Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 
Push for smart guns in the US 
Author Message
Legend

Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:30 pm
Posts: 45931
Location: Belfast
Reply with quote
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015 ... ric-holder

Do it, fcuktards. You only have to present it as 'saving one child's life', and at least that'll be a truthful statement for once.

_________________
Plain English advice on everything money, purchase and service related:

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/


Sun Mar 15, 2015 12:14 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 6:37 am
Posts: 6954
Location: Peebo
Reply with quote
pcernie wrote:
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/15/us-invest-smart-guns-eric-holder

Do it, fcuktards. You only have to present it as 'saving one child's life', and at least that'll be a truthful statement for once.

And where exactly has truth ever mattered in the American gun control debate?

_________________
When they put teeth in your mouth, they spoiled a perfectly good bum.
-Billy Connolly (to a heckler)


Sun Mar 15, 2015 2:02 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
First Law of Robotics.

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Sun Mar 15, 2015 3:33 pm
Profile
Doesn't have much of a life
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:10 pm
Posts: 1057
Reply with quote
It will never happen - the National Rifle Association will quickly squash any chance of that succeeding

_________________
Image


Mon Mar 16, 2015 8:45 pm
Profile WWW
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
Is gun crime in the States mainly through the use of stolen firearms, or is it use by registered owners? If the person who is supposed to be firing the gun is the person firing the gun, it being a 'smart gun' will make no difference at all. If you can still go out and buy a smart gun without having to go through psychological checks or such, smart guns aren't going to cut down the number of deaths that much.

Basically, as long as you can buy a gun legally and then shoot someone with it, it doesn't matter how smart the gun is, because it's the component holding the trigger that has to be 'smart'.


Mon Mar 16, 2015 10:56 pm
Profile
Doesn't have much of a life

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 6:50 am
Posts: 1911
Reply with quote
The practical merits are probably limited. But it's a good divide and conquer move for the gun control lobby.

Criminals want cheap guns they can throw away easily, and they don't want to have to microwave them first or whatever you have to do to remove your palm print from the internal memory. Then there are the shrill maniacs - some of them too extreme for the NRA - who see every attempt to simply know who owns which guns as the cruel advance of the fascist Antichrist. For them, this sort of thing is the start of a federal gun and related biometrics registry.

But the main money in the gun industry is in the mainstream, where people aren't necessarily savage or insane. If you can make the market tailor its product ranges towards these consumers with safety features that those others can't abide, you push up the costs, forcing maniacs to use either boutique providers, or deliberately broken guns. You also make guns less easily transferable and sever the commercial links between the mainstream and nut job markets. So the secondary gun market gradually loses liquidity. The costs for both criminals and militias would therefore rise (assuming most of the people buying the fancy new smart guns would probably hold onto many of their old dumb guns too).

And most importantly, you break the political links between the small but noisy lobby that won't tolerate any form of gun control, and the larger population who will side with those guys less often once the mentalists start calling them traitors for buying safer guns.


Tue Mar 17, 2015 12:22 am
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:21 am
Posts: 12700
Location: The Right Side of the Pennines (metaphorically & geographically)
Reply with quote
America doesn't need smart guns, it needs smart Americans.

_________________
pcernie wrote:
'I'm going to snort this off your arse - for the benefit of government statistics, of course.'


Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:27 am
Profile WWW
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:25 pm
Posts: 10691
Location: Bramsche
Reply with quote
l3v1ck wrote:
America doesn't need smart guns, it needs smart Americans.

Thanks, you owe me a new keyboard! :lol:

_________________
"Do you know what this is? Hmm? No, I can see you do not. You have that vacant look in your eyes, which says hold my head to your ear, you will hear the sea!" - Londo Molari

Executive Producer No Agenda Show 246


Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:41 am
Profile ICQ
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 6:37 am
Posts: 6954
Location: Peebo
Reply with quote
jonbwfc wrote:
Is gun crime in the States mainly through the use of stolen firearms, or is it use by registered owners? If the person who is supposed to be firing the gun is the person firing the gun, it being a 'smart gun' will make no difference at all. If you can still go out and buy a smart gun without having to go through psychological checks or such, smart guns aren't going to cut down the number of deaths that much.

Basically, as long as you can buy a gun legally and then shoot someone with it, it doesn't matter how smart the gun is, because it's the component holding the trigger that has to be 'smart'.


The argument about smart guns isn't necessarily entirely about crime prevention. There is at least some accident prevention going on there - kids accidentally shooting themselves or someone else with their parents gun (I seem to recall a recent incident where a toddler shot it's mother in a supermarket becuase she had a gun in her handbag or something like that).
Also it mitigates a justification for law enforcement officers gunning apparently unarmed people down - "he was going for my gun so I shot him", which I believe has been used as a defence in a number of shootings of black teenagers. If the suspect won't be able to fire the weapon even if he's managed to get hold of it then it's considerably harder to justify shooting him in the face pre-emptively but also means there should be little point trying to grab the officers gun in the first place. Whether or not that would actually stack up in reality is an interesting question of course.

_________________
When they put teeth in your mouth, they spoiled a perfectly good bum.
-Billy Connolly (to a heckler)


Tue Mar 17, 2015 11:10 am
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
davrosG5 wrote:
jonbwfc wrote:
Is gun crime in the States mainly through the use of stolen firearms, or is it use by registered owners? If the person who is supposed to be firing the gun is the person firing the gun, it being a 'smart gun' will make no difference at all. If you can still go out and buy a smart gun without having to go through psychological checks or such, smart guns aren't going to cut down the number of deaths that much.

Basically, as long as you can buy a gun legally and then shoot someone with it, it doesn't matter how smart the gun is, because it's the component holding the trigger that has to be 'smart'.


The argument about smart guns isn't necessarily entirely about crime prevention. There is at least some accident prevention going on there - kids accidentally shooting themselves or someone else with their parents gun (I seem to recall a recent incident where a toddler shot it's mother in a supermarket becuase she had a gun in her handbag or something like that).
Also it mitigates a justification for law enforcement officers gunning apparently unarmed people down - "he was going for my gun so I shot him", which I believe has been used as a defence in a number of shootings of black teenagers. If the suspect won't be able to fire the weapon even if he's managed to get hold of it then it's considerably harder to justify shooting him in the face pre-emptively but also means there should be little point trying to grab the officers gun in the first place. Whether or not that would actually stack up in reality is an interesting question of course.


They have smart guns in Mega City One. Doesn’t stop the perps from getting their own weapons.

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Tue Mar 17, 2015 11:57 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:35 pm
Posts: 6580
Location: Getting there
Reply with quote
l3v1ck wrote:
America doesn't need smart guns, it needs smart Americans.
you just won this debate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
Oliver Foggin - iPhone Dev

JJW009 wrote:
The count will go up until they stop counting. That's the way counting works.


Doodle Sub!
Game Of Life

Image Image


Tue Mar 17, 2015 4:50 pm
Profile WWW
Doesn't have much of a life

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:23 pm
Posts: 710
Reply with quote
l3v1ck wrote:
America doesn't need smart guns, it needs smart Americans.


What he said. I was thinking similar thoughts as I scrolled through.

_________________
No Apples were used in the making of this post.


Tue Mar 17, 2015 6:27 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 12 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.