And place a burden on those that cannot afford the retrofit. Maybe billionaire Mayor Bloomberg will pay for them.

It's funny how gun nuts place the slightest inconvenience of gun owners over the lives of victims of gun violence.

in the fight to reduce the proliferation of guns stolen from irresponsible owners, and straw purchases, which end up in the hands of criminals.

He should have no problem helping to fund this and NYPD would be a great testbed.

your buddies at the NRA/Gungeon to chip in?

And I don't have the resources necessary to assist in testing this tech properly.

In both areas Bloomberg is far better situated than I to assist. Is G4A around maybe you can get him to whisper in his ear?

seem to be having much luck at all these days, now that the national conversation is shining a light on the obscene proliferation of lethal weapons in this nation.

I know that the temptation to disrupt this group is strong, and that you Gungeoneers believe that you are being oh so clever in "infiltrating" behind enemy lines, but you really need to get over yourselves. "A gun under every pillow" is so NRA, and the American public is growing tired of your talking points.

Ta, ta...

I am generally interested in this tech.

and I would like to arm bears...

What about very small guns? Examples would be derringers or Kel-Tec P3ATs, Ruger LCP, or North American Arms mini .22 revolvers.

What if you need to defend yourself when your hands are dirty or greasy?

What if it is winter and you are wearing gloves?

What if the battery has died?

What prevents a crook from disabling the device and rendering a gun capable of being used?

Those are questions that the buying public is going to ask.

What if you could significantly reduce the possibility of anyone but you firing your weapon? Would that not be a worthy goal?

By your reasoning one might wonder why anyone would have a gun safe, since certainly they can be cracked and you'd have to carry the safe with you everywhere.

Some are just sheet metal that can be easily pried open with a crowbar, others are fairly strong. Some aren't worth the money and some are good investments.

The questions that I asked are the same kind of questions that should be asked before donating money to that group. I am suspicious of their claim that their design could be retro-fitted to all gun designs. I would check out that organization more carefully before donating money to them.

As a gun carrier, I would not want my life to depend upon the state of the battery or whether or not my hands were clean.

You'll understand if I question the motive of your scrutiny, given your NRA membership.

That said, of course not all safes are created equal. And a biometric lock would not be a solution for every gun owner, such as those who live in climates that require gloves be worn often.

But it is idiotic to discard technologies that would increase safety for most because they would inconvenience some. See also "seat belts."

I carry around a bunch of keys so that not just anybody can drive my car, or get into my home, or other locked spaces.

I have passwords at various accounts so that not just anybody can access the account.

Such protection for my guns would be a good thing. But I am suspicious of the organization because they are asking for donations to develop a commercial product that will be patented and sold, instead of seeking investors. Distributed Defense also sought donations, but their intention was to freely offer their plans for download, which they did, Distributed Defense made no profit from sales and did not patent their designs.

Your group seems to be claiming more than is mechanically possible. Gun design has changed very little in over a hundred years. M1911 designs are still being manufactured and bought. Guns are designed to be simple, rugged and reliable. Such a device could be easily removed from the gun, or deactivated. Such a device has to have a go/no-go part that is in either a go or no-go position. Such a part could be simply fixed in the go position.

They are saying that their device could be fitted onto all guns. I suggest that such a claim is false. There are enough design differences between guns that making a one-device-fits-all is simply unbelievable. If their claims were more modest, and if they were looking for investors, I might consider investing myself. The amount invested would be small, but the payoff if they succeeded would be huge.

For such a device to be accepted by the gun buying public it will have to be super-reliable, and very difficult to remove. It would not need to fit all guns, just fit most of the ones sold.

I read the article. One company is working on a device to recognize pressure patterns. I would not trust that on a gun that might be used under the stress of an attack, possibly even injured myself and firing with my off-hand. Personal pressure patterns would almost certainly be different than firing on a range.

Please notice that I have not said anything personally insulting towards yourself nor impugned your motives.

If you find my mentioning it insulting, perhaps you should reconsider membership? I believe it is voluntary.

"kinder and gentler" Gungeoneers who just can't stand being ignored for the NRA zealots and shills that they are. The old "but I really DO want to find a common ground" is such transparent bullshit that Stevie Wonder could see through it.

So I shall leave.