"If I only had a brain!"

I have a smart phone.  It's as dumb as the Vice President .. who thinks we should all have "Smart Guns" because it's a NO BRAINER for him.

Very convenient, because Joe Biden has no brain.  In fact, he looks a lot like Ray Bolger.

 (He is also protected by Secret Service guys who carry "Real Guns" because "smart guns" are a concept whose time has not yet come.)

Hat Tip: Gunmart Blog --

I KNEW that the anti-gun crowd was going to play this card... - Gunmart Blog:

 So, here is my question for you, Joe. You are sitting there all smug and pious telling people to go ‘buy a smart gun…. do it for the second amendment’. ,,,, I mean, if it saves only one child from finding a capitol police gun in the bathroom… If you believe so much in this technology then… YOU FIRST!

What the heck is a "Tyrranophile"?

Maloney’s Stupid ‘Smart Gun’ Bill an Unintended Gift to Gun Owners | Oath Keepers:

Because it shows Maloney for the sick tyrranophile that she is. It takes away the arguments that gun owner rights advocates are “paranoid” and that “No one wants to take your guns.”

I pride myself on my vocabulary, but when David Codrea calls Maloney a "Tyrranophile" I admit that I'm just guessing:

Tyrannosaurus Rex   ["Tyrant Lizard King"?] is the king of cretaceous-era carnivorous monster  "Tyrant" lizard, and "Phile" is "one who loves" so I assume that this makes Carolyn Maloney a tyrant lover.   

Having said all that:

Maloney's proposition that ALL firearms must be "Retrofitted" to apply "Smart-Gun Technology" is the purest political polyglotism 

 It is a twice-told tale full full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

To Protect Me, I Can't Close My Garage Door

I came home from a day at the range, opened my garage door with the remote in my car, and moved all my gun gear into the garage.  When I had everything in the right place, I pushed the inside-the-garage mounted controller to close the garage door. Nothing happened.

So I went to the (exterior) frame-mounted, coded controller on the outside of the garage, entered my four-digit code, and waited.   Nothing.  Tried it four more times, being VERY careful to ensure that I used the correct code.

Nothing.

So I went back to my car, entered the four-digit code to unlock the car door (it worked), and used the same in-car remote to close the garage door ... you know, the one I had use to OPEN the door.

Nothing.

I got my landlord to come over.  He couldn't get it to work with his remote, either.
Finally, we physically disengaged the garage door opener mechanism from the garage door, manually closed the garage door, manually pulled it down.  And manually locked it.

That all occurred three weeks ago.

My landlord has been in touch with the GENIE people; this week they gave him instructions how to test the garage door opener.  Everything they tried, doesn't work.  Finally,  they decided that the mother-board was fried.  They promised to send a replacement.   They're a little bit backed up, so it will take a couple of weeks to get one to him.

So the replacement mother-board for the garage door opener will be here late this month.

My landlord was careful to inform me that it won't actually be REPLACED, let alone tested, that soon.

I told him .. that's okay.  I can move my gun gear from the driveway to the garage through the patio doors; it's not convenient, but I can get it 'off the street'.  And I'm confident that nobody will be able to get into my garage in the meantime.

That's very comforting.  Nobody can get at my stuff.

On the other hand .. neither can I, unless I go through a lot of physical 'stuff' that takes a lot of time and inconvenience.

Now: please tell me how the same technology that can't get my garage opener to operate in less than six weeks will help me to defend myself and my home if my firearms uses the same technology 'to protect me'?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rep. Maloney Introduces Legislation to Reduce Gun Deaths, Make Guns Safer | Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney: May 8, 2017 Press Release WASHINGTON —In an effort to improve gun safety, Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) has reintroduced The Handgun Trigger Safety Act, forward-thinking legislation to use new and emerging technology to prevent gun deaths. The bill would promote the development of new “smart gun” technology that only allows an authorized user to fire a gun. It would also mandate that all newly manufactured handguns use this technology within five years, and that existing handguns be retrofitted with this technology within ten years. Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) will introduce a companion version in the Senate.

OH and by the way: I'm a widower.

I live alone.   Nobody gets inside my home unless I let them in; my landlord and I have the only keys.

Tell me how it protects the children (there are none here) if I don't lock up my guns where I can't access them quickly.  And how does any state mandate firearms maintenance laws when they don't apply to every home situation?

H/T David Codrea

Arizona Weighs In On Smart Guns ... kinda/sorta/maybe (We're Not Sure)

Some Arizona lawmakers voted to block a measure that would stop people from buying smart guns.   (WTF?)

Have I read this wrong?

The original article is unclear, but it sounds as if a "YES" vote would make it "unlawful" to buy a "Smart Gun".

Some states (notably New Jersey) have laws which REQUIRE people to buy Smart Guns if available;   is it possible that Arizona has taken The Road Less Travelled and is considering making them illegal?

Some Arizona Lawmakers Concerned About Smart Gun Technology | KJZZ:

Some Arizona lawmakers voted to block a measure that would stop people from buying smart guns. The House bill would prohibit any mandatory tracking technology on guns, but most of Thursday’s debate centered on the idea of who is and who isn't supposed to be able to fire the gun. Proponents said smart gun technology could prevent shooting tragedies like what happened last week when a little boy was killed by his two year old brother. But opponents like Senator John Kavanagh said the technology isn’t there yet.

It may not matter, since the technology is still untested, but it sounds as if they're only concerned about the option to track the guns. Which seems a valid reason to oppose them, based on privacy issues.  

We're going to assume that the short article was poorly written, and that the legislature is not really going to make Smart Guns Illegal ... just make it illegal to track them.

(By the way, the parent station KJZZ has a nice jazz station online, where you can listen to some good vibes while the reporter goes back to journalism school!)

How NOT to market "Smart Guns"

German arms maker Armatix to release second smart gun in U.S. | Computerworld:

Yes, it's another article about how great Smart Gun Technology is.

The only problem is, nobody wants to buy them.
Even as new standards are being considered and proposed, nobody wants to buy them anyway.

This article mentions the 'problems' the makers  (Armatix) are having, trying to get someone to BUY their product.  But in the text, it's the bad things about Smart Guns that jump out at the reader.

(1) Useless Caliber

German firearms manufacturer Armatix LLC is planning to release its second smart gun in the U.S. next year after sales of its first model -- the .22 caliber iP1 -- were quashed by pressure from some gun owners and gun rights advocates who saw it as a threat to Second Amendment freedoms.

There's not a lot of people who are looking for a teeny .22LR pistol.   So maybe it is a good idea to build one with an actual usable caliber.

Oh, and BTW?  Nobody likes RFD which might conceivably be over-ridden by "outside agencies"!

Armatix finally figured this one out all by themselves:

 Unlike the iP1, which used RFID technology, the new iP9 9mm semi-automatic pistol will have a fingerprint reader. The iP9 will be available in mid-2017, according to Wolfgang Tweraser, CEO and president of Armatix LLC.

Good for you.  You're making a 9mm .. which is still (in the opinion of 'old school' pistol owners, a "Poodle Shooter".  But it's a step in the right direction.

(2) Overpriced!

So, why would someone want to pay over $1,000 for a tiny pistol?

The iP9 is expected to retail for about the same suggested retail price as the iP1 -- $1,365, which is more than twice the price of many conventional 9mm semi-automatic pistols. While smart gun technology will always bring with it a price premium, Tweraser said that's to be expected, and he compared it to a Tesla electric car.

Yes, well ... the advantage of electric cars is that they will probably, in the long run, save money because electricity is cheaper than gasoline.   But that's a fallacious comparison because you'll never get a return for your dollar by buying a 'Smart Gun'.

(3) Arrogant marketing!

But the manufacturer thinks the introductory price is reasonable:

"Always the latest technology comes with a higher price tag. As you make hundreds and thousands of units, then the price will change also," Tweraser said. "We're not going to replace regular guns because of the price point also."

And you wonder why you can't sell your guns in America?   You are so cocksure in the value of your product you ignore the fact that you have to build a market almost before you build the product.

You're not doing that.

Hell, you can't even find dealers!

When your firearms are competitively price, you will at least get a few people to buy the gun.   Maybe they will try it, discover that it's worth more than they paid for it, and tell their friends.

 You're not going to replace regular guns until you can COMPETE with regular guns!  Your marketing strategy today ... sucks.   Today, you can't afford to  "make hundreds and thousands of units";  when you start SELLING "hundreds and thousands of units", that's when you can start jacking up the price.   It's also called "The Law Of Supply And Demand".  Right now, you have too much supply because you have no demand for your product.

(4) Identify, and Sell to  your market

Who buys guns?

Hunters, Home & Personal Defense folks, plinkers, competition shooters, collectors, military and police, Governments, new firearms owners .. that's the potential market.

This product appeals Plinkers and New Firearms Owners in the .22 caliber configuration.  Not a big market for a small pistol which costs almost $1,400.

In the 9mm caliber, you MIGHT get some "Home & Personal Defense" people interested.

Hunters, Competition Shooters, military & police, they're not going to ... I think the expression is "I wouldn't touch that with YOUR dick!"   So, your market is probably limited to Home & Personal Defense buyers.

That's a very SMALL niche market, especially since the sub-set of that group will probably be "New Gun Owners", and they need to be romanced carefully.

You're doing okay with emphasizing how SAFE your gun is, and probably many most buyers are  will be young homeowners with children in the house.

Your niche just became much smaller.

Now all need to do to sell to a sustainable market (hopefully, more than 100 a month, nationwide) is to get them into the hands of this group, and let them do your marketing for you.

Did I mention  young, homeowners, children?

They're dealing with bloated mortgages and childrens' college trust funds, and you want to sell them a pistol for $1400 (plus plus ... license, taxes, permits, etc.)  Thank Goodness you brought it out in 9mm, which at least justifies some of the cost.

New Jersey!
New Jersey was the 11th of the original 13 colonies.

And it was the first in America to pass a state law that, as soon as (well, 3 years after) a "Smart Gun" became available for civilian purchase an America, only "Smart Guns" would be eligible for purchase in the state.

Unfortunately, the ARMITIX was the only gun in America that met the criteria, so after it came on the market the entire state of NJ was locked into selling only YOUR firearm ... what a great marketing moment for you!

Too bad your version was untrusted, and the available make/model/caliber was so limited, because suddenly you started a whole new revolution.  

Dealers who attempted to retail your gun were threatened because of the precedent which was set by ONE idiotic NJ Salon, and ONE underfunded manufacturer  (cough *Armitix*) was unable to meet the demand, provide a sufficiently wide range of desireable make/model/caliber, and the world came to an end until the NJ Governor nixed the whole damn thing.

Not a great publicity moment for Armitix.

So, I am guessing that the corporate gurus in Armitix are trying to figure a way to dig out of this black hole.

Here are a few suggestions, if you wish to continue making a "Smart Gun":

• make it in many calibers
• find a better platform
• get it tested AND ACCEPTED by LEO and military ... because if they won't trust their life to it, no civilian is going to trust their life to it in a self-defense situation
• find a price that will allow you to get it on the market, even if you have to take a loss
• about New Jersey ... sorry about that.  You lose.

Hope you have a large number of investors with very deep pockets, because you need to rethink your concept, design, marketing, vision and leadership

And after that?  

You're still screwed.

You're building a product which just isn't good  enough  to meet a market which just isn't big enough to justify the effort.

And very few people who are BUYING guns wants it, anyway.  They don't trust it.

Only state legislators want it, and they're all a bunch of pusillanimous idiots that nobody listens too!

"Maybe in six or seven years" ... (as John Wayne said to Ben Johnson in "She Wore A Yellow Ribbon").

Brooklyn, you can't afford this

Failed Technology 

This is just one more example of how liberals use false hopes and wishful thinking to undermine the ability of Americans to defend themselves, their families, and their home.  And their sole purpose is to make us LESS safe.

Brooklyn kicks off $1 million smart gun design competition (VIDEO):

Adams says the competition has already brainstormed three areas of interest in personalized handguns: a smart phone app to find lost or stolen guns, firearms with fingerprint biometrics and RFID technology such as a ring worn by the user. But he cautioned these initial ideas are just the tip of the iceberg. “Embracing other concepts such as microstamping* and other technologies that are out there, we can create an environment where gun ownership will not be trampled on but the rights of people living in a society free from gun violence will be preserved and protected,” said Adams.

If the "Smart Gun" concept gains credence in America, soon it will be difficult to find a firearm which will be useful in protecting yourself.  You would have to find a "used gun" for protection,  because the 'new guns' are not reliable enough to serve the purpose for which they are intended.

"Smart Gun" Technology:
There are two ways that Smart Guns prevent unauthorized users from using your gun against yourself:

1. Have the gun keyed to the proximity of an RFD device (a ring, a bracelet);
2. Have the gun keyed to your personal fingerprints.

RFD DEVICE:

Antigunners like to say that it's foolish to use a gun to protect yourself/home/family, because they will just take your gun away and shoot you with it.  (The worst of this verminous pack direct their 'bad advice' against Women, because they think that Women are more susceptible to violence, and more likely to yield their gun to an aggressor.)

If they can take away your gun, they can also take away your ring, your bracelet, or other device and use THAT to take your gun away and shoot you with it.

PERSONAL FINGER PRINTS:

This is even worse.

I'm a concealed carry permit holder, and I go to the Sheriff's office every few years to renew my permit.  They always take finger prints.  What's the first thing they do?  They have you wipe your hands so that sweat, body oils, and debris does not mar the perfection of the impression.

So if you have to use your finger-print protected Smart Gun before defending your home, are you going to wipe your hands?

Of course not.  And you'll be sweaty, your hands will be oily, maybe there is lint from your flannel pajamas ... your fingerprints when you are in an emergency situation may not match the prints you 'registered' on your Smart Gun when you set it up.

So your Smart Gun may not function for you, when you need it.  

This is the same thing as having "no defense at all", because ... you haven't!

But wait!  There's MORE!

"... a smart phone app to find lost or stolen guns ...:"

Gee, how does that work?

You would need an identifier to cull your Smart Gun ID   (an RFID TAG) out of the hundreds in your area, and of course you would have already registered that ID with your local police department because it's THEIR job to find stolen property.   Right?

Which implies that they will ALWAYS know where your firearm is.

This is just like the failed effort to implant RFD devices under the skin of people; except that this will only identify Americans who have guns.

There are some issues with tagging firearms (or people) with RFD tags.

If your personal privacy is important to you, RFID tagging might not be an option which appeals to you.

CONCLUSIONS:

Any alteration to the original design may render your firearm less than perfectly functional.

There are many uses for a firearm, and one of them is for home/property/personal defense.
Which implies (strongly!) that your firearm should be always and immediately available in an emergency, and there should be no alterations to the basic design which may impede it's ability to function as designed.

We know how to use guns safely and effectively:

• We've practiced with our defensive firearms until they seem like an extension of our hand; our thumb and fingers automatically access slide, safety, hammer and trigger without conscious thought;
• All members of our household have been trained until their usage is familiar; if you can't get to your gun, someone else will;
• Children have been acclimatized to firearms, and know not to touch them without permission except in an emergency;
• A firearm which is so shrouded in artificial 'safety mechanisms' to the point where it is essentially useless in an emergency, is nothing better than a large rock with which to batter an aggressor.

That's not defense; that's desperation, and doomed to failure.

* PS: MICROSTAMPING

I'm not sure how that bit of failed technology crept into the original quote, but it's a signature which deserves to be stamped out (sorry) immediately.

Microstamping is a theoretical technology which purportedly embosses some unique identification code upon the base of a cartridge when it is fired.  The breech of the gun is 'stamped' or 'embossed' with an unique identifying code, hopefully to be stamped on the base of a cartridge upon firing, and which can (according to theory) be read under a microstamp to identify the firearm from which the cartridge has been fired.

This has been touted as a 'crime-stopping' technology, and has as yet not been proven to be reliable ... or effective, useful, or feasible.  However, it would add so much expense to the process of mass-producing firearms that it would triple (at least) the cost of a firearm.

If you're interested in the many ways that Microstamping of ammunition is Not A Good Idea, you can go to my home page and type "MICROSTAMPING" into the search box on the top left hand corner of the page.  There about 10,000 words debunking the concept there.  Have fun!

A Modest Proposal for Smart Guns

Allen West has a nifty proposal which may potentially resolve two issues:

1.  What do we do with "Smart Guns"?   It's untested technology; nobody trusts it.
2.  How do we arm our "friendlies" in the Middle East ... who change shirts at will?

EVERYBODY (almost) is touting the benefits of "Smart Guns", which cannot be fired by anyone except the 'registered owner'.  Some folks want Americans to put the lives of their families at risk by depending on this untested technology.

Americans have lined up to say "UH ... I DON'T THINK SO!"

One of the issues is that Americans love their country but fear their government;
"The Feds" can turn off the functionality of a 'Smart Gun' at will, because it's all electronics and NSA has the premier control in this world of electronic data transfer.

At the same time, we are arming our 'friendlies' in the Middle East, but we don't trust them all that much either.

Instead of imposing Smart Guns on the American People, why don't we give them to our allies?

The Real Issue of Gun Control - Allen West:
(July 06, 2016)

Both Afghanistan and Iraqi Defense Forces have difficulty determining the sympathies and loyalties of new recruits. Aware of these concerns, Florida-based Trigger Smart has now developed and patented a smart gun system that can remotely enable and disable weapons using wireless technology on the military field.  

While technology alone cannot replace proper vetting practices, smart-gun technologies can potentially mitigate the risk that our troops face. Equipping our ally soldiers with RFID-secured weapons, paired with wide-area control technology, can ensure that only authorized personnel can operate their assigned weapon. Weapons can be enabled and disabled by U.S. advisors whose military forces will designate safe zones throughout outposts and operating bases.

Tee hee hee

I can only imagine the Middle-Eastern turncoats who point guns at American 'advisers', only to discover that "The Furschlinger Gun Doesn't Work!"

(I don't know how to say that in Farsi.)

This is probably the best idea I've heard in years.

In the words of Andy Rooney: "Hey Kids, I've got an idea ... let's put on a show!"

Not-so-smart NJ and not-so-smart Smart Guns

You recall how New Jersey had her knickers handed to her when the smarmy law requiring "Smart Guns" to be sold as soon as they had become available? Uh huh. They still have sores from the bite marks under their nickers.  (And the Smart Guns are STILL not all that 'available'!)

Now, New Jersey has has backed WAY off its original arbitrariness.
Not far enough, though.

New Jersey Assembly Approves Bill For More Smart Gun Sales  CBS New York:

 More smart guns would be sold in New Jersey under a measure that cleared the state Assembly Monday. As WCBS 880’s Kelly Waldron reported, the measure would create a roster of so-called smart guns, which can only be fired by authorized users, available for sale. The bill would also require most New Jersey gun retailers to carry a couple of smart guns in their stores.

[H/T: The Gun Feed]

("MORE" Smart Guns?  Have they sold even ONE, yet?)

So far, the "Roster" includes one small .22 caliber pistol, underpowered for any 'practical ' purpose, and it costs an arm and both legs more than most pistols of that genre.

Oh, and it's not all that smart, having failed in a significant number of tests.  Boy, Howdy, that's the pistol *_I_* would want to have in my nightstand to protect my family against a home invasion!

So the wise solons in The Garbage Garden State have declared that all they want to do is to have every gun shop have 'a couple of smart guns in their stores.

Great.
Beat up on the small retailer stores much?   How may other products does this state's legislature mandate that stores carry in stock?   Is it just firearms?

Yes, it is "just firearms".

Thank Goodness for the Second Amendment which ... provides absolutely NO protection for a specialty merchant, as long as the State Legislature is composed of a ignorant sore-losers who don't mind sticking it to their constituents who are just trying to make a living.

Well, those ignorant elected officials are still smarting (no pun intended, but it seemed appropriate) from the public embarassment they sufferred last year and somebody has to pay the price.  Guess who?

This is a valuable product useful for home defence  competition plinking at tin cans absolutely nothing.   And NJ wants every small retailer to carry them in stock ... rather than have them available for 'special order' in the (unlikely) possibility that someone would really like to own one.

Not that the State Assembly wasn't aware of that; this is merely another transparent attempt to run gun stores out of business.  The law serves no other purpose.

You can bet that if a gun store actually had someone ask to buy one of those not-so-smart guns, the retailer could put an order in to the manufacturer and it would be delivered the next business day by the president of the failing company (who probably has a closet full of unsaleable guns in his basement).

The ironic thing is, the good people of New Jersey will probably re-elect the idiots who wrote the original law requiring that only 'Smart Guns' be sold ... when they were both unreliable and unavailable.

No word from NJ on whether the original law, mandating that only Smart Guns be sold in NJ as soon as one became 'available'.   Well, you can't blame them for not wanting to advertise their lunacy any more.

Mossberg and "Smart Gun" Technology

Yeah, right.

New Gun Technology Weds You to Your Gun | Digital Trends:
(May 03, 2016)

 Mossberg knows he faces an uphill battle when it comes to changing the negative opinions of both law enforcement and consumers regarding gun lock solutions. That battle will be won or lost in the long term, but in the immediate future, Mossberg is working on improving the firearm circuitry with the goal of shrinking it to fit inside the handgun. An internal board will restore the seamless appearance of the gun and will hide the technology from potential thieves who will of course be surprised when their stolen gun fails to operate.

... and the gun owner will be surprised when his gun fails to operate, for any of several reasons.

I'll accept Smart Gun Technology when it meets any number of 'technical' criteria:

• When the U.S. Army accepts it as the standard
• When all American Police Departments accept it as the standard
• When both these governmental groups have proved it in 10 years of on-the-job usage
• When the price of a 'smart gun' is the same as a "Stupid Gun" (or preferably less than)
• When you've proven that the technology can not be circumvented by an 'outside' influence (including the Feds with their Smart Gun Shut Down Technology) @TM
• When it's available in guns which are within my range of purchase price
• When the gun works every time, all the time, no matter whether I'm wearing the Ring of Fate or the Bracelet From Hell, and it can be made to reliably work for every member of my family

It's my life you're talking about.   It's a LOT more important to me than field-testing your flawed technology ... which you can't even figure how to fit it into a handgun!

So go back to the drawing board, Mister Mossberg, and think about not how what you can sell it, but what works for your prospective customers.

My guess is that you will never, ever, come up with a design which works for all of your customers.

In the meantime, do us (your prospective customers) the courtesy of no longer making bold, unfounded promises of "We'll make this work Real Soon Now", because we do not believe you.  

So STFU and go do your job.

So far, all we have is unfounded expectations and promises that "we really, REALLY want this to happen, real soon now"!

It's not going to happen in your life time.  Nor mine. 

 And the sooner you realize that, the sooner you're going to quit sinking your family fortune in pie-in-the-sky baloney and go back to making very, very good shotguns.

Which you're very, very good at.

Smart Guns: Just Another Lie

Why is no one investing in smart guns? | VentureBeat | Business | by Ralph Fascitelli, Washington CeaseFire:

 A cross-section of many business leaders, entrepreneurs, investors, and public health experts recognize the opportunity. And yet, no one is stepping forward to invest in new smart gun technology, which describes weapons that can only be fired by the authorized user. The technology would significantly reduce the many thousands of deaths caused by childhood firearm accidents, suicides involving third-party firearms, and criminal acts perpetrated using as many as 500,000 stolen guns annually.

The answer is very simple, and here are the reasons (details and comments available 'below the fold'):

In ascending order of importance"

• There is currently only one version of a "SmartGun(TM)" available: The Armitrix iP1
• It's is incredibly under-powered for a 'Home Defense" weapon, which one would reasonably assume is the justification for this configuration.  (.22 Long Rifle isn't anyone's first choice)
• It's incredibly expensive: "Costing $1,798 for a package of one iP1 smart gun, and one RFID smartwatch (which must be worn to operate the gun), Armatix's smart gun costs more than four times Glock's new G43 concealed-carry handgun"
• It's incredibly inefficient:  it takes up to 12 seconds to 'run up' from the time you pick it up to the time it has identified you as an "authorized user"; not good in a 'home invasion' scenario
• It requires EVERY "Authorized User" to have a "SmartWatch" .. at a cost of $400 each .. before they can use it
• When "they" kick down the door in the middle of the night,, you have x-seconds to find your gun and another y seconds to find and put your SmartWatch on ...  when you awake from a sound sleep and the adrenaline is rushing through your veins.  (Ever try to operate a doorknob when you're on an adrenaline high?)
• Did I mention "battery powered"?

I'm 'almost' sure (I say "almost" because I'm too polite to say "never gonna happen!" that this technology can be refined, and more efficient, more effective versions may be developed.  But until the 'smart money' decides that 'smart guns' are the wave of the future, there money just isn't there to make it happen.

The Armitrix is nothing more than a test-bed today; call it a bread-board circuitry version of something that only serves to show that something MIGHT be evolved into a viable, marketable product.

But until the progenitors of the Bread-Board can convince someone with bigger pockets that there is a market for this product, nobody will touch it.

And here, I'm not afraid to say "Not Gonna Happen"!

(Unless the Brady Campaign decides to fund the project ... and wouldn't that be the richest irony?)