Armatix to market smart guns to LE

ryan_j · Aug 18, 2014

So, consumers don't want it, now they want to dump it on law enforcement. I wonder if Steve Fulop will buy them for JCPD?

http://gunssavelives.net/gun-indust...cement-market-after-consumer-market-backlash/

csanc123 · Aug 18, 2014

What leo wants a .22 as a duty weapon let alone a "smart" weapon.

Kingjamez · Aug 18, 2014

I really really want to get my hands on one of these "smart guns". I want to hack it and remotely disable it, I bet it can be done.

-Jim

BradMacc82 · Aug 18, 2014

csanc123 said:
What leo wants a .22 as a duty weapon let alone a "smart" weapon.

Animal control? :shrug:

Verbotene · Aug 18, 2014

Good luck with that ****.

Knowingly adding complexities that increase the chance of total failure is utter lunacy. I imagine most cops want to know their gun will go bang if they need it to.

navyis2 · Aug 18, 2014

LE should have the same issue with it that we all did. It is more likely to fail and a small area RFID hammer would not be hard to construct.

swinokur · Aug 18, 2014

Don't blame Andy.

ryan_j · Aug 18, 2014

navyis2 said:
LE should have the same issue with it that we all did. It is more likely to fail and a small area RFID hammer would not be hard to construct.

They do, and that's why the NJ law exempts LE. The original NJ law was for LE only, and then they howled and screamed so they changed it to apply to regular citizens instead of LE.

teratos · Aug 18, 2014

It will be interesting to see if any LE agencies pick it up. I bet they won't. It will also be nice to see them cite the same reasons we have. It will be in writing and will further strengthen our arguments in the future.

FrankOceanXray · Aug 18, 2014

This won't take. Even if the "weapon taken by a criminal to kill a cop with his own weapon" argument is tossed into the ring. Just use it to beat the guy to death then.

Lame.

Threeband · Aug 18, 2014

I laughed and laughed when I saw this thread title.

Laughing again now.

Funniest thing I've read in months.

Edit to add:

I just saw this

The company hopes to offer other controls besides a watch, including a version that responds to voices.

Oh lordy! The laffs won't stop! Respond to voices!!! Like, "SHOOT!" or maybe, "No! Don't Shoot!" Maybe it will respond to the voices in the designer's head....

Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!

OK, that is my reasoned argument. I think I'm finished now.

.

ryan_j · Aug 18, 2014

csanc123 said:
What leo wants a .22 as a duty weapon let alone a "smart" weapon.

They'd have to bump it up to at least 9mm.

rseymorejr · Aug 18, 2014

Sorry, I like my guns like I like my women; Dumb!

Threeband · Aug 18, 2014

Has it occurred to anyone that if a bad guy does wrestle the gun away from the cop, it will probably still be just as close to the "watch" the cop is wearing as if the bad guy were wearing it himself? The gun will shoot for the bad guy same as for the cop.

Anotherpyr · Aug 18, 2014

Kingjamez said:
I really really want to get my hands on one of these "smart guns". I want to hack it and remotely disable it, I bet it can be done.

-Jim

Wasn't there an article that claimed police could remotely disable them? Doesn't mean it's true, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Kman · Aug 18, 2014

Funny now, tragic if becomes reality for LEO.

Threeband · Aug 18, 2014

Anotherpyr said:
Wasn't there an article that claimed police could remotely disable them? Doesn't mean it's true, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Supposedly the manufacturer has already patented the jamming mechanism.

Kingjamez, if you do hack it, you'll get sued for patent infringement.

SilverBulletZ06 · Aug 18, 2014

How about we just mandate them for whomever is protecting people advocating gun control.

ryan_j · Aug 18, 2014

Threeband said:
Supposedly the manufacturer has already patented the jamming mechanism.

Kingjamez, if you do hack it, you'll get sued for patent infringement.

They have and they even have remote disabling via satellite!

Kingjamez · Aug 18, 2014

Threeband said:
Kingjamez, if you do hack it, you'll get sued for patent infringement.

They can't patent "no vulnerabilities". What part of their patent do you think I'd be violating?

-Jim

Armatix to market smart guns to LE

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Gun Builder

Ultimate Member

Lurker Supreme

im a grown ass man

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

My hair is amazing

Ultimate Member

The M1 Does My Talking

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

The M1 Does My Talking

Ultimate Member

Blah, blah, blah

The M1 Does My Talking

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Gun Builder

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics