19-Year Old Develops Controversial Finger-Print Unlocking Glock

Capture

Presented at the 2016 International San Francisco Smart Gun Symposium (ironic, considering the city shuttered its last gun shop in 2015), then 18-year-old Kai Kloepfer presented a new handgun design that incorporates a fingerprint reader. Young Mr. Kloepfer is sponsored by angel investor Ron Conway, who’s Smart Tech Challenges Foundation is spending $1.5 million for the development of “firearms safety technology.” Kloepfer is one of about 15 start-ups that Conway is sponsoring.

The design has been in skunk-works for over four years. Kloepfer’s start-up, Biofire, is “just a few months from a live-firing prototype, which assuming it works, will be the first gun to unlock like an iPhone.” This is untrue, as multiple finger-print reader base firearms have existed before, specifically Kodiak Industries with their Intelligun

Even if proven reliable (which no “smart” firearms technology has to date due to batteries), the Biofire will face deeply rooted mistrust of electronic locks on a firearm. When weapons need to be 100% functional after sitting for extended periods, electronic devices have had a tendency to fail too often due to aforementioned batteries and mechanical failure due to recoil.

Combined with the need to grip the firearm a certain way, I can see this technology failing to gain wide acceptance. Simply put, humans do not grip everything the same every time and the weapon is not lefty-friendly.

Still, its interesting to watch the brains in the high-tech world attempt to apply solutions to decidedly “low-tech” firearms. With electronic scopes and trigger systems making their way into public acceptance, “smart gun” capability is only a matter of time.

For the full article on Mr. Kloepfer, check out the Wall Street Journal (warning, pay wall). 

*Title photo courtesy of the WSJ, photographer Matt Nager.

 

Editor Says: TFB univocally opposes electronic locks on firearms.



Nathan S.

One of TFB’s resident Jarheads, Nathan now works within the firearms industry. A consecutive Marine rifle and pistol expert, he enjoys local 3-gun, NFA, gunsmithing, MSR’s, & high-speed gear. Nathan has traveled to over 30 countries working with US DoD & foreign MoDs.

Nathan can be reached at Nathan.S@TheFirearmBlog.com

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


Advertisement

  • ConsulClemens

    EMP! Saw it in CoD once… the tritium in the ACOG stopped working too which was odd…

    • Drew Coleman

      Yeah that bugged the crap out of me in CoD.

      • Jacen

        Maybe they predicted the battery powered ACOG

    • Twilight sparkle

      Also your character had buis, why couldn’t you deploy them???

      • Major Tom

        Or ya know, just take the dang thing off? Coulda made it a cutscene moment.

    • Uniform223

      Seriously?

  • Drew Coleman

    As others have said – when law enforcement, including Federal agencies like the FBI and Secret Service, and the military adopt this, then I might consider buying one. Until then, I’ll file it under “neat but kinda useless.”

    • Max Müller

      Useless at best, killed by the bad guy with a working gun at worst…

    • KestrelBike

      They can all use/adopt/love it, I’m still not touching that garbage.

    • Major Tom

      I file it under “Less Than Useless”.

  • Gambler X

    the fingerprint system on my cell phone barley works as is, im not trusting my life to this bullshit

    • I want to ask these ninnies if they also support putting the same thumbprint lockouts on fire extinguishers and seatbelts.

      • Kyle

        When’s the last time someone killed a classroom full of kids with a seatbelt? There been a lot of fire extinguisher muggings in your neck of the woods? While I disagree with the implementation of an electronic lock on my firearms acting like those things are the same is extremely disingenuous.

        • All three are safety devices meant to save lives during unexpected emergencies when seconds– or fractions thereof– are the difference between life and death. The idea that a criminal with a Buck Rogers Thumbprint Space Blaster wouldn’t simply jailbreak the ridiculous thing and use the gun anyway is what’s extremely disengenuous here.

          I’ve personally injured more people with fire extinguishers than with guns, by the way.

          • raz-0

            Yes, one of the things sometimes forgotten in the whole smart gun thing is that not only does it need to perform as well as a traditional firearm to satisfy the “gun” half of smart gun, for the “smart” part to be viable, it has to be impossible to by pass the lockout without destroying the firearm.

            This is the critical part in the debate. I doubt there is any mechancial system that can not be bypassed, and I can guarantee you every electrical system can be unless it is highly, highly integrated. Electromechanical systems have the hazards of both.

            You can’t have a debate on giving up rights for public safety if the thing can be bypassed in 2 minutes with simple tools.

        • M-dasher

          do you keep all your kitchen knives under lock and key when you arent home?

        • iksnilol

          I dunno, I killed plenty of folks in GTA with a fire extinguisher.

        • Mark Gammel

          He wasn’t implying that they were the “same”. Was asking would you trust this technology to unlock (every time) other devices meant to save lives. Your scope of comprehension is extremely disingenuous.

      • Major Tom

        Or cans of gasoline. How many arson attacks have claimed how many lives now? I can buy a gallon of gas, a book of matches and enough chain to lock up a church full of people all no questions asked. But dare to think about getting a semi-automatic DMR or shotgun? HERESY! MUST BAN!

        The brainpower of anti-gunners is always overestimated.

      • Sulaco5

        Or cops or military guns…

    • Major Tom

      Neither am I comrade.

    • Sulaco5

      The fingerprint scanner on my HP computer only ever worked about 30% of the time, first time and now does not work at all….

  • Lt. Dan

    10,000 nopes. Never ever. “smart” technology, RFID/biometrics etc have no place in small arms period. Save them for ICBMs

    Nyet. Rifle is fine!

    • Major Tom

      Indeed, “smart” technology is awfully dumb.

  • Marko Tesla

    I would totally gamble with my life for this bit of technology if it had an Apple Logo and added significantly to the cost of the gun

  • TheNotoriousIUD

    As dumb as this idea is they may be a path to ownership for people in gun restricted states.

    • AC97

      That’s not how it works at all, what it would do is make it more cost-prohibitive, at best.

      • TheNotoriousIUD

        How do you know how it would work if it hasnt been invented yet?
        Hippie state legislatures are nuts for this kind of crap. And if it ALSO makes the gun too expensive for most folks than all the better. It still could be a path to legalization.

        • Z

          And if it ALSO makes the gun too expensive for most folks than all the better.

          Dafuq?

          • TheNotoriousIUD

            Dude…

            As in that would be an appealing feature to states where hand guns are currently illegal. Meaning that if these “safe guns” were legalized then even fewer people would be able to afford them.

      • iksnilol

        Yeah, but here’s the thing. A restrictive state would be more likely to let you have a “safe” gun than a “dumb” gun… and like others mentioned, you can just remove the finger printamajig aftetr getting the gun.

        • AC97

          But the question I have is as follows: In what example under state law would getting a smart gun be less restrictive than getting a “dumb” gun?

          • iksnilol

            I don’t know, no smart guns are for sale yet so no laws around them in practical terms.

            I imagine Cali would add new guns to the roster if they were “safe” .

    • Yeah, the same way “just stop being poor!” may be a path to economic recovery in poor states.

      • TheNotoriousIUD

        Whatever.

        • Sgt. Stedenko

          Now that’s a mature response.
          You sound like my 4th grade niece.
          Someone shoots a hole in your stupid analogy and you get all butthurt.
          Again. Real mature, but what else would we expect from someone who posts more memes than insightful commentary on the blog.

          • TheNotoriousIUD

            Youre the one spluttering and blubbering.

            Anyone who doesnt see how this may end up being a legal firearm is letting their hatred for the idea cloud their judgement because it is most likely coming.

          • Sgt. Stedenko

            I’d love to own a gun that wont unlock when the battery is dead.
            The criminals would love it too

          • TheNotoriousIUD

            I dont understand…are you waiting for me to say this is a bad idea?
            Because I already did.

          • Sgt. Stedenko

            Well, I can see you are the type who has to get the last word in edgewise so I’ll leave this conversation and let you contemplate your navel some more.
            Deep thoughts Mr Meme.

          • Kurt Akemann

            Stop the trollng, please. TNIUD didn’t attack you, you started in on him. Just stop your provocations and the trouble will end.

          • Bill

            How about a gun where the mainspring breaks from metal fatigue, or the propellent is contaminated and rendered inert by a solvent?

          • Out of the Blue

            Those occurrences are far rarer than a battery dying, a battery that is completely unnecessary in the design if not for security features that would only be useful for preventing a small subset of violent deaths while leading to far more due to untimely failures.

  • JT Win

    Billions behind this technology, millions spent into my iphone fingerprint unlock tech, yet it doesnt work everytime and my 7 year old is able to unlock it with playdoh. This topic is childish.

  • Caio José Zubek

    I Can’t understand why some people think this is a bad idea. If it works correctly, is awesome!

    • AC97

      “Works correctly” are the key words, and fingerprint scanning is notoriously finicky.

      So no, screw this.

      • KestrelBike

        how did you Bold your “No”????

        • AC97

          Use the arrow keys like this (no spaces or quotation marks):

          “”, then put the text that you want bolded or whatever after that, then end it with a “”.

          You must do this one time for each desired action if you want to have multiple effects on the same text.

          I hope this helps, feel free to try it in a reply.

          • KestrelBike

            testing excellent help, thanks!
            “<" "spoiler" should work.. Eureka!

          • AC97

            You’re welcome!

            Also, on Youtube, the way it works is:

            Bold= *text*

            Strikethrough= -text-

            Italics = _text_

          • Cymond

            Whoa, dude, thanks.
            Screencapping this.

    • And if it doesn’t work correctly, you’ll be sexually assaulted or murdered! Hooray!

      Which is kindasorta the reason nobody with any critical thinking skills thinks this is a good idea; ask a room full of iPhone owners if they’ve ever had to fight with the thumbprint reader on their phone and the only ones who won’t raise their hands are the ones too busy fighting the thumbprint reader on their phone.

    • Bill

      Because. Just Because.

      It’s easier to criticize something than to put effort into pushing the technology. But then, there are some people who think the moon landing is a hoax, also.

      • m-dasher

        do you want something you use to defend your life to run on batteries?

        i know i dont…….

        • Bill

          Like my flashlights? TASER? AED? Car? Air traffic control system? TV remote?

          Sure electronics can fail. Just like mechanical stuff does.

          • Dan

            Exactly. Whether we agree with this technology or not eventually it will be forced upon the manufacturers to only produce smart guns. And the supreme court will rule that smart technology does not interfere with your right. Someone had better come up with a system that is up to snuff. Will it suck? Yes can it be circumvented definitely.
            It’s going to happen sooner or later and it might as well work when it does.

            I still hate the idea though

          • Bill

            I dont know that it will eventually become a requirement, anymore than any active safety becoming a requirement for a gun to be sold, but just dismissing the technology outright is very shortsighted. I could claim that the safety selector on my AR could have been made out of substandard material and snap off, rendering my rifle useless, but metallurgy and manufacturing have advanced to the point where the possibility of that happening are so remote as to be nil. There no reason why electronics won’t eventually get to that level of reliability.

        • iksnilol

          I don’t think batteries are the problem.

      • crackedlenses

        I’ll embrace new technology when it works and isn’t a political landmine.

    • m-dasher

      “IF” being the key word.

      i dont want to have to guess if my gun is going to fire when i pull the trigger

  • derpmaster

    So a 18 year old who can’t even legally purchase a pistol “developed” a technology that is little more than a bunch of off the shelf stuff stitched together? Oh, and not to mention, was already conceptualized and implemented 20+ years ago?

    Good on him I guess for being interested in technology and engineering but I have to say these puff piece “genius kid” stores are typically 99.9% horsesh*t. There’s almost always a parent or guardian or mentor driving the project.

    Call me a bitter old engineer but I can see straight through this garbage. This project was a clever means for this kid to impress college admissions counselors with a hip-for-2016 crowdfunded, slightly edgy/appeal to morals high visibility project. It looks like he succeeded too, as he’s enrolled at MIT in EE.

    Again, good on him for succeeding, but any person even tangentially involved with firearms knows that the finger print smart gun is a 20 year old decaying dead horse. If you invested in this, give me a call, because I have some prime swampland in Florida to sell you.

  • Trachtenberg

    Good for the kid, working on something he loves and has a genuine passion to help.

  • TC

    And next week he will ‘invent’ a hovercraft made from old Kias. He should partner with ‘clock boy’. Don’t you think maybe this is some anti gun propaganda funded by our good protector Michael Bloomberg?

  • HH

    I found that video kinda sickening…almost fraudulent- the claims and hopes (“reduce 90% of accidental shootings” ) and all the repeated tugging of the ole heartstrings and such repeated overtures to mass killings and children, etc.

    This is basically another Ahmed the Clock kid type of fluff piece. Let’s take a smart all-American high schooler with great ideals and support him to solve this complex social issue with his “invention”. Kinda in a “neva beeen done before” Red Jacket type of way. Come on- you dont think REAL manufacturers have been able to “invent” this technology–yet this kid will at his home messing with his computer and electronics?
    But he has such a great heart and moms across the nation who have lost children support him!!!

    This is fabricated start to finish. Just like Ahmed the Clock kid. It’s a slick and disingenuous media video.

    • derpmaster

      Exactly – it’s pure, unadulterated PR. This kid surfed the publicity of this project into getting accepted at MIT. Mark my words all development is dead as soon as he shows up on campus and the entire thing will be canned in under a year, unless he can somehow shoehorn it into a capstone or senior project type situation. It’s how all of these things go.

    • Darren Hruska

      That’s how the anti-gun community functions. They like to throw “30,000 annual gun deaths” statistic around, but then they completely ignore suicides and gang-on-gang/crime-on-crime incidents that together make up about 90% (maybe plus or minus a percent or two) of annual “gun” deaths. That’s because the former has the perpetrator and victim being the same person, and not even a brain-dead zombie thinks gun control can prevent that. With the latter, it’s difficult to get the masses to feel sympathy for a criminal that gets “smoked.” Thus, the media focuses on the 10%, which are mainly cases of social disputes, random acts of violence, and negligent uses of firearms (or “accidents,” which make up under 2% of annual “gun” deaths, or about 0.4% strictly for minors). They try to turn the 10% into the 90%.

      Really, putting the politics and sensationalism aside, many of the negligent firearm deaths can be prevented simply from education on the principle rules of firearm safety, and making sure people are taught these rules early into their lives.

    • Nalame

      7 year old girl from Nieria ginvents smart lock for gun and earns a scholarship to Harvard.

  • felix

    If he lets me maul , I mean torture test it id give it a go 😉

  • Wellp– looks like we found the dude who had the big idea to remove the headphone jack.

    I wonder how many of the people who support nonsense like this spend most of their time online wailing and wringing their hands about social justice issues, and then completely fail to realize that they’re essentially saying poor people don’t deserve the ability to protect themselves from crime if they can’t afford an expensive and unreliable electronic trinket gun.

    Disarmament is counter-revolutionary, Comrade Trustfund.

    • TJbrena

      “Disarmament is counterrevolutionary”

      It sort of is. Marx advocated gun ownership by the proletariat to protect against/overthrow those in power.

      Karl Marx sure believed in the equalizing power of the gun.

      • Tritro29

        If you look at the 1961 code of conduct for the member of the CPSU, you read that we had the duty to protect the revolution with all means necessary. That’s didn’t mean a knut and bear.

  • The Forty ‘Twa

    “Editor Says: TFB univocally opposes electronic locks on firearms.”

    Not sure how that one passed the spell checker!

    • JSmath

      Starts with not being a misspelled.
      Univocally = one voice; unmistakably.
      TFB [unanimously] opposes electronic locks on firearms.

      Related: I laughed for about an hour at my friend for talking sh*t about Trump supposedly saying bigly. Because it’s definitely a word, and he should have known better.

  • Joe Schmo

    Two reasons why I don’t trust any “smart” gun:

    1. Machines fail, and now it is introducing more points of failure to a firearm that I may need to depend on. The less that can go wrong, the better.

    2. If there’s an EMP, I need my gun to work more than ever.

  • Black Dots

    After being introduced, symposium attendees voted this gun “Most Likely to Be Found Lying Next to the Victim”

  • Joseph Goins

    For when your finger actually lands on that one spot when someone is shooting at you? Two word: F%$K NO!

  • John

    You’d have to put the sensor on the trigger for reliable verification.

  • M-dasher

    im sure this system works great when your hands are muddy, bloody, sweaty…..

    man, i curious to see this finger print reader than can read fingerprints through gloves!……because im sure theyd never overlook the fact that peoples hands get cold in the winter….

    • milesfortis

      It is already established from further interviews that having wet hands makes the print reader go ????????? to ∞.

  • Roy G Bunting

    Il skip all the party line and get right to the business point.

    What does this offer that a $30 locking metal box doesn’t?

    When they build a “smart gun” that offers the *buyer* a better value proposition then a locking box I’ll consider it.

    Right now this is merely a gun takeaway safety that requires the user to not wear gloves and shoot right-handed.

    • m-dasher

      last i checked….all new guns come with a gun lock…..

      and you can go to any police station in the country and get a free gun lock.

      dont even need to spend the $30

      • Roy G Bunting

        Gun locks are fun, but I am specifically referring to the single pistol sized metal boxes because they allow you to secure a loaded firearm, much like “Smart Guns” proport to do.

    • milesfortis

      And don’t forget to have dry hands too.

  • Bill

    I’m just here for all the NOOOOOOO!

    If you are convinced something won’t work, it won’t. Like helicopters and implantable defibrillators. Oh, wait….

    • Out of the Blue

      What if I sold you a security device integrated into that helicopter that caused it to occasionally fail in flight because it didn’t register its designated pilot on board? Or kept that implanted defibrillator from activating unless you had the right RFID key present. These measures can be easily defeated with a little ingenuity once you’ve stolen it and have access to a machine shop, so prevention of theft isn’t a valid argument. Accidents aren’t always stopped by idiot proofing and are rare to begin with. More widespread training and better storage habits are the solutions to accidents, not adding another point for failure. Adding tech to a scope is one thing and can actually benefit the user. What you are doing is introducing another potential point for failure to an already functional piece of technology that will cost more lives than it will save due to in-field failures. The examples you give of technology that works actually offer tangible benefits and capabilities that wouldn’t be available otherwise. This is actually one of the reasons electric cars are still a niche product. They might be just fine for an average commute, but try to travel out of town and with most models you’ll need a rental. Forget to plug it in at night and you’re stuck, whereas with a gas powered car you can drive to the nearest gas station and be a few minutes late to work in the worst case scenario instead of however long it takes you to find an Uber or Lyft driver. The larger point is that all iterations of smart gun tech so far have been far too situational to be usable in the field, and the problems it is supposed to solve are better met with good handling practices.

      • Bill

        Dude, that’s static thinking. What was impossible 20 years ago is possible today, likewise what’s impossible today may, or may not be, tomorrow. Rigid thinking never advances the state of the art.

        And Tesla drivers with their Supercharger program may disagree with your electric car analogy. While it is expensive and isn’t commonplace right now, who knows what may literally be right down the road.

        • crackedlenses

          If what you say is true then the market will buy smart-guns when they are ready. Until then they need to keep being sent back to the lab until they work.

          And no, we aren’t obligated to like them, anymore than people are obligated to like Glocks or AR-15s.

          • Bill

            That’s funny, in the 80’s no one thought a “plastic pistol” would ever amount to anything , and before then ARs were Mattel guns that no real rifleman would ever touch. I understand that those things actually worked out OK.

          • crackedlenses

            My point. They’ll come of age when they’re ready and it is then that people will buy them. Until then they will rightfully draw scorn from some corners.

        • Out of the Blue

          The supercharger takes an hour to full charge if I recall correctly, and cannot safely be used with non-Tesla cars if my understanding of battery technology, so my point about the linits of all-electric cars still stands until someone finds a way to make a fast charging battery that rivals gasoline in energy density, which will require a revolutionary technology. However, I am not opposed to such a development. It was merely intended as an example of how the drawbacks of new technology limit it’s utility and therefore adoption. Firearms are often used in less than ideal conditions, meaning that smart gun technology has to be mature before anyone who actually has to use a firearm will adopt it. However, it’s not like a body camera where it provides you information you otherwise wouldn’t have. It provides an extra externally activated safety in a market that has increasingly abandoned manually activated safeties for the sake of simplicity, choosing to rely on training instead. A smart gun makes its operation more complicated, and unless it works based on an implanted RFID chip, something for which I have seen no prototypes, will require extra time to use under stress, resulting in multiple deaths of users who couldn’t activate their sidearms when they needed them. Even with the RFID reader, it will probably take a second or two that you don’t have. On a less serious note, they’ll also make sharing a gun with a friend or family member at the range a lot more complicated. 18 and 21 might be the minimum legal age to purchase a long gun and a handgun respectively, but most of us started shooting several years before we reached that age, and I don’t think those pushing for smart guns have multiple users in mind. A minor hassle with a PIN based system, but a PIN based system is the worst one for life and death matters.
          It’s a lot like magazine release safeties put on police guns in the mid 20th century. In theory it could be used to disable a gun that was being stolen, but in practice it must have proven to be a liability rather than a useful feature, seeing how it seldom, if ever, appears on new models. And just for the record, gun owners are fine with new technology, when it works. The problem we have with smart guns is that the make more complicated what should be simple, a violation of the first rule of engineering. We have no problems with new technology when it adds new capabilities, unless we think it takes the skill out of shooting. One thing I’ve seen hyped in the comments is electrically variable lenses, which would vastly increase the zoom flexibility of optics and reset to a close range setting if the battery fails, meaning that it’s still ready for life and death situations, assuming it comes to fruition. We aren’t opposed to new technology per se, we are opposed to new technology that decreases the reliability of firearms while offering only dubious safety and security benefits in return

  • kingof9x

    Held in the same city that want’s to make it legal for cops to take away a homeless person’s shelter. You know because it’s smarter to invest $1.5 million into technology that apple can barely get rite than it is to invest $1.5 million in homeless facilities.

  • USMC03Vet

    This guy’s example is the firearm equivalent of Clockmed(jerk student that removed a clock casing to cause an incident at his school claiming he built something worth value) in action, except this time to progress the narrative that the 2nd amendment should be further restricted beyond the gross illegal restrictions on it already.

  • bdig33@hotmail.com

    Nobody died at Sandy Hook. Research it.

  • Ghost930

    Yeah, because we wouldn’t want to actually engage and use our BRAINS. Not when we can replace it with a mechanical or electronic device. Almost 100% of the 90% of accidental shootings that this kid hopes to “avoid” are caused by a failure to engage the gray matter of one or more people in the accident or negligence train leading up to a bullet leaving the barrel………………….More gadgets, because thinking is just getting to darn hard.

  • Frank Grimes

    If he spent half as much time trying to get laid, he won’t end up a 35 year old virgin.

  • mechamaster

    NOPE !
    But this tech it is useful for airsoft-gun and nerf-gun rather than real firearms for adult.

  • Edeco

    Someone should get him and Cody Wilson together in an interview 😀

  • LazyReader

    advanced technology, meet hammer and chisel and your thousands of dollars of tech is useless.

  • Badwolf

    Freedom is good for all. You have freedom to develop “firearms safety technology”. I have freedom to buy guns with or without it. Don’t force it on me.

    • Roy G Bunting

      Which is the real problem. It’s not that they are developing guns with various types of electronic lockouts, it’s the legislatures that think these are a safety device worth requiring on all new handguns.

      • Sulaco5

        And outlawing the old ones.

  • InfidelCrusader

    My first thought was would this contraption work if the user’s fingerprint was covered in blood? For some reason I doubt that it would. That is the primary fundamental flaw in this idea. It may function as intended under ideal circumstances but will it work under duress? If it doesn’t its useless.

  • JoshCalle

    Stick your thumb in your mouth. Now try to unlock your iPhone with the thumbprint reader. If a little saliva can disable a gun it has no place in my hip.

  • YS

    At 0:33, he is clearly pointing the pistol at the next booth while loading. If you’re going to preach safety, learn some muzzle control first. No biometric supergizmo’s going to replace common sense.

  • Matt Shermer

    How can someone intelligent enough to design this at his age also be so unintelligent are the same time with regards to what quagmire he’s stepping into…

    • Ren

      Inexperience and optimism. Takes a while to get that beaten out of you. I doubt it’s intentional on the designers part.

      As others have said though, it’s pretty clear that he was essentially sponsored to produce something that appealed to the anti-gun crowd. Anyone who has actually attempted to work with biometric scanners as part of their job/hobby knows damn well they tend to fail regularly, even the expesnive high-end ones. Thats why you get a fob or access code after you get your biometrics registered for access, heh.

      The technology is still pretty new, another couple of decades and it might be reliable enough that it could be viable. Until LEO and military use it as standard, no-one else should even consider it.

  • Hoplopfheil

    If this works as well as the fingerprint reader on my 800 dollar smart phone, everyone who uses it is going to die horribly.

    • Cory C

      Hahahahaha.

  • gunsandrockets

    Aside from the obvious and odious politics, I am struck by the waste of talent devoted to such an economically idiotic project.

  • gunsandrockets

    So-called “smart guns” that only idiots would willingly use.

    Force the cops to use them first!

  • A bearded being from beyond ti

    Jeez that looks dumb.

    Also, gotta love that finger on the trigger in the video.

  • Sir TuberKopf

    Smart gun technology is a boondoggle that could get you killed.

    This kids video is short on technology and all wound up with Antiguan propaganda. They got what they wanted for $50,000.
    I bought a high quality, safe with a fingerprint access, does it work, yes. Does it have problems? Absolutely, big time.

    It is cool technology, yes, I bought the highest rated safe in this size class that I could find, period. Thank God it also has a keypad combination access?

    Fair warning these safes are not recommended for people over fifty, your skin thins and all biometric fingerprint scanners have problems reading prints! O’REALLY?

    Ok the safe is installed bolted to the wall and I call the wife over. You guessed it the damn thing can’t read or register her print, at all, ever? Now my 20 something daughter stops by, guess what, the safe can’t read or register her print at all, no way, no how! Hmmm, if this was a smart gun, my daughter is dead, my wife is dead. Thank you very much.

    Ok the safe lets you store 30 fingerprints. Now my wife can’t use it, my daughter can’t use it! So I start storing prints, from several fingers, my right hand only. I come in from gardening with dirty hands, and store them, clean hands, just road dirt, ok it’s doing pretty good. I come in with cold hands on the first cold day of the year, and like a cheap date in the morning, my safe doesn’t know me, in fact the safe can’t even register the prints of my cool hands, and it was only fifty out.

    Please keep in mind the safe has a large door with lots of space for electronics, a very high quality scanner, and a good sized battery pack. If anyone thinks that shrinking all this technology to fit in a handgun will make it more reliable, I have to say you are nuts.

    Gun haters cry that the gun lobby actively blocks smart gun technology from advancing. To the lint for brains liberals that make this fool statement, biometric locks like my safe, building security, and all other real world biometric security technology is a hot field that no one is suppressing or holding back.

    This is the technology want your gun to be controlled by, and isn’t gun control all about CONTROL? Or is it all about your gun not working when you need it?

  • Tritro29

    The only real “smart” gun isn’t going to be digitally checked, but pressure/pressure pattern checked. There aren’t two same pressure areas per human at grip, trigger and obviously mag and slide release.

    Simply put it’s people who don’t know about firearms, pretending to care. Every time I hear 12 yo/14 yo/18 yo designs super revolutionary gun, I just laugh my ass out. Bigger and smarter solutions haven’t worked, this isn’t even scratching the problem.

    It is similar to those who preach a society without cash. Same mental illness.

  • Justin

    This is all part of that “feel good” mentality. Firearm safety is something you are taught and actively do, not something you strap to your gun and hope for the best.

  • Sardo Numspa

    Not sure where Kai Kloepfer is from but it is illegal in almost every state to purchase or posses a handgun under the age of 21 especially Ca so how is this legal and was the demo model for the show legally transferred into Ca ? I feel the city of San Francisco should be liable and have charges brought against it for conspiracy & several other charges we would be made examples of .

    • Sardo Numspa

      Did he register with the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) and pay an annual fee beginning at $2,250 before modifying a serialized receiver ?

  • Scott

    I wouldn’t care if the technology was 100% reliable, I still would not want it. What if an emergency arose where someone not pre-programmed in as “approved” needed to use it?

  • Neo

    I applaud the kid for putting his passion, time and energy into such an ambitious project even if I (and most other gun owners) absolutely hate the idea. Although misguided, his heart seems to be in the right place. Hopefully he’ll be able to “kill his baby” when he finally realizes what an impractical and potentially dangerous technology this could be.

    The good news about this project is that it’s so easy to communicate what a bad idea it is to others. The subject came up with two not-so-pro-gun co-workers over the summer and one said, “Come on, how could you not embrace this idea?” Without pause I said, “What if my wife needs to access the gun if there’s an intruder while I’m away? What if I need to defend myself from an attack while wearing gloves or my hand is covered in blood from an injury? What if my hand is dirty or I need to fire it with my opposite hand due to injury?” What if the battery dies or there’s a malfunction (Samsung phones keep blowing up…do you want a batter to explode while positioned just a few mm from ammunition?”

    Not to mention that hackers have already showed that they can hijack some new car models, does anybody really think that there won’t immediately be a black market solution for rendering these useless?

    Within a minute or two even they conceded that there are potential issues and probably always will be. I understand why people might think this is a brilliant concept…and it would be if there weren’t so many potential issues. There obviously is a huge problem with stolen guns ending up in the hands of violent criminals, but the solution isn’t to create a possibility of a gun being rendered a useless paperweight when good people need them the most.

    • RSG

      It depends where his heart is. A real “gun guy” won’t allow himself to settle when it comes to reliability. An anti-gun guy (or a person driven by emotion) will consider certain “inconveniences” a small price to pay “if it saves the life of just one child”. As for me, it’s something I’ll never be interested in owning for the fear that like NJ, will someday make them MANDATORY. Don’t fool yourself, these will never be for sale as a choice, once working models are developed. They will be legislated right onto your local gun store shelves and into your safe.

      • Neo

        Oh I agree that anti-gunners are champing at the bit to inevitably make this mandatory in all firearms and that scares the hell out of me. I hate the technology and think it’s incredibly dangerous. But there are people who are neither pro or anti gun and just see things in matter of practicality. I have no issue with them, per se. My issue is with the politicians and anti-gun groups that will attempt to exploit their work in order to force it on us.

        • AHill

          I agree with you but can the “fire + assembled small arms ammunition = various explosions from hand grenade to 155mm artillery shell size” die? There’s an informative video on YouTube where a fire department sets different amounts of ammunition in different circumstances on fire to see if the meme is true. (Hint: it isn’t)

  • jerry young

    I don’t like it and would never own it! first I want to be able to grab whichever gun is close at hand if needed so if it’s my wives pink .380 or my 357 magnum that is what I will use and nothing to program to use simple lock load and defend! second all this will do is drive up the cost of firearms and help antis put more regulations on guns like they can be programmed for only one person, add to that it’s just more electronic crap to break down and when you really need it bam you got a dead battery or something worse! NO THANKS!

  • JT303

    Idiot. Trying to solve a problem in a way which creates more. Smart gun technology won’t catch on unless it’s instant and 100% reliable.

  • PersonCommenting

    If people want to buy them and manufactures want to sell them then have at it. That is what is great about our free market… Just dont require me to have one.

  • Harry’s Holsters

    When they can create a finger print scanner than doesn’t crew up for safes, computers or phones and place it ergonomically correctly for me on the gun I can see adopting it for a bedside gun.

    Never for a carry gun or anything I except to grab and use right away. That said a guy local to me shot a home invader from his bed. So I probably will never be buying a gun like this.

  • LazyReader

    There’s nothing controversial about a finger print unlocking glock being invented. Forcing owners to adopt it, that’s another story.

  • Mark

    *sigh*… let’s say that this things was 100% reliable… What problem does it solve? (My bet? A solution looking for a non existent problem). In what scenario does this play a part?

    • Cory C

      No disrespect intended, but I disagree that there’s not a problem. There are hundreds of deaths and injuries each year wherein little Timmy finds daddy’s gun under the bed and shoots himself or his little sister.

      Don’t get me wrong, the skepticism surrounding this smart gun is well founded, but there is a genuine problem of accidental shootings.

      Personally, I’d rather see legislation with teeth which sends people to prison for making guns available to kids / legitimate enforcement of such laws.

      I have guns. I have a young child. The likelihood of my child ever being hurt by a gun is as close to zero as possible? Why? Because like any safety plan worth its salt, I developed a routine and impliment it religiously. When I come home from work, the gun goes in the safe that she couldn’t access even if she wanted to. The gun has only ever been on my person or in the safe; there is no in-between.

      Additionally, rather than keep her in the dark about it, she understands that I have a gun, understands that it can kill people, understands that if she touches it that she can die, and she understands that if she ever finds a gun lying around, the rules are: don’t touch it, tell a grownup, and you get to go to Disney World.

      But here’s the tricky part. You can’t just tell these things to a three-year-old, you have to test them. So, we practice regularly on what to do if we see a gun. I use a toy gun and set it here or there and monitor her response. Sure, she wants to touch it, but she wants Disney World a lot more.

      The point is, I think gun owners have a responsibility to keep children from accessing guns (notwithstanding willful exposure, like taking your kid to the gun range). But this involves some actual parenting, so I can see why so many kids are able to access their parents’ guns. 😐

      • Mark

        I thank you for the well though out reply. But, respectfully, I must disagree with the first portion of your post. Let me explain why.

        A gun has never shot someone by accident. Yes, there are many accidental shooting and unfortunately people die. But it’s not the fault of the gun. Lack of training and lack of respect for the 4 rules is the culprit here. Let’s not fall into the anti-gun trap and blame the gun for an accidental shooting. The one at fault is the one that pulled the bang switch.

        Following this, be a responsible person. 1) Dont leave guns lying around. 2) Children who grow up with guns in the house should be taught safe firearm practices. There may not be a gun laying around in your home, but what about the friend they go to visit? Is that parent a responsible gun owner? Teaching your child how to handle firearms and to respect them and avoid them at all costs unless under your direct supervision is the key. Completely shielding them from it will not satisfy their curiosity. I was a kid once and you were a kid too, and we know what curiosity is like when you’re completely ignorant. I believe in teaching a child to never touch a firearm without the direct supervision and permission from a responsible gun owner (a responsible gun owner being one that checks or clears a firearm before handing it over to anyone).

        In terms of accidental shootings amongst gun owners, well, don’t point it at something you aren’t prepared to destroy, don’t put your finger on the trigger until you’re ready to shoot, be aware of what is behind your target and a gun is always loaded, even if it has a fingerprint scanner.

        So, I say it again but in a different way, this device does not solve a gun problem. It solves a people/negligence problem.

  • nova3930

    safe for the bad guys when his scanner goes south…

  • Can we stop calling 18 year Olds “kids”. by his age I was already working in aerospace.

    Smart People are more important than this “smart gun” fable….. it’s disgusting how much funding is available for anything labeled a “smart gun”

  • RicoSuave

    I’ll think about it when they get to V2.0, after the military and law enforcement field tests it.

  • Uniform223

    Until something like “The Law Giver” comes out the only REAL gun safety is INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILTY.

  • PeeDee

    The typical rallying cry: “If it saves just one life…”

    I find this funny because these kinds of people all vote for big-government/anti-individual liberty statists which throughout history has been the biggest cause of the loss life and freedom.

  • mindflayer

    The fingerprint sensors on my cell phones won’t work when my hand is wet. What happens when they are covered with blood after being attacked? Or sweaty from exertion of fighting off an attack or running away?

    Want to make guns safer? Give homeowners a tax break for locks, security systems, and gun safes.

  • David Harmon

    We can’t have Voter ID laws, you can’t have worthless always going to fail when you actually need it electronic gun locks. Give us Voter ID laws, then we can have a conversation about not having electronic gun locks.