house with is OWN gun won't be able to shoot me because MY gun has palm reading technology. "One moment while I read your palm! Whirr zzzzz zip...OK, according to you palm reading, you have just been shot by a burglar. Palm signing out..whizz..whirr...zzzz..zip."


Because every time someone breaks into your house you have less than second from the tim eyou grab your gun until he uses his ninja-like reflexes to acquire you in the dark and fatally shoot you? Hell if all the tech did was force you to spend an extra second assessing the situation before making a shoot/ don't shoot decision it might prevent a lot of tragedy.
 
2012-11-15 03:13:07 PM  

padraig: heypete: Two guns that I own came with magazine disconnects: they wouldn't fire if the magazine was removed. Naturally, those were the first things I removed and the guns have run perfectly and without issue since then.

Not being a gun owner myself, why did you feel this was something that you needed to do ?


Magazine disconnects aren't a substitute for sane gun handling, and in fact they can be dangerous: Someone used to guns with magazine disconnects is the sort of person who has accidental discharges with guns that don't have them. Magazine disconnects encourage laziness, where people won't check the chamber because the gun won't fire without a magazine in it (probably).

You should *ALWAYS* check the chamber of a gun. If you do that, then a magazine disconnect is superfluous: You know there isn't a round chambered because either the gun was truly empty, or you ejected the one round left in the gun when you racked the slide back to check the chamber.
 
2012-11-15 03:13:53 PM  

Mock26


It is not good if you are trying to shoot coins or nail that bull's eye ring, but for larger targets it is supposed to be quite accurate.


Don't take this the wrong way, but I could stand on my head and hit a "larger target". That does not mean head-standing is an effective technique; it means the target is so large that it masks the problems with the technique.
 
2012-11-15 03:14:10 PM  
I think something similar has been tried. The biggest problem is that technology does not react well with recoil.
 
2012-11-15 03:14:53 PM  

Darth_Lukecash: Like you can't disconnect the locking mechanism...


THIS.
 
2012-11-15 03:14:57 PM  

dittybopper: timujin: This concept has been out for a long time, well before this movie. I remember reading about prototypes back in the late 90's or early 00's. I think they were looking into it for law enforcement at the time, so criminals couldn't take a cop's gun.

Actually, no.

New Jersey enacted a version of the law that requires all handguns sold in the state to be "smart guns" 3 years after their attorney general decides they are commercially available and safe to use. The police are exempt from the requirement.

Every version of it I've heard proposed at the state and federal level exempts police and military.

Gee, I wonder why?


That particular law or even "every version of it you've heard" doesn't make what I wrote untrue. In the article I was reading, they were talking about using this for cops, specifically because they didn't want criminals taking a cop's gun. Now, this was a long time ago, at least a decade, so maybe the general philosophy is different now, but it doesn't change what I read.
 
2012-11-15 03:15:01 PM  

Ethertap: There's a pawn shop on the way home from work that has a banner advertising $99 9mm pistols


sounds like a lovely area
 
2012-11-15 03:15:20 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: pir8p3t3: it doesn't matter what you make illegal when it comes to guns. Criminals will just make their own because it's easy and cheap.

This. And because "hacking guns" won't become a black market business itself.


Which is why so many machine-guns (full-auto weapons you pedantic bastards) have been used in crimes since the Federal government went out of thier way to make them expensive and hard to obtain?
 
2012-11-15 03:16:17 PM  
use a knife, or a sword

they never jam always ready to use, and scare the shi@t out of most of your common criminals.
 
2012-11-15 03:16:45 PM  
I invented a lock for my wife's vajayjay that if the DNA sample from the weewee doesn't match mine it shoots metal spikes into it.
 
2012-11-15 03:17:54 PM  
No, THIS is the weapon we need to develop.
scienceblogs.com 
/hot like Leia in a bikini
 
2012-11-15 03:17:59 PM  
It is a cool idea that isn't quite technologically mature. Its primary benefit, besides the child accident thing, is if you are disarmed by an assailant. The e-gun owner that wants to be ready at all times could just have the ID tag tattooed on the inside of both ring fingers if they didn't want to be tied to a piece of jewelry or RFID chip.

But from what I've read, the criminal's gun is not normally a stolen weapon, but instead a straw-purchased one. The big conundrum is figuring out how to stop straw purchases.

Terrydatroll: The sad thing is that if poor minorities could not afford guns then 97% of America's gun problems would disappear. 92% is black on black anyway, so I really don't see a problem.


It is odd to see a known troll using arguments that are backed up by an article written from the other side of the issue, although TFA said 90% is gang violence as opposed to "black on black." There are latino gangs, white gangs and drug gangs that fall out of that category. I think black-on-black is only 65% of homicide deaths.
 
2012-11-15 03:20:31 PM  
what if the batteries run out?
 
2012-11-15 03:20:48 PM  

ProfessorOhki: [metalgearsolid.nl image 800x450]

Heh, what a cute idea.


Came for this, leaving satisfied...
 
2012-11-15 03:22:07 PM  

dittybopper: Voiceofreason01: Or you could keep your gun secured when you're not using it and buy a $10 trigger lock.

Don't use a trigger lock. It's a mechanical finger near the trigger.


so... you never learned that you can put a pin behind the trigger and between the trigger guard, thus making it impossible for the trigger to be pulled when the lock is on it?

And why would you put a trigger lock on a loaded weapon anyways. If you've got time to fark around with keys and taking a trigger lock off, you've got time to load the damn thing as well.

If you're using a gun as self defense and keeping it loaded you're not going to have a lock on it at all. Which is one of the big problems with self defense weapons and why people shoot themselves in the foot with them.
 
2012-11-15 03:23:58 PM  

Duke_leto_Atredes: use a knife, or a sword

they never jam always ready to use, and scare the shi@t out of most of your common criminals.


Except when this happens.
 
2012-11-15 03:25:31 PM  

timujin: dittybopper: timujin: This concept has been out for a long time, well before this movie. I remember reading about prototypes back in the late 90's or early 00's. I think they were looking into it for law enforcement at the time, so criminals couldn't take a cop's gun.

Actually, no.

New Jersey enacted a version of the law that requires all handguns sold in the state to be "smart guns" 3 years after their attorney general decides they are commercially available and safe to use. The police are exempt from the requirement.

Every version of it I've heard proposed at the state and federal level exempts police and military.

Gee, I wonder why?

That particular law or even "every version of it you've heard" doesn't make what I wrote untrue. In the article I was reading, they were talking about using this for cops, specifically because they didn't want criminals taking a cop's gun. Now, this was a long time ago, at least a decade, so maybe the general philosophy is different now, but it doesn't change what I read.


What you read was an incorrect justification for the development of the technology, either by someone who just didn't know what they were writing about, or in order to put one over on the rubes.
 
2012-11-15 03:25:48 PM  
Just so I am clear ihis. It is unreasonalbe to expect me to be able to prove who I am when I go to vote because of the undo expense and hardship it may impose on a "poor' person. At the same time not only is that hardship and expense of identification a nonissue when a person exercises their right to purchase a firearm but now they want me to have to identfy myself to the gun I purchased each time I use it.

I suppose I will have to idneitfy myself when I exercise my "right" to Obamacare also. For some reason only when voting is this a bad thing.
 
2012-11-15 03:26:16 PM  

Ethertap: iheartscotch: dittybopper: iheartscotch: It would also significantly increase the price of firearms.

That's the real reason behind it: So poor minorities can't afford them.

That is a possibility; but, as it stands, even the cheapest guns I know about are $250-$350. That's a huge investment for poor people.

The real goal is probably to increase the cost of all firearms; so it's expensive for everyone but rich people.

There's a pawn shop on the way home from work that has a banner advertising $99 9mm pistols. That's pretty cheap, although I'm guessing that the guns are pretty crappy.


I'm guessing its either a Croatian / soviet surplus number or it's a Hi-point. If its a Hi-point, it's utter crap. If its a surplus pistol; it depends. You can get some neat old pistols for super cheap. Last I knew, you could get a nagant pistol for under $100, the ammunition is very scarce though. But, for a new production pistol anything under $250 is going to be utter crap.
 
2012-11-15 03:26:45 PM  

dittybopper: Terrydatroll: dittybopper: iheartscotch: It would also significantly increase the price of firearms.

That's the real reason behind it: So poor minorities can't afford them.

The sad thing is that if poor minorities could not afford guns then 97% of America's gun problems would disappear. 92% is black on black anyway, so I really don't see a problem.

I do see a problem, because not every poor black person is a criminal. Yes, crime tends to be concentrated in that demographic, as I've pointed out numerous times on Fark, but I've *NEVER*, *EVER* advocated a blatantly racist "Hey, our problems would be over if we prevented blacks from owning guns" viewpoint.

That's just farkin' wrong, sad or not.


I'm black, I own SEVERAL firearms. I have absolutely NO inclination to commit an act of violence with said weapons.

But thanks for the vote of confidence.
 
2012-11-15 03:26:49 PM  

factoryconnection: It is a cool idea that isn't quite technologically mature. Its primary benefit, besides the child accident thing, is if you are disarmed by an assailant. The e-gun owner that wants to be ready at all times could just have the ID tag tattooed on the inside of both ring fingers if they didn't want to be tied to a piece of jewelry or RFID chip.


That use case implies either the gun scans between trigger pull and firing every time (seems like a really bad idea) or uses grip pressure release/application as a flag to reauthenticate (better, but still potentially unpredictable). The "keep a kid from finding it" case works a bit better because you could auth and then have a manual re-lock. That at least ensures that once you're able to fire, the gun won't fail on you but still makes storage safer.
 
2012-11-15 03:27:34 PM  
When Daniel Craig gets too long in the tooth to play the secret agent, will they have to manufacture a new gun so Justin Bieber can shoot with it?
 
2012-11-15 03:28:42 PM  

padraig: Not being a gun owner myself, why did you feel this was something that you needed to do ?


Good question.

In general, it's because I think that a gun should be able to fire whenever it's loaded and any manual safeties are set to "fire" regardless of whether or not the magazine is inserted. I don't mind safeties that are designed to prevent accidental discharge (e.g. a drop-safety that prevents the firing pin from moving if the gun is dropped but is deactivated when the trigger is pulled, or a grip safety that is deactivated when one is holding the gun), but I dislike mechanisms that don't really serve any safety purpose (a gun with a round in the chamber but no magazine is still loaded and should be handled as such) and add complexity.

In the specific case of the Ruger MkIII .22LR pistol, the magazine disconnect explicitly required unsafe gun handling when disassembling and reassembling (in that it required inserting the magazine, cycle the bolt, and then pulling the trigger to release the hammer). By removing the disconnect, I could disassemble and reassemble the gun without needing to handle magazines at all as I could cycle the bolt (while checking the chamber for any cartridges) and pull the trigger without any risk of inadvertently loading the gun in the process.
 
2012-11-15 03:31:06 PM  

factoryconnection: But from what I've read, the criminal's gun is not normally a stolen weapon, but instead a straw-purchased one.


What you've read is wrong. The "time to crime" for most guns seized is on the order of a decade.

The most common way guns get into the hands of criminals isn't straw purchases, or through theft, but through leakage from the legitimate private market, where Joe sells his handgun to Pete, who sells it to Fred, who sells it to someone he may or may not know, etc.

Straw purchases have a very specific meaning: A gun is purchased by Person X specifically for Person Y. A gun purchased by Person X, then sold to Person Y a few years later is *NOT* a straw purchase.
 
2012-11-15 03:31:29 PM  

hasty ambush: Just so I am clear ihis. It is unreasonalbe to expect me to be able to prove who I am when I go to vote because of the undo expense and hardship it may impose on a "poor' person. At the same time not only is that hardship and expense of identification a nonissue when a person exercises their right to purchase a firearm but now they want me to have to identfy myself to the gun I purchased each time I use it.

I suppose I will have to idneitfy myself when I exercise my "right" to Obamacare also. For some reason only when voting is this a bad thing.


You think that you don't have to prove who you are to vote? What county do you live in?
 
2012-11-15 03:31:42 PM  
There isn't a trigger safety that can stop a gun from killing someone when they want you dead. The safest thing that could done to protect the citizenry from wanton acts of gun violence is to make any use of firearms in the commission of a crime punishable by death. Yes, the death penalty for using a firearm while committing a crime. There has to be a conviction on the crime before this can be enacted, but it would thin the herd a little (there will always be those who will have guns, just less of them).

/any crime will do. It's the gun that counts
//also, register and limit bullets
///
 
2012-11-15 03:32:34 PM  
i218.photobucket.com"

These exist but the people on Earth don't know about it. You'll have to join the CDF to find out more.
 
2012-11-15 03:33:09 PM  
Slappers only
 
2012-11-15 03:33:36 PM  

TheEdibleSnuggie: I'm black, I own SEVERAL firearms. I have absolutely NO inclination to commit an act of violence with said weapons.

But thanks for the vote of confidence.


Brothers in arms, we are.
 
2012-11-15 03:36:07 PM  
This was a bad idea when it was first suggested around thirty years ago.

Where you have electronics, you have batteries and dozens of components that can fail under various circumstances. Which means that you need a backup system. Easy to do in the case of a holographic sight (backed up with irons) but not so much in the case of a trigger.
Its fail state would leave you with an inoperable gun... and people who want guns do not want that.

/This is the kind of thing that would only appeal to a politician.
/At least until he figures out his guards might be saddled with non-functional weapons.
/As much as it might make for a better world, I suspect "weapons that can only be used by a select group of people" goes against every known purpose for the 2nd amendment.
 
2012-11-15 03:36:43 PM  

padraig: heypete: Two guns that I own came with magazine disconnects: they wouldn't fire if the magazine was removed. Naturally, those were the first things I removed and the guns have run perfectly and without issue since then.

Not being a gun owner myself, why did you feel this was something that you needed to do ?


Magazine safeties are in very limited use. Basically they serve the function of preventing accidental discharges like when you are cleaning your gun. Pop the mag out and forget there is a round in the chamber, which amazingly a lot of people do. There is also the argument that if you are in a fight over the gun you can just release the mag, making it inert.

Basically they are pretty useless and don't add much to the overall safety of the firearm at all.
 
2012-11-15 03:38:18 PM  

id10ts: No, THIS is the weapon we need to develop.
[scienceblogs.com image 355x199] 
/hot like Leia in a bikini


No, THIS is the weapon we need to develop.
i1125.photobucket.com
/Hot like Summer.
 
2012-11-15 03:38:27 PM  

392Zaphod: This idea has been around for awhile...

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 260x194]


But unless it can fire grenades, double whammies, signal flares, full auto... and shock the bejeezus out of a criminal that tries to use it... I don't want it.
 
2012-11-15 03:39:31 PM  
Am I really the first one to mention The Weapons Shop of Isher?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Weapon_Shops_of_Isher
 
2012-11-15 03:46:33 PM  

Summer Glau's Love Slave: id10ts: No, THIS is the weapon we need to develop.
[scienceblogs.com image 355x199] 
/hot like Leia in a bikini

No, THIS is the weapon we need to develop.
[summerglau.jpg]
.


Seconded!

All in favor? AYE!!!
 
2012-11-15 03:49:25 PM  

Terrydatroll: I guess they completely missed the Judge Dread movie or 16 others that had guns recognizing dna/fingerprint/vocal commands etc. No, just the James Bond movie. Idiots.

Secondly, I am sure that the guy breaking into my house with is OWN gun won't be able to shoot me because MY gun has palm reading technology. "One moment while I read your palm! Whirr zzzzz zip...OK, according to you palm reading, you have just been shot by a burglar. Palm signing out..whizz..whirr...zzzz..zip."


The vast majority of homicides are committed with illegally obtained firearms. If we had a perfectly functioning biometric ID on a firearm, these would be eliminated. Obviously, the "perfectly functioning" part is an engineering feat that's likely beyond current technology.
 
2012-11-15 03:53:02 PM  

UtileDysfunktion: Summer Glau's Love Slave: id10ts: No, THIS is the weapon we need to develop.
[scienceblogs.com image 355x199] 
/hot like Leia in a bikini

No, THIS is the weapon we need to develop.
[summerglau.jpg]
.

Seconded!

All in favor? AYE!!!




dl.dropbox.com

Soooon...
 
2012-11-15 03:53:05 PM  

meanmutton: Terrydatroll: I guess they completely missed the Judge Dread movie or 16 others that had guns recognizing dna/fingerprint/vocal commands etc. No, just the James Bond movie. Idiots.

Secondly, I am sure that the guy breaking into my house with is OWN gun won't be able to shoot me because MY gun has palm reading technology. "One moment while I read your palm! Whirr zzzzz zip...OK, according to you palm reading, you have just been shot by a burglar. Palm signing out..whizz..whirr...zzzz..zip."

The vast majority of homicides are committed with illegally obtained firearms. If we had a perfectly functioning biometric ID on a firearm, these would be eliminated. Obviously, the "perfectly functioning" part is an engineering feat that's likely beyond current technology.


Guns are relatively simple mechanically speaking. In reality, I can't see how you'd implement something like that, not to mention the millions of guns that already exist without them.
 
2012-11-15 03:55:43 PM  

padraig: heypete: Two guns that I own came with magazine disconnects: they wouldn't fire if the magazine was removed. Naturally, those were the first things I removed and the guns have run perfectly and without issue since then.

Not being a gun owner myself, why did you feel this was something that you needed to do ?


I am a gun owner and can't imagine why he'd feel the need to do this -- unless you do speed shooting competition?
 
2012-11-15 03:56:57 PM  

fluffy2097:
If you're using a gun as self defense and keeping it loaded you're not going to have a lock on it at all. Which is one of the big problems with self defense weapons and why people shoot themselves in the foot with them.


Shooting accidents and car accidents have one big thing in common: most are caused by someone doing something monumentally stupid with predictably catastrophic consequences, often for an innocent bystander.
 
2012-11-15 03:59:11 PM  

meanmutton: padraig: heypete: Two guns that I own came with magazine disconnects: they wouldn't fire if the magazine was removed. Naturally, those were the first things I removed and the guns have run perfectly and without issue since then.

Not being a gun owner myself, why did you feel this was something that you needed to do ?

I am a gun owner and can't imagine why he'd feel the need to do this -- unless you do speed shooting competition?


It breeds laziness.
 
2012-11-15 04:01:24 PM  
Ruger MKIII's famously have the magazine disconnect, and everyone takes it off. Screws up the gun to boot.
 
2012-11-15 04:02:07 PM  

Terrydatroll: Secondly, I am sure that the guy breaking into my house with is OWN gun won't be able to shoot me because MY gun has palm reading technology. "One moment while I read your palm! Whirr zzzzz zip...OK, according to you palm reading, you have just been shot by a burglar. Palm signing out..whizz..whirr...zzzz..zip."


Apparently the consensus is that this idea won't work, because today's computers take seconds to process a kilobyte of data, all the while making clockwork noises.
 
2012-11-15 04:03:27 PM  

meanmutton: padraig: heypete: Two guns that I own came with magazine disconnects: they wouldn't fire if the magazine was removed. Naturally, those were the first things I removed and the guns have run perfectly and without issue since then.

Not being a gun owner myself, why did you feel this was something that you needed to do ?

I am a gun owner and can't imagine why he'd feel the need to do this -- unless you do speed shooting competition?


1. Its one more thing to interfere with operation.
You can have a round in the chamber and fire a gun just fine, but if the magazine isn't seated (which is an easy mistake to make) then you got nothing.

2. Its a safety concern and an annoyance.
Some guns like the Ruger MKII require that you pull the slide and drop the hammer at different times during the disassembly procedure. On the MK III you have to insert a magazine (and it has a bolt catch).

/Personally, this grinds my nuts every time I have to clean the thing.
/Getting rid of it is on my list of to-do's.
 
2012-11-15 04:06:44 PM  

Inigo: Didn't License to Kill have a biometric-locked gun?


Yep, Q brought it to Bond when he was down in the "Generic South American Country"
 
2012-11-15 04:06:45 PM  

Xcott: Terrydatroll: Secondly, I am sure that the guy breaking into my house with is OWN gun won't be able to shoot me because MY gun has palm reading technology. "One moment while I read your palm! Whirr zzzzz zip...OK, according to you palm reading, you have just been shot by a burglar. Palm signing out..whizz..whirr...zzzz..zip."

Apparently the consensus is that this idea won't work, because today's computers take seconds to process a kilobyte of data, all the while making clockwork noises.


Imagine you have a cell phone, and imagine you leave that cell phone in your pocket or in a safe and it goes unused and uncharged for months or even years at a time.
Now imagine that you must pull out that cell phone in an emergency.
If it doesn't turn on and dial out, you will die.

How much faith do you have in your cell phone?
 
2012-11-15 04:07:00 PM  

dittybopper: meanmutton: padraig: heypete: Two guns that I own came with magazine disconnects: they wouldn't fire if the magazine was removed. Naturally, those were the first things I removed and the guns have run perfectly and without issue since then.

Not being a gun owner myself, why did you feel this was something that you needed to do ?

I am a gun owner and can't imagine why he'd feel the need to do this -- unless you do speed shooting competition?

It breeds laziness.


I saw some of that argument later and honestly, it's a tough pill for me to swallow. But then again, I'm from the school of thought that you treat a weapon you've personally unloaded and verified as unloaded the same you do as if it's loaded -- you never sweep the barrel past someone, you don't walk around with your finger on the trigger, you keep the barrel pointed down, etc.
 
Displayed 50 of 179 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report