Despite decades of the reports that smart guns are based on theoretical technology that does not work in reality, leftists have gravitated to the German manufactured Armatix IP1 as the smart gun of the future.
Problem #1: A hacker at a Colorado shooting range just showed how to completely sidestep the gun’s lock mechanism via the use of $15 of magnets.
Problem #2: The same hacker showed how to the lock the gun—when it is supposed to be in fire mode—so that the gun’s owner cannot use it in self-defense.
The Armatix IP1 is designed to work when in close proximity with a watch that emits a certain radio frequency. When not close to the watch, the gun is designed to lock, which theoretically prevents it from being used by unauthorized persons. But the Daily Mail reports that a hacker, who goes by the pseudonym Plore, bought $15 of magnets off Amazon.com and was easily able to bypass the gun’s locking mechanism. Moreover, he “was also able to jam the device’s radio signals so the owner could not fire the gun even with the watch present.”
Using a $20 jamming device, Plore showed how to render the gun inert. The Mail reported, “As well as allowing the gun to fire when held by someone else, Plore also used radio signals to make the weapon completely useless.”
Breitbart News has long warned that smart guns are not smart. Any gun that relies upon a radio signal for activation is a gun that can be jammed—and therefore disabled—or stolen and still used (as long as the thief also steals the watch with which the gun is paired). Even without stealing the paired watch, Breitbart News reported that a criminal assaulting an officer could take the officer’s smart gun, hold it close to the officer’s watch, and activate the gun long enough to the shoot the officer.
On top of these concerns are the practical problems that arise from the fact that the Armatix IP1 is a cost-prohibitive firearm. The price ranges from $1,500 to $1,800 for an Armatix IP1 chambered in .22 long rifle. On the other hand, Americans can buy a brand new Glock 19 in 9mm for about $525.
Why should would-be gun owners pass up a 9mm that shoots every time to buy a .22 long rifle that only shoots when it is not being jammed? Moreover, why should people with honest self-defense concerns be dependent on a relatively puny round like the .22 long rifle when they can carry a 9mm, .40, or .45 for a third of the money?
AWR Hawkins is the Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and host of Bullets with AWR Hawkins, a Breitbart News podcast. He is also the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at email@example.com.