That's the subtext behind a lot of the negative reaction to TrackingPoint's PGF technology: its potential use against people, either in the hands of a soldier, a policeman, or the proverbial crazy person. I'd argue that it's far more likely a mass shooting event would take place with conventional firearms than with a PGF; a bolt-action hunting rifle isn't exactly the quickest method of getting a lot of lead on a lot of different targets. The very nature of the PGF's "Tag-Track-Xact" scope encourages methodical target selection at range, and hauling even a hypothetical smaller PGF into a crowded place and letting loose would be enormously difficult. It's not a close-quarters weapon by any stretch of the imagination.
Fear-mongering aside, [...]
The hefty Surgeon rifle feels like a quality firearm should—it's solid and its bolt operates with a reassuring ka-chunk-ka-chunk. Like most firearms, it works best when operated authoritatively—you firmly seat the magazine and firmly close the bolt to put the weapon in battery.
Section 65A. (a) For the purposes of this section, "online shooting or spearing" means the use of a computer or any other device, equipment, software or technology, to remotely control the aiming and discharge of any weapon including, but not limited to, any firearm, bow and arrow, spear, slingshot, harpoon or any other projectile device or any other weapon capable of killing or capable of inflicting injury capable of killing any bird, mammal, reptile or fish.
I think it's hyperbole to start talking like every, most, or many of the people who are going to buy this gun are buying it to murder people.
To actually send a round downrange to the target, you depress the weapon's trigger.
TrackingPoint's rifles, though, remove overcompensation from the equation by totally segregating the act of pulling the trigger from the weapon's firing.
there's sometimes a multi-second period where you're squeezing the trigger and braced for the rifle's kick.
This sounds a little odd and might give the impression that the trigger actually moves under your finger as its weighting is varied. But this is incorrect: the trigger does not move on its own. You pull it and hold it to signal to the rifle that you want it to fire.
the "guided trigger assembly" includes a solenoid which actuates the firing mechanism. The solenoid releases only when the trigger is pulled and when the tagging pip coincides with the scope's reticle.
Mark my words, it'll happen. The technologies involved, as Malor points out, are unavoidable at this point.
It's clear that the trigger only requests that the gun be fired and that there's some software agent which actually discharges the gun when the right conditions are met.
I think it can be successfully argued that this is a remotely operated weapon that would be illegal to operate under Massachusetts state law, and I hope someone does just that before these idiotic things proliferate.
There's still a computer sitting between the human and the weapon deciding when that trigger pull is actually going to discharge the weapon.
You think I am going to run Java on that? What happens if someone roots my scope due to a driveby attack?
« Older Times Haiku... | Mining books to map emotions t... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt