Did German 'smart gun' fail on video?

May 28, 8:15 AMGun Rights ExaminerDavid Codrea

Previous Next

13 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

On Tuesday, we talked about Armatix, a German company that makes "digital and biometric authentication" gun locks. The objection, of course, is not to providing gun owners options and choices. It's against companies working with governments to mandate no choice but theirs. And while "safety" devices can have their place, they should never be relied on as a substitute for training, experience and knowledge.

Which appears to be unintentionally illustrated in this promotional video:

Watch and listen carefully at about 52 seconds into the video. Did you hear a click when the company representative took the gun back and tried to demonstrate it would not fire?

Can you think of any other explanation for why it would appear the gun dry-fired? The only one I can think of is this video has been doctored. I find that hard to believe because it would be so easy for Armatix to disprove.

In a related development, more subtitles have been added to the video we presented on Tuesday. Click here to see the update.

Here's the thing--videos have a way of disappearing from YouTube, so I wouldn't be surprised to see these go away. So please make sure people know about this in case that happens, and do it quickly.

As an aside, here is the company page for the Armatix "smart gun."

A wrist band activator? Personally, I can't think of anything less smart than requiring not one, but two electronic devices to interfere with a firearm's mechanical operation as a precondition for defending your life. Particularly when one of them can be ripped off your wrist.

Also of interest is this revelation:

The wrist watch is then activated for a definable period - e.g. an officer's work shift or until manually deactivated.

Those of us who have been following these developments over the years know the original reason "smart gun" technology was developed in the first place was to address "takeaway" incidents where police were having their own guns used against them. We also know that this idea was quickly scuttled--there was no way police unions would let their guys go into harm's way and trust their lives to a...damned gizmo.

No, that handicap is reserved by citizen disarmament zealots for We the People, you know, the ones with that right that "shall not be infringed."

But take note, LEOs: If they succeed, they'll be coming around to you. Proposals have been floating around for years about making you turn' em in at the end of your shift.

Many thanks to correspondent "Hamburger" for his kind direction to this information. I can't begin to tell you how much finding people from other countries who "get it" fills me with hope.

------------

Here comes the bullet ban

Jennifer Freeman of Liberty Belles tells us:

The usual suspects in New York and California have introduced legislation that would require you to register your ammunition and would limit the number of rounds you could buy per month.

Click here to read the whole thing.

------------

A question in Oregon

Oregon Firearms Federation has one:

How much worse will it be if you are mistakenly identified as "mentally defective" and the State Police have an even harder time getting access to records that would clear you?

That deserves an answer, don't you think? Read the whole alert here.

Further reading:

• "The idiocy of smart guns" by St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner Kurt Hofmann
• "For the children (part two)" by...uh...me