The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

This is a system that I have been aware of for a while and it basically falls into the realms of the smart gun technology that 'Merica' probably fears more than communism.

However...

We're not Yanks and as law abiding shooters we have nothing to fear from logging our firearm use whether its on an analogue or digital register. In fact we already have to and the the idea of just touching the butt of my handgun or rifle to an RFID reader appeals to me more than searching hoplessly for a pen that works before filling in the two dog eared registers that we currently have at my home range.

But Armatix is more than a tagging/logging system, it is also an authorisation and safety system that lets only the authorised owner/shooter discharge the firearm and only when pointed in a safe direction.

click on the link for more detail http://www.armatix.us/Smart-System.778.0.html?&L=7

Look it up on youtube, just search for 'Armatix smart gun lP1 Smart System'

I know, I know, for some this is a step too far and does raise the ugly shadow of Big Brother et al... and I certainly wouldn't advocate its use on existing firearms, but for us pistol shooters it could be a bargaining chip if we ever have the opportunity to re-debate the 1997 ammendment act?

Your thoughts please.

Introverted Edward territory...

It's more than a step too far! I would not be interested in the slightest.

What is wrong with people being all too ready to accept another level of control or appeasement?

So if the Government said to you, yep you can have your full bore 1911 back but you've got to wear this watch when you shoot it, you'd say no!

I'd ask them for two and an Omega.

IsleShoot wrote:I'd ask them for two and an Omega.

Ha ha - if only!

Firstly, I have an Omega and my 1911 was turned into a drain cover a number of years ago...

But, I don't believe that anything would have the government repeal either all or part of the '97 Ammendment. Technology such as this will only be used to restrict further, of that I have no doubt.

And, technology fails. The cars at work are fitted with Journey Data Recorders. These JDR's, or "black box", require having a chipped card presented to it in order that the vehicle can be started. Everything is then recorded against the particular officers card. Probably not dissimilar to the technology associated with this invention. But, last year a friend of mine went to arrest a particular nasty sex offender. He's a detective and was in plain clothes, carrying nothing more than handcuffs. The offender wasn't going to come quietly and infact attacked my friend with a machete. He got to the car, but the JDR wouldn't work. He couldn't start it! The offender then went for the car with the machete in an attempt to get to him.... The offender is now doing 12 years and I have no faith in this sort of technology.

I hear what you're saying about the JDR's, nobody should have to rely on them in order to save their life but thats not my point.

The use of this type of technology should allow us to argue that the re-introduction of all section 5 firearms is possible because the technology can prevent the unauthorised and/or malicous use of firearms that are currently deemed too dangerous to allow the licenced citizen to possess.

In my opinion if the technology can be proven so that if (and when) it fails, it fails to safe i.e. the firearm is inoperable, then how can the establishment argue that these weapons are unsuitable for sporting (target) use.

In addition I want to be very clear on two points;

1. Our firearms are for sport, collection, hunting and enjoyment, they are not for protection, personal or otherwise.
2. I would never advocate the retro-fitting of this type of technology to existing section 1 or 2 firearms and I don't think it possible on section 7.1 or 7.3, but new section 5 firearms, if it puts them back into section 1 I don't see what we have to lose?

Seems a bit like bonds Ppk in sky fall or the guns in that yul Brunner James brolin film "westworld" where the guns would not shoot at at heat source........good to have a owner recognised palm da reader thingy but still would not prevent anyone using them for the wrong reason, that technology will only be of use to the armed units of our cops......

From what I read via your link the target response system is separate from the RFID so someone can still be shot with one of these setups.

It also doesn't prevent unauthorised access just makes it a little more difficult - then again it doesn't do that either because shooters being people will store them together so the RFID/pistol combination doesn't get mixed up.

@Sandgroper - The way I understand it, you'd have to be stood in front of the target to get shot, if the user was to turn the weapon on himself or a third party it would not operate.

To my mind this system has potential in that the weapons can only be operable within strictly confined zones, even my golf club has 'chipped' it's buggies so the engine cuts out when you get too close to a green or the cliff! As people who enjoy technical innovation I think we should be embracing this technology to make it work for us before we have it forced upon us in a format that doesn't suit our wants and needs.

And reference storage, you don't keep your firearms and ammunition in the same cabinet with the keys hung up next to it, so why would you keep the watch/gun together?