The latest rage in the movement to ban firearms is the 'smart gun.' Where,
by some technological mechanism, the firearm authenticates the bearer as
an authorized user before functioning.

It would seem to me that 'smart guns' are an attempt to address two
socially-based problems with a technological solution. Specifically,
   1) 'smart guns' try to eliminate the instances of childhood accidents
      with firearms.
   2) 'smart guns' try to keep unauthorized users (criminals) from using
      firearms they shouldn't have.

Unfortunately for 'smart gun' technology, we're using a screwdriver
that's too big, and is the wrong tool, to pound in a nail. 

In the first case -- protecting the children -- let's try to imagine how
many firearms are sold and available in the United States each year. I
don't have that figure readily available, but I do know that about 25k
handguns were sold in MD. To keep things simple, let's multiple by 50
states, and get a working figure of 1.25 million handguns.

Combine that with an existing estimated base of 270 million firearms, and
we're looking at a lot of guns. But, I like math simple, so let's pretend
that there are 199 million firearms owned in America, and 1 million sold
this year, for a total of 200 million.

Now, let's correlate that with accidental childhood deaths via firearms,
which was ~215 in 1995, an amazingly small number, when you correlate
that to the amount of guns out there, the amount of ammunition fired each 
year, the amount of gun-owning citizens, or just about any other metric
you can think of using. Never mind that firearms accidents are far behind
cars, bikes, pools, choking and chemicals in child fatality.

However, I digress. Again, I like simple math, so we'll call the number of
childhood deaths by firearm accidents 250, per year. According to that
math, 'smart guns' have the potential to save about 1.25 lives a year.
Lotsa effort, little bang.

On the other hand, the NRA has a program, specifically aimed at
youngsters, to teach them about the dangers of firearms without a
responsible adult. The message is simple:
	STOP!
	DON'T TOUCH!
	LEAVE THE AREA!
	TELL AN ADULT!

The cost? Negligible to schools, organizations or groups. The
effectiveness? Childhood deaths due to firearms accidents has declined
steadily every year since 1970. Furthermore, this is the same program that
the FBI endorsed for their agents to teach their children. Lotsa bang,
little cost.

In the second case -- preventing unauthorized use -- let's begin with
"what is unauthorized?"

Is 'unauthorized' defined as criminals, who would steal your firearms? Or,
would your wife be 'unauthorized?' Or, your wife would be allowed, but not
your seventeen year old daughter?

In the case that you and your family is authorized, but everyone else is
not -- how is this supposed to actively deter criminal misuse of that
weapon? Because it is a 'smart gun?'

Our cars are pretty smart, too, and since they're a lot bigger, we should
be able to fit a lot more 'smart technology' into them, so no-one bad can
misuse one. Nowadays, you can either have keys, numeric keypads, or remote
controls to start your car, yet many criminals are making a quite
active and financially rewarding career of car thievery.

In other words, it won't be long before the criminals will learn how to
circumvent the 'smart gun,' turning it back into an effective, dumb
weapon.

What happens if your wife and/or daughter aren't authorized? Hopefully
nothing, but what happens if they aren't authorized, you're 2000 miles
away, and a criminal has just kicked in the front door?

To make a long story short, 'smart guns' will generally fail at both their
assigned duties -- preventing childhood accidents and preventing criminal
access.

To make matters worse, 'smart guns' will have to overcome, at least, the
following obstacles before we can even dream of employing them:

   1) ease of use
   2) speed of use
   3) reliability of use
   4) authorization management

1) ease of use -- if it isn't easy to use, no-one will use it. Especially
on a piece of life-saving equipment, such as a defensive firearm! If it is
2'o'clock in the morning, and your worst nightmare is coming down the
hallway to kill you, there won't be time to remember which button to push,
or what exact 'kung fu mojo' grip to use, so it can get a read.

2) speed of use -- authentication has to be quick. The average human can
cover 21 feet in under two seconds, which is longer than most rooms inside
a house. If you have to wait for the gun to approve you, the time just
might kill you.

3) reliability of use -- it has to work on time, every time. It's
emergency equipment, and it is useless if it fails. A lifeboat has to
float, if you need it, and a gun needs to fire if you need it. Anything
else, you're risking your life on unreliable equipment. This means that
the authentication device can't have a battery, as batteries slowly
lose energy and fail. This also means that the authentication device needs 
to work in hot weather, freezing weather, bone dry conditions, right after
being immersed in water, or in any other imaginable condition. It also
needs to be immune to magnetic interference, sun-spots, lightning,
electricity, electro-magnetic interference, or any other type of
disruption possibly imaginable, or else the device is categorically
unacceptable.

Points 1-3 all, in different ways, say the same thing -- in an emergency,
it is best to Keep It Simple, Stupid [KISS]. In an emergency, time is not
a resource you have, and failure is not an option -- you need results, and
you need them now. Any 'smart gun' technology will have to be KISS easy to
use, else valuable lives will be lost.

The last point I bring up is management of authorization. Basically, the
owner of the firearm needs a reasonably expedient way of telling the gun
who can use it and who cannot. Example: If a gun is sold, obviously the
new owner will want all authorizations transferred to him. Example: You
want to let a friend shoot with you at the shooting range, because she's
been thinking about acquiring a gun just like one of yours. Example: You
want to remove your ex-wife from the access list, and add in your 18 year
old son.

This has to be reasonably expedient, and easily done by the owner --
sending the gun to a police station, or to the manufacturer, or ordering
another magic decoder ring won't work.

As technology progresses, the concept of a 'smart gun' should periodically
be reviewed, as there could well be a case for the military and police to
use it, and perhaps some firearms owners would be interested in it, as
well. But, we are not there yet, and a government mandating the use of
technology that is not reliable -- that should concern just about anyone!

--
-- John E. Jasen  // DNRC Ambassador to Earth \\  jjasen1@umbc.edu --
-- My views are those of the DNRC only. Prepare to be domesticated --