# Why the opposition to "smart" guns? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 31, 2013, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867 "2013-01-31T01:44:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/61 "2013-01-31T15:36:27Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > It seems you don’t like any of the responses you are getting to your silly question. If I ask a question of car owners, a response from someone who doesn’t drive stating that they don’t drive is a silly _response_. A question isn’t silly just because you don’t want to(or can’t) answer it. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/62 "2013-01-31T15:37:11Z")
> [@BwanaBob](#): > > Smoke detectors mostly run on batteries. That’s why they tell you to change the battery every fall and spring so that there’s no chance of them being dead. > > Your not yet existing smart gun that needed a battery to run its user validation technology would be no different. > > If you are a diligent owner who services his weapon regularly, why would changing the battery be such an inconvenience? I’m into archery and have a high end bow. I needed to put a sight on this bow. My choices included sights that are battery powered. These perform better since the battery powers a light that shines on the sight pins to make them glow and be visible in the dark when lots of shooting occurs. I opted not to get the sight that needs batteries. It’s more important for me to have a bow that always works, even if the sights aren’t as bright as they could be. Having reliance on a battery just isn’t acceptable for me in hunting situations. There’s too much chance that it will die suddenly or fail mechanically. It’s not worth it for me to take that risk, even to get the increased performance. Back to handguns. You are asking me to take that same risk. Except there is no benefit to me, as there is with the bow example. Also the stakes are much higher. If the gun doesn’t work it doesn’t just ruin my chance to shoot at a deer walking by my stand. It prevents me from defending myself in a life or death situation. No thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/63 "2013-01-31T15:38:46Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > If I ask a question of car owners, a response from someone who doesn’t drive stating that they don’t drive is a silly _response_. A question isn’t silly just because you don’t want to(or can’t) answer it. Analogy fail. If you ask a question of car owners and get a response that someone stopped driving precisely because of the question you were asking I wouldn’t call that silly. ---
**Author:** ![BrokenBriton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@BrokenBriton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrokenBriton)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/64 "2013-01-31T15:40:35Z")
Right, like that ‘life and death situation’ happens anywhere but in your fantasy life. But it might happen right - maybe 1%. No, not that much. ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/65 "2013-01-31T15:40:27Z")
> [@BwanaBob](#): > > Smoke detectors mostly run on batteries. That’s why they tell you to change the battery every fall and spring so that there’s no chance of them being dead. > > Your not yet existing smart gun that needed a battery to run its user validation technology would be no different. > > If you are a diligent owner who services his weapon regularly, why would changing the battery be such an inconvenience?. Changing batteries is easy, who said otherwise? Making the technology work is not the issue. It is making it work every single time after thousands of rounds have punished it with recoil, and after it spent countless hours in hot and humid conditions while being carried, that make for concerns that it is less that 100% reliable. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/66 "2013-01-31T15:42:14Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > So some gun owners would find the device acceptable, but only if it worked 100% of the time? > I don’t suppose any of you who agree with this apply this standard to all _other_ devices you use? Nothing works 100% of the time. But a 1% failure rate is too high. I’d never keep a car that failed to start 1% of the time, for example. But as always, I appreciate hearing your special **Czarcasm** -brand pro-gun rights responses. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/67 "2013-01-31T15:45:29Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Like seat belts, bike helmets, safety rails, airbags in vehicles…if I tried to list all the safety devices we have in our society that aren’t _perfectly_ effective but are in use by you and me it would take all day. I’d be very nervous with a seat belt that had a 1% failure rate. I’d also be very nervous if you tried to add a device to my seat belt that increased its failure rate. ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/68 "2013-01-31T15:45:48Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I never mentioned glasses. So? Pretty sure every contact wearer has a pair of glasses as back up. I know I always did. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/69 "2013-01-31T15:48:17Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > Depends entirely on if the cause of the brakes failing 1% of the time prevented some other catastrophe an even greater percent of the time. Is it your stance then that greater than 1% of the time, people are accidentally shot? The evidence proves you wrong. Anyone trying to justify a 1% rate of failure as “acceptable” is one of the biggest groups of hypocrites you can be. Jump in your car and have your brakes fail 1% of the time, or an airplane’s engine, or any number of things. Hypocrites the lot of you. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/70 "2013-01-31T15:48:41Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Nothing works 100% of the time. > > But a 1% failure rate is too high. > > I’d never keep a car that failed to start 1% of the time, for example. > > But as always, I appreciate hearing your special **Czarcasm** -brand pro-gun rights responses. What percentage would satisfy you? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/71 "2013-01-31T15:49:16Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Hypocrites the lot of you. Leave the personal commentary in the Pit. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/72 "2013-01-31T15:50:09Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > OF those who say they need almost instant access to their weapon because time is of the essence in the case of a home break-in, how many wear contact lenses? Do they they stop in the bathroom to put the lenses in first? A person who wears contact lenses typically also has glasses, and in an emergency would presumably uses the glasses rather than dashing into the bathroom to get their contacts in. Yet another Czarcasm-brand pro-gun rights response. Thanks for defending gun-rights, bud – we can always use another voice! ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/73 "2013-01-31T15:50:27Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Leave the personal commentary in the Pit. Boy, that was fast. Noted. ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/74 "2013-01-31T15:51:12Z")
> [@BrokenBriton](#): > > Right, like that ‘life and death situation’ happens anywhere but in your fantasy life. > > But it might happen right - maybe 1%. No, not that much. The probability that someone will break in to my home is low. To mitigate the risk, I have chosen a home that is in a relatively crime free area, I have a security system with active monitoring, two large dogs, and very secure entry ways. The probability that safe gun technology will fail is low. To mitigate that risk, I choose not to use it. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/75 "2013-01-31T15:56:02Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > What percentage would satisfy you? I’m not sure I know the answer – but since 1% is at least two orders of magnitude away from actual gun failure rates now, i don’t need to know what rate WOULD be acceptable to know that 1% is not acceptable. I’d say one-tenth of that rate – a failure rate of 0.1% – is in the ballpark. That tells me that 999 times out of a thousand, I’m OK. Maybe I mitigate that by having two guns in play, and life is good. I already accept some small failure rate by the fact that my bedside gun is in a biometric safe. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/76 "2013-01-31T15:59:34Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I’m not sure I know the answer – but since 1% is at least two orders of magnitude away from actual gun failure rates now, i don’t need to know what rate WOULD be acceptable to know that 1% is not acceptable. > > I’d say one-tenth of that rate – a failure rate of 0.1% – is in the ballpark. That tells me that 999 times out of a thousand, I’m OK. Maybe I mitigate that by having two guns in play, and life is good. > > I already accept some small failure rate by the fact that my bedside gun is in a biometric safe. One in a thousand sounds good to me. BTW, what is the failure rate for your biometric safe? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/77 "2013-01-31T16:05:05Z")
> [@BrokenBriton](#): > > Right, like that ‘life and death situation’ happens anywhere but in your fantasy life. > > But it might happen right - maybe 1%. No, not that much. It wasn’t [Melinda Herman’s](http://abcnews.go.com/US/georgia-mom-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/story?id=18164812) fantasy life. Sure, it’s uncommon. So is a car accident. But I still wear a seatbelt, and carry liability and collision insurance. ---
**Author:** ![solosam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@solosam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/solosam)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/78 "2013-01-31T16:13:24Z")
Imagine you are in a life-or-death fight and someone is shooting at you and your family, and your weapon suffers the Blue Screen of Death. Congratulations, you are now dead. The more variables you take out of the equation, the better off you are. Anything that adds to the complexity of the gun increases the chance of failure. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/79 "2013-01-31T16:19:48Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > One in a thousand sounds good to me. BTW, what is the failure rate for your biometric safe? Assuming proper maintenance – which includes battery changes at prescribed intervals – less than 0.1%. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2013, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867/80 "2013-01-31T16:22:42Z")
> [@solosam](#): > > Imagine you are in a life-or-death fight and someone is shooting at you and your family, and your weapon suffers the Blue Screen of Death. Congratulations, you are now dead. > > The more variables you take out of the equation, the better off you are. Anything that adds to the complexity of the gun increases the chance of failure. Get a gun that runs Linux. _flees_ [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-opposition-to-smart-guns/648867.md?page=5)