, , , , , ,

I already remarked on this idiotic idea in a prior post, but now that Rep. John “I Watch Too Many F’ing Movies” Tierney (D-Mass.) has decided to offer up HR2005 “The Personalized Handgun Safety Act” (better known as “We Think Stuff in James Bond Movies is Real Act”) it’s time to return to this subject.

In the latest James Bond offering Skyfall, the classic anti-hero is toting a new Walther PPK/S — already showing you the filmmakers aren’t thinking beyond fan service and product placement…it’s a terrible firearm, compared to the PPS or PPQ — that is “coded to his palmprint” to prevent anyone from Bond using the jammin’est gun MI6 ever issued.

Here’s why it’s a stupid idea: 1) Fingerprint and palmprint technology is finicky even when not attached to a device is essentially a container for a controlled explosion. There’s a reason it didn’t catch on with laptops — it doesn’t recognize you half the time. You look like a new cash register jockey running the pack of gom over the laser scanner for twenty minutes.

2) One of the issues with the sensors is they are highly prone to dirt and fouling…something firearms produce in spades. The recoil of the .380 is not especially vicious, but fragile electronics run through the frame of the pistol would be prone to failure from normal usage. Imagine the effect of a 10mm 1911 running “hot” loads…. In the cold, in the heat, what would be the effect? How about if, in the middle of a tussle, the police officer armed with one of these turds dropped it and it stopped functioning?

3) The battery technology is not adequate to the task of allowing the firearm to be ready at all times. You would have to switch it on and off…and if the battery is dead, would the firearm lock down? That could be damend inconvenient if, say, you needed it suddenly. If it did work with the sensors off, then what’s the damned point; you’d just flip the switch to “off.”

That’s just the practical  issues…

The lesson here is “movies aren’t reality.”