back to article Obama: What will solve America's gun problem? What could it be? *snaps fingers* Technology!

President Obama is looking to increase funding for research and development of new technologies that could help to cut gun violence. The President said as part of his executive order on gun crime and accidents that the development of technologies to help track lost or stolen firearms and the development of locks to prevent …

Silver badge

Huh?

"the development of locks to prevent accidental firing would be a key part" - Most modern guns come with a mechanical device called a safety that prevents the firing of the gun. Mechanical safeties have been used since at least the 1890's on various rifles and pistols. The ferals reinventing the wheel so some crony can suck at the teet.

28
14
Silver badge

Re: Huh?

These new locks would use biometrics to detect a registered owner, and if it decides you are not its RO at the critical moment, well, you can try hitting your assailant with the gun.

An additional effect is to help condition the public to the idea of being disarmed.

20
5
Silver badge

Re: Huh?

Yes, that safety worked a treat when the 2-year-old shot his mother dead in a Walmart.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/toddler-accidentally-shoots-woman-in-idaho-walmart-9950847.html

And when another 2-year-old killed his father at home.

https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/i-hurt-my-dad-the-tragic-moment-a-2-year-old-127173047597.html

And when the teacher shot herself in the leg while having a leak.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/11/teacher-accidental-shooting/15452271/

Safeties could be made safer.

I anticipate that many gun enthusiasts would say that accidents "just happen" and "stupidity is the problem." But the point is to minimize accidents. The point is, safeties could be made safer.

26
7
Silver badge

Re: Huh?

Most come with a trigger lock that requires a key to remove it. Great thing if you have kids or a burglary where the gun is taken. Not a good thing if you need it in a hurry.

9
2
Silver badge

Re: Huh?

"These new locks would use biometrics"

In that case, they seem to have badly misspelled "unauthorized"...

2
0
Bronze badge

Re: Huh?

>...well, you can try hitting your assailant with the gun.

How often do people have this problem in America where an assailant is attacking them in such a way that lethal force is necessary?

Is it really so frequent an event?

8
2
Silver badge

Re: Huh?

How often do people have this problem in America where an assailant is attacking them in such a way that lethal force is necessary?

Is it really so frequent an event?

Dunno, I don't live there. But a friend's mother lives there and the small town she lives in apparently mandated carrying a gun. Crime in the township declined dramatically, albeit at the expense of an increase in nearby townships. Criminals, by and large, dislike being shot at. Many law-abiding citizens in the USA, UKLand and Oz apparently approve the disarming of law-abiding citizens under the assumption that they are unlikely to be shot at by the police, or criminals.

A new investigation into the police shooting of Joe Gilewicz in 1991 has been ordered by the state government, after new evidence and further allegations of a police cover-up were presented in the manuscript of a forthcoming book. The book, by former journalist Paul Tapp, is based on extensive examination of the evidence and on allegations by former police ballistics expert Stan Hanuszewicz.

https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/18829

Declaration: a mutual friend was refused permission by police to talk to Joe who, as a Vietnam war veteran, had regular psychotic episodes of the nature he was experiencing when the police decided to execute him.

7
6

Re: Huh?

I can't speak for anyone else, of course, but I've already had to use a firearm to protect my family and myself in my home. Of course, in other countries (do I have to name names?), such an action would be considered not just illegal, but rude and anti-social.

7
6
Silver badge

Re: Huh?

The funny thing is people dont generally seem against making gun sales safer but instead fear the nutter president who is so untrustworthy as to have to keep repeating he doesnt want to take the guns away. This president is such an anti-gun nut I am not shocked when a military exercise is watched by the armed locals.

Yesterday I read someones amusing comment on facebook about how the NRA doesnt want a reduction of guns because then people will see it is safer. So far the safer states are the ones with more liberal gun laws yet there are still anti-gun nutters.

9
14
Silver badge

Re: Huh?

How often do people have this problem in America where an assailant is attacking them in such a way that lethal force is necessary?

I don't know about what happens outside the house, but certainly the stats show a greater risk of being murdered by a firearm if you have a gun in the house than if you don't. The leading causes are the escalation of a domestic argument and the gun-owner struggling with or being disarmed by a burglar. Fortunately, death by toddler is still comparatively rare...

10
3
Bronze badge

Re: Huh?

Safeties can be idiot resistant, but not idiot proof. Merely keeping your booger hook off the bang switch prevents most accidental discharges.

7
0
Silver badge

Re: Huh? (Safeties could be made safer)

Safeties on guns are a lot like condoms.. they only prevent accidents if you use 'em.

3
0

Re: Huh?

>How often do people have this problem in America where an assailant

>is attacking them in such a way that lethal force is necessary?

If lethal force isn't needed, then they shouldn't be pulling a gun. Don't point a gun unless you plan to shoot. Don't shoot unless you plan to kill. But if a gun IS necessary, it needs to work every time. How often do you need your fire extinguisher? Would it be useful if it had electronic locks to determine if it was going to work? People just need to take some personal responsibility and properly store and handle a dangerous tool.

9
1
Silver badge

Re: Huh?

> "If lethal force isn't needed, then they shouldn't be pulling a gun."

Bullshiza. A small woman being menaced by a big man is not going to make him stop by claiming she is armed. She will need to brandish the gun to get results. No need to actually start shooting right away.

Or do you not believe in the deterrent effect? It's something the gun grabbers pretend doesn't exist, either against criminals or the government, because it undercuts their arguments about the reasons not to own guns.

3
7
Bronze badge

Re: Huh?

>How often do you need your fire extinguisher?

I don't have a fire extinguisher.

2
2
Facepalm

It's kinda moot if you look at the data

100,000 million gun owners in the US. Every time Obama opens his mouth on the issue, you can add another million. This not a particularly effective approach to gun control. More effective might be bringing down the crime rate or put people back to work and lessen the sense of desperation within the culture.

5
2

Re: Huh?

"The point is, safeties could be made safer."

Actually, the point is that "safeties are mechanical devices which can fail," and this is the correct answer on the NRA Basic Pistol Shooting course. There is no such thing as a safety that is 100% reliable. And even if there was one, criminals would disable it anyway.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Huh?

I don't have a fire extinguisher.

I'd hate to be your next door neighbour then. It's amazing how many houses burn down because the house next door caught fire.

2
1

@Pompous Git - Re: Huh?

> It's amazing how many houses burn down because the house next door caught fire.

If the fire is anything more than very minor, a fire extinguisher is going to do you damn all good if you use it to try to put the fire out.

The point of a home extinguisher is actually to ensure you can create a safe escape path and get out of the house and then let the Fire Brigade do their job.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: @Pompous Git - Huh?

If the fire is anything more than very minor, a fire extinguisher is going to do you damn all good if you use it to try to put the fire out.

Minor kitchen fires can quickly get out of hand unless nipped in the bud. My kitchen has a 1 kg powder type extinguisher within easy reach of the stove.

When the volunteer fire brigade I was president of was amalgamated with the paid fire brigade, we had an unbroken record of never having lost a house. The paid firies had an unbroken record of never having succeeded in saving a house. One fire in particular I remember they turned up with a tanker, but it was empty because they had forgotten to refill it after one of their "exercises".

0
0
JLV
Silver badge

>Is it really so frequent an event?

A long, long time ago, Time Magazine ran an article covering 1 day's worth of guns deaths.

http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/01/16/a-history-of-violence-gun-control-in-the-pages-of-time/slide/july-1989-death-by-gun/

IIRC, it went something like this:

72 deaths - total. Due to accidents, suicides, criminals killing someone, suicide, murder of acquaintances, etc... And self-defense.

4 (out of 72) - number of deaths where criminals were killed by citizens defending themselves. Even assuming those self-defense kills were all justified, the numbers did not really point to guns improving things much.

I really can't see Time ever doing this again. Too hot a topic.

Obama is doing what he can, which is to say, not much. Biometrics are not a bad idea, if they can be made to work, but most of the recent mass shootings have been carried out by the rightful owners of the firearms AFAIK.

4
1

Re: Huh?

You should probably just stay in your bed and never come out. Bad stuff happens everywhere, stupid people make it happen more often. Sometimes people come to do bad things and real adults have to do things they otherwise wouldn't, like protect family and friends. Most likely that requires a weapon capable of meeting or exceeding the threat involved. Pardon my condescending tone but I wanted to be sure of your understanding the point.

1
4
Silver badge
Headmaster

Re: Huh?

How often do people have this problem in America where an assailant is attacking them in such a way that lethal force is necessary?

This is called a defensive gun use (DGU). Depending on whose numbers you look at, according to the Harvard School of Public Health a DGU occurrs between 55,000-80,000 times a year - however, that survey was commissioned by an anti-gun lobby. Another survey sponsored by The Police Foundation found that 4.7 million DGUs occur in the USA each year. There seems to be a consensus that 1 million DGUs per year is a good number.

Growing up in New York, one night a burgler jumped a fence into my friend's yard with a bag of loot, big guy, built like a linebacker. Whole family in the yard. Burgler saw my friend's father and ran straight at him with a knife. Father took out his pistol and quickly put two in the guys chest from ten feet away, killing him. While guns were illegal in NY at the time, my friend's father was an off-duty policeman, wearing his civies but still packing his service revolver, as required.

2
0

Re: Huh?

Have an upvote for "booger hook."

0
0

LawBringer

This gun is coded to my DNA...

2
0
Silver badge
Trollface

Re: LawBringer

Uhhh, this is terribly embarrassing but I seem to have left some residual DNA on that gun - would you be a chum and wipe the sensor with some acetone before trying to use it against me...?

3
0
Silver badge

Re: LawBringer

That would be a Lawgiver.

1
0

In the spirit of Tommy Flanagan (Jon Lovitz, SNL)

Uhh, TECHNOLOGY! That's how we'll fix it! Yeah, that's the ticket!

If guns are such a problem, how about we get the Secret (Cigarette?) Service to disarm?

It's easy for a US politician, surrounded by more firepower than any US citizen can ever HOPE to have, to tell everyone else to disarm.

What a bunch of "maroons".

18
9
Silver badge

Re: In the spirit of Tommy Flanagan (Jon Lovitz, SNL)

Hollywood feedback loop.

To develop a solution and roll it out, replacing everyone's gun trigger with new biometric-o-matic triggers which will also presumably need to be charged up will take years, maybe two generations. It will also get the nutters stockpiling old hardware and create a black market.

By which time education and toughening gun laws would have already done the job.

1
0

Re: In the spirit of Tommy Flanagan (Jon Lovitz, SNL)

Yes but the secret service are trained to use guns, know about gun safety and are pretty much registered.

Not so for the people leaving their guns on the coffee table for the kids to shoot someone with.

When was the last time a secret service agent shot himself accidentally or shot someone by accident?

Better regulation doesn't meant that "they're coming to take the guns away", it means making sure the person owning a gun is able to in a responsible manner.

3
0
x 7
Silver badge

other than banning guns, the only technical fix is to lobotomise all members ans supporters of the NRA

20
20
Bronze badge

You may find that it is much easier for members of the NRA to castrate people like you, than the other way around...

15
19

Exactly, and as has been oft said....they may have my guns when they pry them from my cold dead hands....and I am dead serious.

14
14
Anonymous Coward

RE: "lobotomise all members ans supporters of the NRA"

AGAIN..?

36
9
Silver badge
Meh

Too much thinkin' goin' on...

> "other than banning guns, the only technical fix is to lobotomise all members ans supporters of the NRA..."

Ah, to 'level the political playing field,' so to speak.

15
7
Silver badge

Re: Too much thinkin' goin' on...

Presumably we are talking about removing ear lobes here, because I don't think there are any others available from these people.

6
5
Silver badge
Facepalm

"they may have my guns when they pry them from my cold dead hands"

Presumably that's when you've been shot.

Made it, Ma! Top of the world!

11
5
Silver badge

@ Dan 55

"Presumably that's when you've been shot."

By the anti-gun president and his enforcers? Hmm

4
5
Silver badge
Unhappy

The American disease

I fear containment may be the only way forward.

The horse went thattaway ------>

8
3
Bronze badge

Re: The American disease

The American disease appears to be far wider than just firearms - the way that they celebrate killing deer (and the occasional Lion) with modern compound bows is excruciating.

3
6
Anonymous Coward

Batteries not included

I'm guessing I would have to charge this "smart" gun every night along with my phone? And I'm guessing the Gooberment would want some sort of backdoor access to turn the gun off at their whim, say if I did not pay some sort of new tax they dream up or if the citizens need to set the government back on track?

15
3
Silver badge

Re: Batteries not included

You are correct. The long term plan seems to be that duly appointed authority figures would have the means to turn off your guns when they need to "have a word" with you. Their motives are assumed now and forever to be good, so no need to consider worst cases.

10
3
Anonymous Coward

Ammunition

The 2nd amendment gives people the right to bear arms. It doesn't say anything about ammunition for those arms, so just ban the sale of ammunition. Problem solved.

As the great philosopher Sledge Hammer once said "guns don't kill people, bullets do".

14
13
Silver badge

Re: Ammunition

It's people do... maybe we need to ban people. We tried legislating idiocy but that backfired. Look at what we have in Congress.

Idiots you say? Yeah, I once saw a friend use a loaded gun as a hammer. I left his presence very quickly. He's now in the State legislature.

11
0
Silver badge

Re: Ammunition

"great philosopher Sledge Hammer"

also said - "trust me, I know what I'm doing"

but remember his colleagues used to ask "are you talking to your gun?"

2
0
Bronze badge

Re: Ammunition

>The 2nd amendment gives people the right to bear arms.

But they don't have the right to bear any arms they might like, they can't own a nuclear missile for instance.

7
0

Re: they can't own a nuclear missile for instance.

Serious question; where is the line drawn and which amendment or law covers this?

1
0
Bronze badge

Re: they can't own a nuclear missile for instance.

> Serious question; where is the line drawn and which amendment or law covers this?

It's a supreme court decision that emphasises that the limit is that of the reasonable needs of a militia.

I think it's further limited by acts that make it hard to own certain types of weapons through sheer quantity of paperwork.

Sorry don't have time to hunt references.

0
0

Re: they can't own a nuclear missile for instance.

The limitations are generally left to the states and to local administrations within the states. What is legal in one area may not be legal in another. For example, in California a "modern" .50 caliber rifle (such as the Barrett) is illegal. In other states, it is legal. In some states, a muzzle-loading black powder firearm is treated the same as a modern, fixed-cartridge firearm. In other states, it is not.

Certain firearms, such as machineguns, short-barrelled rifles, short-barrelled shotguns, suppressors, and several others, are regulated by the BATF, which is a Federal agency. Further regulation of these "NFA" weapons resides at the state and local level.

1
0
Silver badge
Pirate

Re: Ammunition

"they can't own a nuclear missile for instance."

No, we can't. And if you even so much as ASK to own a nuclear missile, they look at you like you're totally bat-shit crazy. It's not like I'd ever USE it, I just want to have one parked in the back yard for the "coolness" factor. I mean, unless the neighbor's dog shits in my yard one more fucking time, then I might think about pushing the big red button. Well, no, not really, I imagine it would make a hell of a mess. (the nuke, not the dog-shit).

Perhaps the trick is in the wording. If you say "I want to own a nuclear bomb", then folks think you're nuts, and possibly dangerous. But if you say "I want to own a physics package", well, fine, that's just a bunch of nerd-stuff, innit? No harm there.

Ah well. Back to my regular firearms, I guess.

4
0

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017