Biometric Fingerprint Trigger Lock

First this,

then,

Alexa can you unlock my gun?

6 Likes

Another point of failure. Keep it simple stupid.

8 Likes

Tech has peaked and now headed back down hill. I like a good old fashioned combination lock. Only my wife and I can open our big safe and the day I can no longer remember the combo is the day I ought to pass down my guns to my kids.
Lots of times it takes me several try’s to unlock my phone with a fingerprint. If I needed that gun in a hurry, I’d better hope my aggressor waits patiently for me to unlock it.

6 Likes

I would never trust my life to biometrics.

There are some pretty sophisticated key locks that would work as needed.

5 Likes

Ok, Robert. Let me be more clear:

I would never trust a biometric lock for a gun safe of any size, especially if it contained my home defense guns.

Regarding healthcare and biometrics - a whole different subject, and far more complicated view.

And, regarding IBM’s dark history, yes I had heard that before.

3 Likes

^ This. And to add, I would not trust technology/software either (e.g. automated car).

2 Likes

Mister_Torgue:

I would have to be much older and less mobile to accept having a machine do the driving.

Technology has come a very long way, but driving is still far more complex than the software can handle.

3 Likes

I agree completely. Now tell the electric car hippies / hipsters this.

3 Likes

Don’t want a gun that takes batteries.

Don’t want a gun I can’t shoot weak-side/handed.

Don’t want a gun my wife and family can’t use (especially if they really need it).

Don’t want a gun I can’t shoot with leather gloves on.

Don’t need the added expense.

Half the time my Galaxy 7 "smart"phone doesn’t recognize my fingerprint to unlock. That’s unacceptable when seconds count.

3 Likes

Mister_Torgue:

Oh, I have and I will continue to do so.

However, I do hope that driverless cars become an available option someday. People like my parents could sure use them to get around.

2 Likes

Stumpkiller:

I agree with the batteries comment.

But, have you ever fired a Smith & Wesson .460? Oh boy that’s fun. But personally, I would not want to shoot it one handed.

However, for personal defense, I think your comments make a lot of sense.

3 Likes

I finally got a phone with a fingerprint scanner, a LG Stylo 3. It works perfectly, no issues whatsoever. Would I want it on my sidearm? No way in hades. If I can’t get my phone unlocked I can double tap and use the code. If I am drawing my sidearm for immediate self defense, and my finger is covered in blood, mud, or oil, and it doesn’t read it…I may be a dead man with my perfectly good sidearm safely locked away. There was a video years ago about robotic type clone cops hunting down people, and one went after a guy smoking a cigarette. At the end, when they con fronted each other, they both had Beretta 92s with touch screens on the side, entering in codes. The clone’s fired. and the last screen showed another clone in a control room with the mans screen on in front of him flashing “DENIED”. Can’t find that one anymore, but that IS the end result they want - make gun ownership so onerous and difficult that nobody wants to do it, except the criminals who will have “dumb” guns forever.

3 Likes

I got a note 10+ the other week and have fingerprint on it as well. I like it a lot. But no way I want my firearms using it. Sometimes it takes 2 or 3 tries, sometimes even not then. It’s fine for a phone, or even your front door, but not on a firearm.

5 Likes

I have a small safe that opens with a finger print . But being a sheet metal worker I always have small cuts and scratches on my fingers so it is hit or miss if it Will open. I only use it in the car when we travel and I have a key for it.

6 Likes

Wonder if it would work better with one sensor for every finger?

5 Likes

just remember to multiply potential failure for each sensor

6 Likes

Our time clock at work uses fingerprints to let you sign in and out. My thumbprint also works on 2 other co-workers accounts. A couple of my co-workers have to try several times to sign in and out. I’m not going to trust this stuff on keeping emergency equipment locked down.

6 Likes

I absolutely agree. Most people wouldn’t trust smart technology with their home security panic button or fire alarm. I always bring up that point when debating smart guns with anti-gun people. They always say, “Well, that’s not the same thing.” LOL

5 Likes

Just tried calculating it as a Bernoulli distribution. If the probability of failure is 0.5 per finger, the probability of one false reading against four successes is (5 choose 1)(0.5)^1(1-0.5)^4 = 5:32 = 15.6%. Two failures against three successes is (5 choose 2)(0.5)^2(1-0.5)^3 = 10:32 = 31.2%. Three failures are also 10:32 due to symmetry, and four failures are likewise 5:32, while 0 or 5 failures are 1:32.

If we tolerate a maximum of one failure, the total success probability is 1+5:32 or 18.75%. If we allow two failures, that’s 1+5+10:32 or 50%. Not so good.

If the accuracy of one reader is 70%, the numbers are 52% if allowing one failure, and 83.7% if allowing two failures, an improvement of just 13.7%. If the accuracy of one reader is 90%, allowing two failures gives 99.1% success.

Yeah, not enough for me to want to rely on it.

7 Likes