Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Security The Military United States

Gun With Wireless Arming Signal Goes On Sale Soon 457

An anonymous reader writes "Armatix has built a pistol that will disarm itself when it is taken away from a watch that sends it a wireless arming signal. The .22 caliber guns will go on sale in the US within months, and the initial price is 7,000 euro. Higher caliber models will follow. To activate the gun, users must enter a pin code on the wristwatch, and then keep it within roughly 20cm of the gun. If the person is disarmed, the gun can't be used against them. Also coming soon this year, civilians will also be able to buy three-shot Tasers, rubber bullets, as well as Heckler and Koch black rifles." This might not be good news for the citizens of New Jersey.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Gun With Wireless Arming Signal Goes On Sale Soon

Comments Filter:
  • by hellop2 ( 1271166 ) on Saturday January 30, 2010 @09:24AM (#30961590)
    Wouldn't a fingerprint scanner on the grip be more reliable and safer in case you were disarmed?
  • Just what I needed (Score:4, Interesting)

    by OpenSourced ( 323149 ) on Saturday January 30, 2010 @09:24AM (#30961592) Journal

    Just what I needed, a gun that will stop working when the batteries run out (I suppose that will be the behavior). Anyway, I suppose that can be useful for prison guards and similar. Till the inmates learn to take the watch with the gun, of course.

  • by Antique Geekmeister ( 740220 ) on Saturday January 30, 2010 @09:27AM (#30961608)

    No. Fingerprint scanners are not reliable, and would be useless if you're wearing gloves.

    I can actually see this for crowd control weapons, hostage negotiations, and other law enforcement firearms, where the gun would be activated as the officer goes on duty much as they'd release the safety when drawing their weapon.

  • by telomerewhythere ( 1493937 ) on Saturday January 30, 2010 @09:35AM (#30961648)

    Here is another interesting tech that would be very useful in some contexts, and scary in others.

    Burris has built one of the most sophisticated rifle scopes we’ve ever seen. It has a laser rangefinder that can automatically adjust your sights to compensate for the fall of each bullet over long distances. Just point the crosshairs at the target, push a button on the side of the scope, and a bright red dot will show you exactly where the bullet will fall. We were able to easily hit targets at 400 and 700 meters without any experience at long-range rifle shooting.

    Critical weakness: pure black target.

  • by complete loony ( 663508 ) <Jeremy@Lakeman.gmail@com> on Saturday January 30, 2010 @09:39AM (#30961680)
    Why not use a challenge response system that communicates with low voltage current that passes over the skin. Then you can disable the weapon the moment direct physical contact is lost. Of course you'd need to ensure the current was low enough that it didn't cause your trigger finger to spasm...
  • by happyslayer ( 750738 ) <david@isisltd.com> on Saturday January 30, 2010 @09:46AM (#30961726)

    And on the opposite side--send out a signal that authorizes any weapon!

    If the authentication takes place only within the watch, then the weapon's mechanism is just looking for an arming signal--probably something simple--and you could mass jam or arm weapons with a strong enough transmitter (I'm thinking of those shopping-cart brake systems that people have been pranking...). Heck, you can even get your own watch, put in your own pin, and steal any weapon and it will work!

    OTOH, if the weapons' system is tied to a specific watch, then the failure rate will be through the roof! And, of course, you can disarm everyone easily because the systems are so strict.

    As an aside, this would make locating weapons extremely easy--all you have to do is walk around with an RF scanner, searching for watch and/or weapons signals.

    I see a big market for jammers, spoofers, RF scanners, and a multitude of other mini-electronic RF products. I better go take some spectrum-analysis classes soon.

  • Here's an idea... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by wjsteele ( 255130 ) on Saturday January 30, 2010 @09:51AM (#30961758)
    How about pricing it in Dollars and giving the measurements in Inches. That way us US customers (who is, after all, the apparent market) can actually buy and understand it.

    BTW... I'll be damned if I'm going to use a gun that also makes me put on a watch. Imaging having to deal with that in the middle of the night when someone tries to break into your house. Let's see, can I use the watch on my left hand and have the gun in my right? 20cm... let's see... that 2.54 cm per inch, so 20 div... BAM... No, I've been shot!

    No thanks... I'll stick with my Kimber 1911. No measurements required and sold for US $. And I'm pretty sure any would be attacker would notice getting hit with it.

    Bill
  • by markdavis ( 642305 ) on Saturday January 30, 2010 @10:32AM (#30962020)

    >and just how many departments are willing to take up a system that could leave their officers with an expensive rock in their holsters potentially.

    Oh, but of course the POLICE, CIA, FBI, and MILITARY would be exempt! And, oh... the murderers and robbers and such would be exempt too, since they won't have to purchase legal guns like we law-abiding citizens do.

    I am not anti-technology... I think such research is a GOOD idea. But wireless? No. Mandated by law???? No.

  • by 0100010001010011 ( 652467 ) on Saturday January 30, 2010 @12:05PM (#30962712)

    Mod Parent Up!

    I understand slashdot is full of people with different backgrounds, but it becomes easily apparent when people get outside of what they're comfortable with.

    A .22 is a very very useless hand to hand weapon and I don't know of any law enforcement in the world that would use the gun powder equivalent of a pea shooter. Unless you get a Boom Headshot.

    There was an article a while back on how US soldiers were picking up and using the AK-47 and using them. One reason was most US guns use the Nato .223, which tops out at 4.1g the AK-47 uses a round that tops out at 10g (.22 tops out at g, 9mm at 9.5). People would keep coming after the first shot. Now if I have a suicide bomber running straight for me I want something that I know will make him stop.

    For hunting they're mainly used for squirrels and the such. People hunting larger game go for larger guns.

    The other being that our guns were in such tight tolerance that in the field they had great range and accuracy ... if you kept them clean. The AK-47 could be buried in a pile of sand. picked up, brushed off and fired.

    *And the awesome 30-06 topped out at 14g. And you knew it. I spent an entire day shooting nothing but that at a friends once. The next day I had a palm sized bruise in on my shoulder. Oh but it was fun.

  • by A nonymous Coward ( 7548 ) on Saturday January 30, 2010 @12:20PM (#30962834)

    Dick Heller's gun is a .22.

  • by rubycodez ( 864176 ) on Saturday January 30, 2010 @01:10PM (#30963310)

    it is useless if the attacker bleeds to death half a hour later or more after stabbing you you death.

    My cousin was shot in the head with a .22 pistol, died over twelve hours later in surgery, was able to talk before then to relate details of circumstances

  • by modecx ( 130548 ) on Saturday January 30, 2010 @05:05PM (#30965468)

    I'll bite.

    Back in WWII, the US government developed a neat little piece called the FP-45 Liberator [wikipedia.org]. It was a .45 ACP single shot pistol, made very crudely of mostly stamped metal, which was to be dropped into axis occupied territories. Included with it were ten rounds of ammunition, and a wooden dowel which was used to manually extract the spent case.

    Most of the ammunition was intended to be used for practice fodder, perhaps in the basement of a ghetto building. But you'd go up to a lone nazi (or perhaps a small group, if you had some friends), ask him if he had a light for your cigarette, or distract him somehow, and then you'd blow his brains out. Then you'd take his weapons. Perhaps a rifle from a guard, then a sub machine gun from an officer, and so on--and soon enough you've got a real life Maquis unit.

    The government made a million of them at $2.40 per copy, but unfortunately the OSS didn't really distribute them in Europe. Pity. It might have had good effect.

    Anyway, the point is: there's millions of vastly more functional, but equally concealable pistols running around America--and some potentially very concealable rifles. Unless they pen everyone up, a handgun designed for defense can become a keystone in obtaining weapons more useful for offense. Any tank commander would be pretty nervous to know a squad humping around an AT-4s or Javelins (or whatever) got shot up the day before.

  • by waimate ( 147056 ) on Saturday January 30, 2010 @05:16PM (#30965552) Homepage

    I have to sleep with my watch on, and gun within 20cm, or type in a pin in groggy half sleep?

    Compared to just picking up your gun and pointing it at someone in a groggy state?

    You are more likely to be shot if you own a gun, and that's just talking about you, the gun owner. How about your hapless wife or child who happens to be sneaking around trying not to wake you in "your groggy state", in which you want to become instantly fully armed.

    Frankly, I think the idea that you have to pass some sort of non-groggy-state test before your gun enables is a damn fine idea.

  • by dunkelfalke ( 91624 ) on Saturday January 30, 2010 @07:45PM (#30966546)

    Except that Glock 17 was designed as an army pistol. A prime example for a pistol designed for police and security needs in mind is the HK P7 which has a grip cocking/safety lever.

It's a naive, domestic operating system without any breeding, but I think you'll be amused by its presumption.

Working...