Smart Weapons

CET50019

NSA, if you are listening, please note this and get it to the proper authorities for action. Thanks.

We are considering arming some Syrian rebels that we hope will fight ISIS on the ground. I suppose that is OK; it might save us from sending our own troops to an area where we know we are disliked. But what about later? We know how many times we have supplied arms to some group that was our buddy but later turned against us.

I have a solution. With the high-technology abilities we possess, we can make weapons that will disable either after a certain period of time or by a remote command. Think about that …

OK, that’s enough time. With small arms and explosives, we could build them with some ‘disabler’ inside. Say, an M-16 with a firing pin that would fuse inside the carrier, preventing it’s forward movement. Or a trigger that would freeze and become immovable. Even better, insert a small amount of acid or explosive in a capsule. Upon receiving a  remote signal, say from a satellite, it would blow up. Quite a surprise to a former buddy now turned against us. Higher tech items, like rocket launchers, would have ample places to use this destruct technology.

There is technology now that can make a handgun not fire unless held by a person wearing a ring or wristband that enables the weapon. Perhaps this would be better. Give them the weapons and the rings of power, but make the ring so the battery would run down after a time and disable the weapon. The ring battery would of course, not be replaceable; it would need to be returned to the factory – us- for replacement. Much like iPhones.

I was going to include date-sensitive ammuntiion, so it would not fire after a certain time. But that is too iffy. Ammunition is available from too many sources. The best bet is to disable the weapon itself. And of course, you have to make it tamper-proof. Like an electronic device that warns that you will void the warranty if you open it up, if the user attempts to open the weapon to remove the explosive or acid, it would detonate it. Enough said.

I am sure the military-industrial complex could jump on this like a guinea on a cutworm and start turning out these selectively usable weapons soon. I lean toward the remotely disabled device because you never know how long the person will remain your ally. The timer would be too rigid: you would not want to have the rifle stop working while she or he was still fighting for you; on the other hand,  you might leave the timer too long and he could use it after he turned on you. But the remotely controlled device could be done whenever the political or military need arose.