We joke about things like safety marks on electric chairs (for one example)
but in fact there are inherently dangerous which require evaluation of the
harm they might cause an operator. Electric knives have UL marks, after
all. Some years ago I was told of the efforts needed to certify a device
used to electrocute fur-bearing foxes for the fur industry. It did receive
NEMKO approval. Dangerous, even lethal in application, it could not be
dangerous to its operators, and that, I think, is the bottom line on
approval of a device used to safe a gun. It must function while not
endangering its user.
I predict that at least one NRTL will see things this way, when once
electronically controlled firearms become more common. Certainly no
municipality would issue such weapons to its officers if it suspected they
might endanger them -- and no police union would allow it. Some kind of
certification will have to be agreed upon, or forgo the befits of a "Smart"
firearm.
Cortland Richmond
-------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
[email protected]
with the single line:
unsubscribe emc-pstc
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Jim Bacher: [email protected]
Michael Garretson: [email protected]
For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute: [email protected]
