GlassHalfEmpty August 5, 2016 04:44 AM Good idea! Why did it take so long? Now, can we take the "disassemble and keep in a safe" firearm laws off the books? Anne Ominous August 5, 2016 07:44 AM With today's technology, nothing battery-powered comes even close to matching the reliability of a modern mechanical handgun.The problem with these fancy "safe" guns is they are only "safe" in one direction. That is, in order to make them good at stopping unauthorized people from operating them, they sacrifice reliability for those who ARE authorized. A lot.The enormous difficulty of making a firearm that prevents unauthorized use AND is sufficiently reliable for self-defense makes them impractical. I sure as hell wouldn't want one.In order to really meet both reliability and these kinds of "safety" standards, they have to work effectively to 3 nines, both ways. I.e., they must prevent unauthorized use to 1 in 10,000 AND work for the authorized user 9,999 out of 10,000 times.Some have done the former. A few have done the latter. None have come even close to doing both.Dead battery? Too bad. RangerJones August 5, 2016 12:53 PM $1,295.00, Yeah that's practical-NO Wolf0579 August 5, 2016 01:08 PM Even if you "train in" the unlocking procedure to the point of it being automatic, it's still going to add seconds to your ability to respond to a life or death situation, and as such, a liability no one who wants to protect their wives and children would allow.The same is true of disassemble and keep in a safe laws. tyme2par4 August 5, 2016 01:26 PM So if someone breaks into my house, I have to, in a panic, type in a pin? Then if I switch hands, I have to remember to type in that pin again, because I've then released the second safety. No thanks. BerryJGriffin August 5, 2016 01:28 PM No thank you. Isn't going in my holster, ever. JeffKing August 5, 2016 03:01 PM Simply put, this is the worst idea ever. I'm a firearms trainer and one of the first things I tell people is that a safety is a mechanical device that can and will fail. The only thing worse than that would be an electronic safety like this. So now you will have idiots leaving guns out thinking that they are perfectly safe. Also a gun like this is useless as a self defence gun. Just imagine that there is an attacker and you need to pull your gun, enter the pin and then fire? Also, if you even slightly adjust your grip that grip safety will get disengaged and then you have to reenter the pin. I know, I have XD's and I disabled the grip safety in mine due to just this issue. Gun safety can not be surrogated by a gadget. Gun safety starts and ends with rules. If you live by the rules accidents just can not happen. The first step towards that is EDUCATION. Mandatory gun safety classes in school would be a great first step. If the kid in that class had been educated at all on guns he would NOT be touching that gun. I have three kids around that age and all of them know better than to do that. 1. STOP 2. DON'T TOUCH 3. RUN AND GET AN ADULT. And for adults. LOCK IT UP! You have young kids in the house, ever? Get a quick access safe. I have one next to my bed, one next to my desk, one in my shop and a large regular gun safe for everything else. Timelord August 6, 2016 04:42 PM The biggest obstacle isn't the technology. As 60 Minutes reported a few weeks ago, it's the gun lobby and their rabid supporters who see smart guns as the first step to taking away their rights. Read the transcript on the CBS News website to find out just how nutty they are. Anne Ominous August 10, 2016 05:02 AM @Timelord: Yes, it's the technology. I don't deny that some people think they see the other coming down the pike. And I don't blame them, to be honest. But the technology REALLY, genuinely, is not there.Earlier I mentioned "3 nines" but didn't really explain what I meant by that phrase. I meant 99.999% of the time.All the statistics from whence that number is derived are too extensive to show here. But in order to be "worth it" for saving lives, it has to stop someone unauthorized 99.999% of the time, AND it has to WORK for the authorized person 99.999% of the time.Guns that will do one or the other have been made. But nobody has come even close to doing both. Usually, they have succeeded on the (so-called) "safety" side, that is, stopping someone unauthorized from using the gun, while sacrificing the reliability side. The problem is that guns are used far more often for defense than they are used for ill, or involved in accidents or theft. So the reliability side is a very big "safety" issue too.And this product is a case in point. Anything that works on batteries... ANYTHING that works on batteries... fails the reliability side of the equation. A good old Glock will be vastly more reliable in a pinch.The same holds for all the other schemes that have been tried. RFID rings can be cloned, transmitters on the person fail (or can be spoofed), fingerprint sensors are a joke, and so on. AND they all work on batteries.Combination locks are mechanically complex and slow to open. Etc.No thanks. Joe Blough September 1, 2016 03:26 PM The geniuses at the NRA are already battling any safety measures. They prefer dead kids over simple sensible controls. But then they aren't exactly the brightest bulbs in the pack.