The Washington Post has this story on so called “Smart Guns.” The interesting point in the story is that one of the gun control group that you would think would be in favor of this , the Violence Policy Center, seems to be adamently opposed to the idea – not because it won’t work, but because it might work so well it will encourage more people to become gun owners:
Policy Center officials argue that the new technology is unlikely to stem gun homicides, which often occur between people who know each other, and that personalization will have no effect on the more than 300 million guns in circulation. The organization also questions whether the technology would deter the nearly 350,000 incidents of firearm theft per year, though some of the proposed technologies are add-ons that can be installed on existing guns.
And perhaps most important, the Violence Policy Center worries that smart guns will increase the number of firearm owners, because marketing that touts safety could sway those previously opposed to guns to make their first purchase.
Can’t have anything that creates more gun owners can we.
I remain skeptical. My reason can best be summed up in this quote from the story:
The chief concern for potential buyers is reliability, with 44 percent of those polled by the National Shooting Sports Foundation saying the technology would not be reliable at all. A commenter in an online Glock forum explained the concern this way: “They can’t even make a cellphone that works reliably when you need it, and some dumbass thinks he can make a reliable techno-gadget gun that is supposed to safeguard you in dire circumstances?”