• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Smart Gun technology. I think its time it arrives in the US without restrictions to the 2nd amend

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
First some information...

Here’s What’s Up With "Smart Guns" — And Why You Can’t Buy One In The US

I think this could provide a fairly practical solution, not affect 2nd amendment rights, and wouldn't restrict legitimate buyers further than what we have now in terms of regulations to obtain a firearm legally.

I really like the idea that such firearms cannot be 'borrowed' by other people aside from its rightful owner. It includes law enforcement officers at well as in cases of disarming the weapon cannot be trained back on the officer by a criminal.

I think that alone will reduce the repeated tragedy of mass killings by firearms.

What do you think?

Its at best a fair compromise that I hope both Democrats and Republicans can agree on at the table. I'm sure the public would appreciate a type of safety without a loss of rights for an individual.

Let's make it happen!
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
There is also gUNarmed. Also mentioned in the article.

It's considerably more restricting for gun owners but used right it can protect high traffic areas such as schools, malls, stores, nightclubs and the like.

Essentially it temporarily disables smart guns in defined corridors that it cannot be used under any circumstances until the gun owner leaves the area of influence.

Once outside the area, the gun becomes operational again.


It's a good idea I think on principle but it does affect one's ability to employ the firearm at any givin moment, should something happens that would require use of a firearm.

But I think gUNarmed could be another viable compromise if certain restrictions on the technology limits it for schools, stores, and other potential mass shooting areas. Essentially it's an automated gun free zone with some teeth.

I have mixed feelings about gUNarmed but wouldn't mind it if used in a very limited fashion for the purpose of sites that experience mass shootings and has a public vote on its implementation. That would make it elective and not compulsory in light of what the people themselves want and not what the government wants.

Just my two bits on gUNarmed.
 

Bathos Logos

Active Member
Toward the bottom of the article was an interesting bit involving New Jersey law. Basically, at some point, New Jersey signed into law a bill that required gun shop's to sell only "smart guns" if one was sold anywhere in the country. This sent the gun rights community into a frenzy, even to the point of sending massive numbers of death threats to any retailer they got wind of, who was contemplating trying to sell these "smart guns". The gun rights activists also tanked the sales of major gun manufacturers who announced they would start producing "smart guns". The result was that these major manufacturer's made statements to the public that they had no plans to develop or invest in "smart gun" technologies in order to assuage the public outrage. Seems there are some pretty big hurdles to overcome to get this type of technology in play, and also a huge number of standard ("not smart") guns already out there in everyone's hands.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Toward the bottom of the article was an interesting bit involving New Jersey law. Basically, at some point, New Jersey signed into law a bill that required gun shop's to sell only "smart guns" if one was sold anywhere in the country. This sent the gun rights community into a frenzy, even to the point of sending massive numbers of death threats to any retailer they got wind of, who was contemplating trying to sell these "smart guns". The gun rights activists also tanked the sales of major gun manufacturers who announced they would start producing "smart guns". The result was that these major manufacturer's made statements to the public that they had no plans to develop or invest in "smart gun" technologies in order to assuage the public outrage. Seems there are some pretty big hurdles to overcome to get this type of technology in play, and also a huge number of standard ("not smart") guns already out there in everyone's hands.
It's possible the winds of change might blow favorably in a good direction maybe.

I found this encouraging albiet it might take awhile yet....

Firearm Enthusiasts Are Warming Up to Smart Guns
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
First some information...

Here’s What’s Up With "Smart Guns" — And Why You Can’t Buy One In The US

I think this could provide a fairly practical solution, not affect 2nd amendment rights, and wouldn't restrict legitimate buyers further than what we have now in terms of regulations to obtain a firearm legally.

I really like the idea that such firearms cannot be 'borrowed' by other people aside from its rightful owner. It includes law enforcement officers at well as in cases of disarming the weapon cannot be trained back on the officer by a criminal.

I think that alone will reduce the repeated tragedy of mass killings by firearms.

What do you think?

Its at best a fair compromise that I hope both Democrats and Republicans can agree on at the table. I'm sure the public would appreciate a type of safety without a loss of rights for an individual.

Let's make it happen!
I think it's at the least one step in the right direction even if it begs the question how easy might it still be to "doctor" such a gun to defeat that safety set-up?
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I think it's at the least one step in the right direction even if it begs the question how easy might it still be to "doctor" such a gun to defeat that safety set-up?
It would take a pretty smart person that's smarter than the gun to jailbreak it. But it's a legit point.

Givin the US educational standards at present I think its fairly safe atm. ;0]
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I think it's at the least one step in the right direction even if it begs the question how easy might it still be to "doctor" such a gun to defeat that safety set-up?

Yes, that's what I would ask. If it's some kind of gadget or gizmo that can be hacked, altered, or bypassed too easily, then it may not really be that effective. It's just like my father always said: "Locks only keep the honest people out."
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Yes, that's what I would ask. If it's some kind of gadget or gizmo that can be hacked, altered, or bypassed too easily, then it may not really be that effective. It's just like my father always said: "Locks only keep the honest people out."
I can only picture a failsafe that disables the weapon if it senses tampering or damage.
 

Viker

Häxan
It would take a pretty smart person that's smarter than the gun to jailbreak it. But it's a legit point.

Givin the US educational standards at present I think its fairly safe atm. ;0]
The majority of hackers today are kids and younger than ours generations. It wouldn't be a giant hurdle for many of them. Hackers aren't just good at hacking computer systems.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Yes, that's what I would ask. If it's some kind of gadget or gizmo that can be hacked, altered, or bypassed too easily, then it may not really be that effective. It's just like my father always said: "Locks only keep the honest people out."
Yes, as I used to bring state police and the FBI in regularly to my poli sci course, and this is what they also said. However, there are ways to better help with deterrence as they explained, and we've utilized that info at our home.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
This year, this law’s influence on smart gun availability in the US could change. On Feb. 28, in the wake of the Parkland shooting, the New Jersey state legislature debated seven new gun law bills. Among them is A1016, which, if passed, requires New Jersey gun shops to carry “at least one personalized handgun,” rather than only personalized handguns.

I think that NJ law proposal is a decent one. I could support it.

This sent the gun rights community into a frenzy, even to the point of sending massive numbers of death threats

Every time I hear of such death threats my instinctive reaction is "**** 'em - we'll shove it up their butts" - in other words, I go utter extremist in the opposite direction
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
The majority of hackers today are kids and younger than ours generations. It wouldn't be a giant hurdle for many of them. Hackers aren't just good at hacking computer systems.
It would still require high IQs.

Unless you suspect most mass shooters are unusually intelligent individuals.
 

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
It would still require high IQs.

We disagree there. 110 and the wrong mindset could probably do it.

It's not like we're talking about being a Lead Programmer for Halo Infinite or Mario Odyssey, here.

I think any IT guy with the wrong mindset could learn it, too.

I've never done it myself and never wish to start, but I used to hang out at IT groups, and most people there were good, but you start to learn about everything.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Yes, that's what I would ask. If it's some kind of gadget or gizmo that can be hacked, altered, or bypassed too easily, then it may not really be that effective. It's just like my father always said: "Locks only keep the honest people out."
Think through what you're saying.

Someone who goes for a cop's gun in the spur of the moment isn't going to be in a position to "hack, alter or bypass" a gun quick enough to kill the cop.

And smart guns don't need to completely eliminate criminal use of stolen guns to significantly reduce how often this happens.

Remember that you're arguing for keeping firearms for "defensive" use: a way to protect your life that's so ****ty it's often more likely to kill you than save you. When it comes to how effective something has to be before you'll consider it worthwhile, we know your standards aren't that high.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
First some information...

Here’s What’s Up With "Smart Guns" — And Why You Can’t Buy One In The US

I think this could provide a fairly practical solution, not affect 2nd amendment rights, and wouldn't restrict legitimate buyers further than what we have now in terms of regulations to obtain a firearm legally.

I really like the idea that such firearms cannot be 'borrowed' by other people aside from its rightful owner. It includes law enforcement officers at well as in cases of disarming the weapon cannot be trained back on the officer by a criminal.

I think that alone will reduce the repeated tragedy of mass killings by firearms.

What do you think?

Its at best a fair compromise that I hope both Democrats and Republicans can agree on at the table. I'm sure the public would appreciate a type of safety without a loss of rights for an individual.

Let's make it happen!
Gun related deaths seem to be correlated to economic volatility. And no, 1970-1990 decades were not great either.
upload_2022-5-25_22-32-12.png
 

Bathos Logos

Active Member
Every time I hear of such death threats my instinctive reaction is "**** 'em - we'll shove it up their butts" - in other words, I go utter extremist in the opposite direction
My reaction would be much the same. Test them on it, and see if they actually try to follow through. Targeting a gun shop owner no less, who would have ample access to just about any type of gun he'd/she'd like to get his/her hands on. Better hope you have a plan that doesn't take you into their shop or home.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Gun related deaths seem to be correlated to economic volatility. And no, 1970-1990 decades were not great either.
View attachment 63199

That is meaningless. You need a total number of all murders versus gun murders. All suicides versus gun suicides. All negligent deaths as related as a type to gun deaths versus gun deaths. All death caused by polices versus guns.

And then you need to compare to other Western countries and then compare economics equality, happiness and I properly left out at least one.
And then you can start to see if you can figure it out.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
That is meaningless. You need a total number of all murders versus gun murders. All suicides versus gun suicides. All negligent deaths as related as a type to gun deaths versus gun deaths. All death caused by polices versus guns.

And then you need to compare to other Western countries and then compare economics equality, happiness and I properly left out at least one.
And then you can start to see if you can figure it out.
All these things are here.
What the data says about gun deaths in the U.S.
 
Top