Ideal Conceal and the Smart Phone Gun

smart phone gun photoA recent invention by gun manufacturer Ideal Conceal literally has people “up in arms.”  Their product is a double barreled .380 caliber… discreetly and cleverly disguised as a cell phone.

The Minnesota company’s website makes the following claim: “Smartphones are EVERYWHERE, so your new pistol will easily blend in with today’s environment.  In its locked position, it will be virtually undetectable because it hides in plain sight.”
Ideal Conceal gun_1459196688152_1224792_ver1.0Not everyone is a fan of the cell phone gun.  My home state Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) is leading the opposition.  He recently wrote a letter to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms calling for an investigation.  But since the product is still in the prototype stage, there’s little that can be done.

As with most controversial products and issues, there are two sides.  Second Amendment purists will argue their constitutional right to bear arms is paramount.  Others will contend this “fugazi product” sets a very dangerous precedent.

The slippery slope argument goes something like this.

Let’s assume these smart phone guns become widely popular.  As they become increasingly prevalent, people would naturally be on the look-out, or at the very least, minimally cognizant of their existence.

Now there are times when police officers encounter hostile situations (rioting, looting, physically taking down a suspect, etc).  As these scenarios unfold, it has become quite common for someone in the crowd to whip out a cell phone and capture real-time video.

Now if I’m a cop, involved in a foot chase and just having tackled a suspect, my adrenalin would naturally be off the charts.  As I’m making the arrest, if I noticed someone reaching inside their coat pocket and pulling out a possible smart phone gun, I might feel that my life is in danger.  What if I open fired and killed the bystander?  Call me naive, but I could easily envision a police officer using this defensive line of reasoning in a court of law as it would be necessary to justify their prior actions and behavior.

I believe most rational people can deduce the “discernible inevitability” here.  You needn’t be Nostradamus to figure this one out.  It’s simply reasonable to conclude, that at a future point in time, a scenario like that would take place.

So do I have any specific proof or actionable intelligence?  Of course not.  I only possess the minimally required, predictable wisdom to theorize a general trajectory for future events.

Hey, I’m not sure if anyone has noticed, but smart phones are miniature wireless supercomputers.  They can be used to transmit panic-inducing information.  Let’s maintain the above line of reasoning and try a futuristic riddle.

A terrorist cyber-attack involving cellular communication kills roughly 1,000 people and injures somewhere in the realm of 10,000, near simultaneously, in 10 different major cities across the East Coast and into the Midwest.  And oh yeah, I almost forgot a trivial detail.  There are no weapons.

Your first thought.  Oh, how quaint.  What a binary riddle!  Lots of ones and zeroes.  This guy must be a brain cancer radiation conspiracy theorist or maybe he’s worried about some kind of mass-reverse electro-shock scenario.  Well, not really.

What I’m concerned about is something entirely different.  It’s a black swan event known as a DOMINIPEDE (multiple, simultaneous human stampedes likely impacting the NFL 1 o’clock slate of games).

NFL stadiums are wirelessly hyper-connective environments.  And each venue has 50,000 – 100,000 active cell phones. These mobile devices are capable of receiving real-time, false information in about a dozen different ways with content trending infinite.  It’s the most glaringly obvious variable in every stadium.  And it’s literally staring everyone right in the face.

I won’t be filling in the blanks this time.  I’m not going to delve into the who, what, when, where, why and how.  I’ve constructed a website (agsaf.org) and written a book (dominipede.com).  It’s one of three that deal with the concept of “artificially generated stampedes.”   Feel free to give it a read.  After all, it’s free.

Okay.  Do you remember how I spoke of the notion of “discernible inevitability?”  Well, I believe that same characterization applies to the modern, technological equivalent of shouting “fire” in a crowded theater.  Try thinking with a long term event horizon.  It doesn’t take a crystal ball to realize that at some future point in time, a scenario like this, at the very least, will be ATTEMPTED.  If you believe this to be a reasonable assertion, it might be wise to develop a straightforward contingency plan.

Any such contingency plan would definitively require making people fundamentally aware of the following: smart phones could be used to perpetrate a real-world, malicious hoax… with the ultimate goal of synthesizing a human stampede.

Now logic would dictate, that if someone is willing to go to the trouble of weaponizing a stampede, they’d most likely attempt multiple stampedes (dominipede).  And assuming there’s a realistic progression of malicious intent, the NFL would be the most inviting target (as opposed to the NCAA, NHL, NBA, MLB, etc.).  Simply stated, the NFL 1 o’clock slate represents the biggest “bang for your buck.”   Stadiums are overtly vulnerable.  And there is no legitimate strategy to combat such an act.  Because the threat itself is, by nature, undiscussable.

The final piece of the puzzle is a generational warfare axiom.  But don’t worry.  Complex mathematics isn’t required.

Throughout the history of mankind, human beings have conceived of just about every way imaginable to kill each other.  Rope, swords, bullets, bombs, arrows, guillotines, pits and cliffs… walking the plank, being drawn and quartered, gas chambers, lethal injections… suffocation, immobilization, electrocution, crucifixion, starvation and an endless list of bizarre torture methods that even makes me feel uncomfortable (deliberate sarcasm).

So here are the three questions you must ask.  Taking everything into account, is it REASONABLE to assume that someone, at some future point in time, will try to artificially weaponize a stampede?  As a tool of warfare or terrorism, are human stampedes somehow “off-limits” across the board?  And collectively speaking, what’s the most obvious target(s)?

If you think something like this could never happen — Well, I would encourage you to mentally travel back in time… to September 10, 2001.  And if you think something like this could never be attempted — Well, I would encourage you to visually survey your surroundings.  Cell phones are ubiquitous.

An open admission: I’m not sure how the future pans out, but I would prefer to err on the side of acknowledgment and awareness, as opposed willful suppression and deliberate ignorance.  As you’ve probably ascertained, I’m not the only person on the planet earth who has thought of this.  And I sure as hell shouldn’t be the only one taking an active interest.

I mentioned earlier how this “whole cell phone weapon thing” is gonna be a big deal.  But there’s something that the vast majority of people fail to realize.

A cell phone already IS a weapon.