Most recently, the media leaked information about the personalization of firearms weaponsin other words, the weapon will be endowed with the ability to think of who is shooting at it, the owner or a stranger, and, accordingly, to make a decision - to shoot or send the arrow away. In fact, all the information on this topic is written in the key “that's how good we are,” but are they great? A lot of questions remain, how much such a system is needed, how reliable will it be, what functions will it perform, and most importantly, how much will it cost? Would this not be another step towards the fact that the owners of the same hunting rifle, inherited from grandfather, will have to voluntarily-compulsorily equip their weapons, gathering dust in the safe for many years, with a rather expensive owner recognition system? Actually, on this topic and try to express my thoughts in this article.
First of all, before proceeding to a direct discussion of where and who needs such a system, you need to understand its implementation. It is immediately clear that such a weapon control system will be electronic, and this in turn imposes many restrictions on its use. In general, it must be said that many people are quite skeptical about electronics in firearms, and although it is clear that the introduction of electronics will be the next step in the development of a “firearm”, many believe that such weapons will be less reliable. In principle, something similar happened in the near time when the pistols began to force the revolvers out of the army and police environment. It’s just that not everyone understood the principle of operation of the new weapon, and it had serious problems with reliability, but now no one even thinks about how to introduce a revolver into the police or military environment, but where they stayed, it’s rather a tribute storiesrather than a real preference for weapons, but this is a slightly different topic. In principle, people who are skeptical of electronics in weapons can be understood. The electronics are exposed not only to water, which, with a minimum amount of dissolved various substances in it, is an excellent conductor, that is, it can damage the electronics when ingested inside the device, but also to environmental temperature. Rather, the real problem is not in the electronics itself, but in batteries, which, naturally, will be chemical, but, as is known from chemistry, the rate of the reaction depends on temperature. A vivid example confirming this problem is the traumatic pistols for 18x45 cartridges, for example, from the family of tubeless pistols “Cordon”, which are powered by batteries, and therefore can be refused at low temperatures. However, for a self-defense weapon, which is usually located in close proximity to the shooter’s body, this is not so important, but for service weapons that will be worn at the lowest temperatures in the holster, not to mention machine guns and machine guns, this can be a rather serious problem. . That is, first you need to create a power source that would be reliable enough regardless of the ambient temperature, shaking, and other things. Of course, there are such power sources, but the price of them, to put it mildly, bites, especially considering the full implementation of such devices on all weapons.
The second problem is that, despite the “nanotechnology”, the electronic device for controlling weapons will be relatively overall, and the problem of its placement in weapons arises. Suppose a machine gun or a machine gun, and submachine guns of separate structures can afford to place such a device “on board”, but pistols, especially small ones, such as PSM, for example, cannot boast such freedom. Of course, taking into account the development of modern technology, everything can be assembled on a board the size of a little finger nail, but the same power source cannot allow the device to be really small. Also, we must not forget that the weapon must somehow determine its owner, while talking only about biometrics, that is, the same gun must somewhere fit the fingerprint scanner at least. However, here again everything depends on the financial issue. In addition, it must be remembered that such a device should be of such a design so that it can be installed on the current models of weapons, since to create new ones, in the construction of which such pribluda has already been laid, will be an expensive task. Here, in the Ministry of Internal Affairs of AKS74U, they can’t change the submachine guns for more than 10 years, what to speak of such a jump in weapons. About the army significantly silent. Thus, a number of problems emerge in introducing such a design into the current weapon, since being located outside the pistol, such a device will simply increase its dimensions, make it less convenient to handle, and there is a great chance of damaging a cheap addition to the weapon during operation.
Now let's try to consider options for implementing recognition of the owner of the weapon. This is where the main fun begins, because of all conceivable and inconceivable options, only one is working and more or less suitable for mass use. But in fairness, let's take a few: fingerprint scanning, one of the most real, and fantastic: scanning the face of an arrow and scanning the retina. By and large, scanning a fingerprint is quite complicated in a firearm, since installing such an element implies that all of the shooters have the same size of the palm and the same grip, which, in principle, should be, but what should not be must. The only way to use the fingerprint scanner is to install it as a safety device. That is, before using the weapon, to unlock it, it is enough to perform a quick scan once so that the same gun becomes available for use. Such a system in my opinion is the only one that is possible in this case. Permanent fingerprint scanner arrow is simply impossible for at least the above reasons, and from the technical side of the question the device will have to constantly consume electricity, which is not very practical and, if implemented, will require a more capacious power source, which will be larger.
Scanning the face of the shooter or a more fantastic option - scanning the retina is quite applicable only in the case of a single scan immediately before use. The most logical would be the placement of such a device from the back of the housing-bolt, if we talk about pistols, because in this case the arrow recognition procedure itself can be carried out at the time of aiming, that is, when the device is located opposite the face or eyes of the gun owner. However, there are several pitfalls here. The first is that the shooter will have to hold the weapon and his head motionless for some time, moreover, the use of a weapon in the event of an unexpected danger is virtually eliminated, because, firstly, the offhand shooting does not work, and, secondly, the speed just a shot and the speed with recognition of the shooter will be very different and clearly not in favor of using a discriminator. The second negative point is that such recognition devices have optical elements in their design. Since, as it was written above, their optical location will be the most logical location of the housing-shutter, these optical elements will be constantly shaken during firing, which requires them to be made resistant to such a load. Well, provided that it will be costly, then such a system can also be considered unacceptable. So we will leave both options for the cinema, in view of the fact that it is simply impractical to use them in real life, although in isolated cases it can be justified.
Thus, it is clear that the only use of such a system is a single finger scanner arrow before starting to use a weapon, and not the constant control of who has a pistol or another sample of firearms in their hands. Accordingly, the question arises, why then such a system at all. If it is created in order to prevent the weapon from grabbing from the owner and using a pistol or something else against the owner, then the system is practically useless, since after unlocking the weapon doesn't matter which one shoots from it. In the event that such a system is entrusted with the function of a device to protect against the theft of weapons, then everything here also does not look very bright. The fact is that the blocking of the trigger or hammer or other parts of the firing mechanism in the case of the use of such devices will be carried out by a miniature electromagnet, which, depending on whether the locking system is turned on or off, will move some element that will lock the trigger. So in the case of theft of a weapon, no one will prevent the attacker simply to remove this locking element from the weapon’s design and use it to bypass the gunman’s recognition system. Vivid evidence is provided by various security locks that various manufacturers embed in their weapons, such a lock can protect a weapon a maximum from children, if in some way the same gun fell into their hands, in all other cases such a lock or just breaks if it is difficult, or simply opens with a nail. So it turns out that the sense of such a device "as with a goat milk."
But all this concerns only the identification of the shooter, in addition to all sorts of interviews also mentioned a device like the "black box" of the aircraft, which should record all the manipulations that are made with the weapon. Suppose it is possible to introduce a device into the weapon system that will act as a kind of counter, will count and record how many shots and at what time it was made. The most logical option for such a device would be to connect it directly to the trigger or casing. But there will be several problems at once. The first of which is the account of the “bashing” of the weapon, when USM seemed to be put into action, but there was no shot. The second is the simplicity of such a device, because of which it will not be difficult to turn it off and shoot as many souls as you want, and in the case of the proceedings make incomprehensible eyes and provide evidence of the recorded data that will prove the complete innocence of the weapon owner to any incident. . About a variety of fillings can not remember, with a strong desire, they can be removed and put on their own, even clearer home-made obtained in comparison with the factory. So it turns out that the simplest designs are not suitable for this, it means you need a sensor that will react to the recoil of the weapon when firing, but then the probability is great that the owner, having driven in a particularly smart bus, and in the opinion of electronics, will shoot thousands of cartridges on domestic roads. There remains one more option - a sensor that fixes pressure in the barrel bore, but how much will it cost and how reliable will it be with domestic “quality” ammunition? I think that this question does not require an answer and everything is clear without further ado. In general, if such a system is introduced, it will only respond to the movement of any part of the firing mechanism, which means that it not only will not assist in solving criminal cases using service weapons, but, on the contrary, will help to justify the perpetrator , in case he takes care in advance so that the smart electronics would not fix the shot. Similarly with civilian weapons. The option with photocells at the muzzle is not even considered, after all, they can be smoked in advance and if something happens, they forgot to clean the weapon or simply the device has been polluted from long wearing along dusty streets. Well, since it will be smoked in advance, it will not fix the shot, however, there are still a lot of options, but almost all of them require making changes to the weapon design, and therefore will be very, very expensive for general use, all the more so because 3 a piece of iron in the form of attachment strips for AK74 cost almost 60 dollars per set, how much will such a device made for the state by the state then cost?
Let me deviate from the topic and touch the adjacent. For some reason, earlier, in order to install weapons of some kind, even the shells were enough and it worked flawlessly, and now some technology from the world of fiction is required to prove that it was this gun that was shot at such and such a time. The question arises, what is it all about? To the fact that the conclusions of ballistic examinations will become a "relic of the past" and will not have weight without the corresponding data in the "black box" of the pistol? I, for example, see no obvious benefit from such a device, I only see the opportunity to disconnect it from the gun, and she, in any case, will use the weapon at her own discretion, saying “it’s not me, that’s my gun’s data about it is not. " After all, really, the only thing such a system gives is the ability to use service weapons for personal purposes, just get the cartridges, then collect the cartridges, and there is no data on the weapons, which means you're not even a suspect. In general, I see absolutely no benefit, only one harm. And it still did not touch the topic, how will the presence of such a device affect the characteristics of the gun, its reliability and so on, because the only sensible use would be to install it inside the weapon, which means to frame the frame somewhere, and so on.
But I deviated from the main topic. In addition to accounting for shots and fixing time, they also talk about accounting for assembling disassembly of weapons, equipment, emptying the store and so on. And again, the question is, how is everyone going to realize this? With the help of microswitches that will fail during operation, stick, oxidize and so on? There are simply no other options. In addition, how to keep records of cartridges that were loaded into the store, because the store is separated from the weapon, although this problem can be solved if a separate device is connected to the store, which at the time of its connection to the weapon will be synchronized with the main one. And in this case, you also need a separate power source for it.
And now let's imagine what it will be like to represent this whole thing, if it is implemented at least on the basis of a pistol. The fingerprint scanner does not allow you to instantly use a weapon in the event of a life threatening situation; it will also not work if your hands are protected by gloves. The weapon will have two power sources for the individual weapon control devices - one in the gun, the other in the store. There will be a need for constant monitoring so that these power sources do not lose their charge, that is, we carry a charger and look for an outlet. The weapon itself will have several microswitches, which simply will not work when moisture gets in, and the electronics will remove incorrect data, just do not forget about the wires, which also need to be placed somewhere, because something needs to be connected. As a result, we get a weapon capable of shooting in greenhouse conditions, which is heavier than a gram on a 100-200 weapon without all this perversion, which is not able to protect the life of the owner in case of need. And we need it?
Well, it would be logical to consider how this whole system is applicable in various areas of the use of weapons, probably starting with civilian weapons, as the closest to the majority. So, suppose the prescription was issued for a voluntary-forced installation on guns and rifles of such devices, and even the devices themselves are installed without changes in the design of the weapon. Naturally, we have a free country, you don’t want to install it, just as it is not necessary to set an alarm when storing weapons, I think the sarcasm is understandable. It is immediately clear that there will be much fewer people willing to buy the same gun, and many will give up weapons if the police officer is not the best person, and the weapon itself is not necessary and just gather dust. That is, we kill two birds with one stone: disarm the population and cut down the money for the purchase and installation of new ones. After all, it is clear that the installation will be made only by certified "specialists". In addition, even the same precinct life will not seem raspberry, because if earlier the whole test was “came, looked, left,” that is, it was possible not to come, if laziness, but just make a mark in the documents that “ everything is calm in Baghdad, ”now it is likely that they will be obliged to drag at least a netbook to read the data from the weapon. Although there is a plus, people can play backgammon during working hours or play solitaire. In addition, it remains to hope that the “experts” during the installation of such a device will not destroy the weapon itself, and in fact people have many really interesting specimens that can be considered historical value, but are registered as civilian. In general, if such an ugliness happens, then an immense love for the authorities will increase even more, at least among those who have weapons, and here they already have something to think about.
Next, the army environment. Here there really will be only one harm from such innovations. People’s weapons are constantly on hand, but why it’s so personalized is not so clear at all. Apparently, in case there is really a need to use these weapons, then it would not be possible to take a machine gun from a wounded or dead comrade when your for some reason refused. In general, there are absolutely no advantages. Even if we consider the cases when the weapon was used against his colleagues or when a soldier deserted with a weapon, then he had exactly the weapon in his hands, that is, he could use it in any case. I'm not talking about how the shooting is conducted, so that the army from this will really only be one harm.
For the police, such an innovation will mean that the attacker will get a head start in time, and will know that before the shot he has a few seconds to shoot first, yes, or just come up while the law enforcement officer tries to peel the finger stuck in the cold fingers, and attach a brick to the head. We are no longer talking about increasing the weight and that in the case of outdoor execution of this disgrace, quickly removing the pistol from the holster will not be the easiest thing. Here it’s really better to wear a cucumber in a holster, they can at least have a snack, they’re more useful on their faces.
In general, despite all the approving nods of many high-ranking officials, and even the delight of some of them, I am personally against such devices in arms. In the end, if it is so necessary to tighten control over weapons, including service ones, then you need to start by cleaning personnel from those who, supposedly, can use it improperly or for some personal purpose. Rather, clean the frames from those who can cover this whole thing, pull the brakes off and so on. In general, I consider such a system not as a means of controlling weapons, but as a means of noticing traces of the use of these weapons. Well, it is impossible to make a device that can not be temporarily disabled or deceive, and the data on it overwrite. Here they cannot ensure the safety of such a simple and unpretentious device as a DVD disc, and even then we can talk about data on more complex data carriers, and here you can not only scratch or something else, there are a lot of options: static electricity, various viruses, written by evil "hackers" who want to shake the foundations of society, and so on. In general, we have, it turns out, a system for which a sufficiently large amount will be deducted from our taxes, and as a result, it will work exactly the opposite of what it is intended for, so it looks like we do not have, but us. One can only hope that all this information about such systems in weapons will be just another farce in the style of "what we are good fellows", and not the immediate prospect of the "development" of firearms. Of course, the development is very interesting, let people work on it at the Central Research Institute of Technology named after Berg and further, everything will be useful on the farm, as a last resort, you can sell such development if there is no other really useful use for it, let others torment with such a weapon.
Shooter Identification: Firearm Personalization
- Karasik Kirill