An Interview with Wayne Weber, President of Heckler and Koch USA.
The trend of making conventional objects “smart” is continuing unabated, and now even firearms are beginning to have computers integrated into them. The Cipher Brief spoke to Wayne Weber, President of Heckler & Koch USA, about the rise of smart guns. He says that systems which only allow authenticated users to fire weapons are still unproven, and that the technology as a whole still has a way to go before it could be implemented on a large scale.
The Cipher Brief: Generally speaking, how do you view smart technology, especially in regards to the firearms industry? There has been some push back in the integration of smart technology into firearms, what are your thoughts on this?
Wayne Weber: To clarify, when we discuss smart gun technology, in general, the perception is that it is a device, whether it is a watch or a ring or some type of electronic device, that disables the function of the gun when that watch or ring is not within a certain proximity of the gun. There are other interpretations of smart gun technologies as well. However, I’m referring to the one whereby the gun is disabled unless the device is within proximity, so that only the authorized person will be able to use that gun.
There has clearly been some pushback from the gun industry with regard to the integration of smart gun technology, and much of that is related to the political climate with gun control in today’s society. I think that some people view this as an opportunity to pass legislation favoring smart gun technology, which in my opinion is not proven. There are so many things that need to be determined with smart gun technology — whether it is a ring that has the sensor in it, or a watch or whatever. I think that smart gun technology still has quite a bit of research and development to undergo before it’s considered a proven technology.
There are certain potential hazards with smart gun technology, too. If you look at this application in law enforcement or military use, quite often if one guy gets hurt or runs out of ammunition, you need to grab another troop’s firearm and use it. In many applications, I just don’t see the feasibility and the practicality of smart gun technology.
TCB: Can you talk more about the integration of these electronic control systems into firearms and how they’re shaping the industry?
WW: I just don’t see a huge trend within the firearms industry. Some companies may see the feasibility of something along those lines in the future, but I’m not aware of anyone actively pursuing smart gun technology, from a safety aspect. There are very basic and fundamental safety precautions that most firearm owners should use with regard to conventional firearms. To say that smart handguns that can only fire from an authorized user would resolve those problems, I just don’t think that’s something that the firearms industry as a whole has embraced or will embrace anytime in the near future. The technology is not proven and that technology is a work around, in an effort to pass anti gun legislation.
TCB: How do you expect the market for smart weapons to evolve and how do you see the technology progressing?
WW: While I mentioned one interpretation of smart gun technology, the other interpretation is a system that we are working on for the U.S. government, which is considered a gun that shoots smart ammunition – this would also be considered a smart gun. A user employs a very complicated fire control system with a laser range finder, and then it takes that information and communicates it to the ammunition that’s in the chamber. This is an explosive ammunition for military use, but it talks to the fire control system and talks to the ammunition and tells the round to explode once it has gone a certain distance. This means that, if the enemy is hiding behind a wall or in a ditch, you can still engage him without shooting directly at him.
TCB: Do you see this integration enhancing functionality at all?
WW: You do, and that’s something that is not necessarily applicable to handguns. Gun is a very general term—that applies to handguns, machine guns, and even larger weapons systems in many cases, but in terms of a smart gun platform or concept, you are seeing a trend of smart guns combined with smart ammunition. You see the integration of a lot of electronic devices that communicate with the gun, a high-end scope, a ballistics computer, and either the ammunition or a PDA of some sort. These take that information and translate it into something that may be user friendly from a command standpoint, whereby your authorities could tell you, “okay I’m seeing the same things you’re seeing, go ahead,” or authorize you to do something. It is very useful from a combat or a law enforcement command standpoint in terms of communicating to multiple people with one guy standing behind a rifle, and others essentially seeing the same thing he is seeing.
TCB: Are there any cyber security concerns that go along with this?
WW: I’m not a cyber security expert but I would say it is as susceptible as any IT system out there right now, whether it communicates via Bluetooth or other cordless means. I wouldn’t say it is any more susceptible than others, but I would say it is certainly a potential risk, given the nature of the existing technology out there in terms of transferring that information.
TCB: Is there anything else you would like to say with regards to smart gun technology?
WW: Smart gun technology is innovative, and I have seen companies that have been working on smart gun technology for probably the past 18 to 20 years, and quite honestly I have not seen a leap in the technology. However, I have seen a leap in gun control efforts where certain states have made efforts to put legislation in place that would ban conventional firearms at a certain date and require smart gun technology. I have seen the effort to politicize it, and that is one of the bigger concerns for me. Being a technical person, I also know very well that this technology is far from being something that is proven and practical, from a fielding standpoint.