With fingerprint-readers and radio frequency identification, smart guns will only fire in the hands of specific, authorized shooters. Though not new, such technology would undoubtedly help in preventing the tens of thousands of injuries and deaths each year from gun accidents. However, the development and sale of these guns have been jammed amid gun industry claims that few people would buy them.

Now, a group of public health researchers say that those claims are way off target.

In a nationally representative survey, 59 percent of people reported that they were willing to buy a smart gun. Among gun owners, 43 percent said they’d consider one, while 33 percent said they were undecided. The safer, childproof weapons even sparked interest among non-gun owners—nearly two thirds of people who don’t currently own a gun said they’d be interested in buying a smart gun.

The poll data, published in the American Journal of Public Health, is included with an editorial by a group of public health researchers from Johns Hopkins University, Harvard University, and Northeastern University. The researchers argue that the poll data reveals a considerable market for smart guns, which could help reduce gun deaths and injuries.

Though data on gun violence is often sparse and incomplete—thanks to federal restrictions that keep the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health from conducting gun violence research—in 2014 there were 33,599 gun deaths in the US and more than 11,000 homicides and 21,000 suicides. In 2013, there were more than 500 unintentional gun deaths, which often involved kids behind or in front of a gun. Also in 2013, 84,000 people suffered nonfatal gunshot wounds.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade association of gun makers, has reported past poll data that starkly contrasts with the new survey results. The NSSF found that only 14 percent of people polled were somewhat or very likely to buy a smart gun.

The researchers behind the new poll suggest that the discrepancy may be due to problems with the NSSF’s survey design or because people’s attitudes toward smart guns have changed—although they quickly point out that attitude changes seem unlikely. “Regardless,” the authors write, “our findings suggest that there is, in fact, a high level of public interest in smart guns and widespread willingness to consider purchasing such guns.” Smart guns, they argue, could reduce accidents involving kids, keep adolescents from using them in suicides, and cut down on the sale and use of stolen weapons.

For the new survey, researchers used a German-based market research institute, GfK, that conducts academic research surveys. Information was collected in a January 2015 Web-based survey from nearly 4,000 respondents who made up a nationally representative group.

Survey takers were asked about their interests in buying smart guns, also called childproof guns. Some of these guns can be unlocked with fingerprints much like current smartphones. Others use radio frequency identification, which unlocks a gun with communication from a tiny transmitter that an authorized gun user can wear embedded in a wristwatch, ring, or bracelet.

Though the majority of survey-takers were interested in the smart guns, liberals and responders with kids were the groups with highest interest level—with 71 percent and 65 percent of those groups expressing interest, respectively. Among moderate and conservative responders, 56 percent of each group said they were interested in buying a smart gun.

American Journal of Public Health, 2015. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2015.303041 (About DOIs).