Smart guns are being pushed in mainstream media to prevent unauthorized people from firing guns in the hopes of preventing mass shootings. 

Biometric recognition technology using fingerprints and or RFID technology is used to activate the high-tech pistols. 

However, as outlined by the pro-gun website Bearing Arms, smart guns aren’t so smart after a possible demonstration failure.

Smart guns could be prone to reliability issues in life in death situations. 

* * * 

Submitted by Bearing Arms

Over the last week or so, so-called smart guns have been everywhere in the mainstream media. In the Second Amendment community, there’s been a ton of talk about them as well. Especially since we all know it’s just a matter of time before lawmakers try to mandate smart guns as the only guns.

However, there are problems with these kinds of firearms. We all know it. I’ve talked about a few of them.

One of the big ones is reliability. The more whizzbangs you put in a device, the higher the likelihood of failure becomes.

Firearms are a technology that has more than a century of development. While there are tweaks here and there, the core of a semi-automatic firearm hasn’t changed all that much. As a result, it’s reliable.

Smart guns don’t have that. What makes them “smart” is a technology that exists elsewhere, but also has problems just about everywhere.

And, as John Boch over at The Truth About Guns notes, it seems they can’t even handle the “gun” part that well, either.

Last week, we lambasted reports of a new “smart gun” that Reuters raved about in a glowing “exclusive.” Reuters reporter Daniel Trotta wrote that the third-generation prototype fired “without issue” during a live-fire demonstration for investors and the media.

Now though, additional footage of the event has since surfaced that shows the LodeStar Works gun couldn’t manage to fire two rounds without an issue during one of the exercises.


Here’s another recording that is embeddable from a local TV reporter. It shows the LodeStar not-so-smart gun can’t even fire two rounds back-to-back.

During a demonstration to share holders last week, the operator clicks the key pad on the side of the 9mm smart gun. Once unlocked, the smart gun is operable. @Lodestarguns @6abc — Christie Ileto (@Christie_Ileto) January 18, 2022

We can clearly see the shooter state he’s going to fire two rounds. He fires one, then pulls the trigger several more times, only the weapon does fire.

Yeah, that’s the reliability thing we were talking about.

The truth of the matter is that smart guns aren’t ready for prime time. Not by a mile. But, companies working on them know they can gin up publicity–and likely some degree of investment–by sending out a few press releases and telling the media about how awesome their new firearms are.

Yet I have yet to see one of these smart gun folks who is actually a gun person. They seem to generally be technology people who decide to build a smart gun, rather than a gun person who wants to build one.

Of course, gun folks know that there’s not really much of a market for these kinds of guns. We’ve heard about them for years. They’re always just around the corner, and yet absolutely no one seems the least bit interested in them. I have yet to find a gun person who is excited by the concept, though some such as myself are ambivalent about the technology itself. Others, however, are downright hostile to it, mostly because they figure someone will try to mandate them for everyone.

Luckily for those folks, smart guns look like they’re at least another decade out at a minimum.

If these companies think they’ve got something, they need to stop turning to the anti-gun mainstream media and start looking at the gun media instead. Let us test and evaluate the weapons. We’ll tell you if they’re ready or not.

I’m not holding my breath on that, though.


  1. Matthew Whitticar says:

    There is a lot of money pouring in. I think in part because CA and NJ s mandates for them are working through the courts and their survival is far less certain if it doesn’t work.


  2. It's just Boris says:

    “Let us test and evaluate the weapons. We’ll tell you if they’re ready or not.”

    And right there is the reason they won’t – it’s not relevant to their business model.
    Just my opinion, but it seems to me these companies aren’t interested in making a good product, but rather in getting a government mandate for people to buy their product. (Individuals working at the companies may well care, of course, about making something good. But I suspect they’re not the ones making high-level decisions.)

    Of course, this business model is not unique to smart guns; it’s been around since there’ve been government standards and mandates.


  3. John M. says:

    I get the concerns about the stupid NJ law, but I don’t generally understand the moral panic gun owners have about smart guns. Sure, they are less reliable, but of the billion guns in America, what percentage don’t have “self-defense” as even a secondary use? How many guys would like to be able to leave their duck gun or deer rifle or IPSC pistol in a soft case in the hall closet without having to lock it up in the gun safe twice a week? Maybe they don’t have little kids running around anymore and just want that one extra layer of safety? It seems pretty reasonable to me.


    1. Shawn says:

      because once new guns are smart guns, then thats admitting they are “Safer” and a reason to ban all those old dangerous dumb guns

      Liked by 1 person

      1. BAP45 says:

        yup, It’s like the micro stamping thing in CA. There’s fewer guns allowed every year because they dont have the stamp. Same thing will be used with smart guns

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s