TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.

First that this idea even needs to be broached in the first place is ridiculous especially given the lack of clarity in the second amendment (eg it does not specify types of arms so that should be handled by laws not as a "do what you will free for all").

That said it seems there are some major elements that would be necessary to reduce gun deaths in the US and there are some obfuscating interests embodied in the NRA that must be sidestepped or accommodated in the solution.

Four main areas of focus jump out to reduce gun deaths:

1) "mass killings" (included in this would be the 2 or 3 person shootings as well as as Newtown or Aurora types)
2) Accidental shootings
3) Non-owner shootings (eg the shooter is not the owner of the gun)
4) "black market" trading

Added to these I would say the parameter that makes gun control legislation difficult is gun manufacturer revenue stream protection using the second amendment as a shill.

So what are the necessary parameters to make something happen vs. the absurdity of what is going to happen over the next few months in Washington:

1) Figure out a way that shifting policy creates more revenue for gun manufacturers so they get the NRA on board
2) Make sure that guns cannot be used in public places or by someone other than their owner

The Idea - Mandatory gun locks and universal kill switches.

On locks, all responsible gun owners have gun safes. Why not move the lock to the gun's trigger mechanism either with a combination code or biometric locks. That would prevent unauthorized use of the gun by anyone but the owner.

On kill switches, in the same locking mechanism put a chip and actuator that freezes the locking mechanism mentioned above when it receives a certain modulated radio signal.

If mandatory then all existing guns will have to be refitted with the new bolt mechanism creating revenue streams for the gun manufacturers and on all new guns they can charge more creating more revenue.



Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Jan 21 2013: It is my opinion that we need a few limited additions to our current gun laws restricting access to high-capacity magazines and assault rifles.

    I do not believe this will lead to the government taking away all weapons as the NRA's propaganda has followers blindly believing.
    • Jan 21 2013: You are, of course, entitled to your opinion but how will restricting access to high-capacity magazines and assault rifles on law abiding citizens stop home invading criminals with these weapons?
      • Gord G 50+

        • +2
        Jan 21 2013: This is such a ridiculous argument. One word ... escalation.

        The logic that makes someone feel safer because they think they have equal to greater fire power than some unknown assailant, is the same logic that fuels an arms race.
      • Jan 21 2013: The gun related deaths per capita in the USA far exceeds that of any other nation in the world. The more guns we take out of circulation the less guns will be available to criminals. All guns used by criminals started out being legally bought somewhere.

        I do support your right to defend yourself but not to own an AR-15 with a 100 bullet magazine.
      • Jan 22 2013: so you'd prefer that any home invader would have to shoot you first in order to get into your house? personally i'd rather be in the hospital than in the morgue.
    • thumb
      Jan 21 2013: True assault weapons ARE barred from citizens, via an act of 1934. Semi-auto rifles are merely referred to as assault rifles because they are cosmetically similar.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.