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.

  • Feb 1 2013: Intelligent debate is lost on both sides of this issue. Only satire, ridicule and comedy will move either cause to re-examine its position and only when the absurd is personalized. A Mark Twain with present day communication technology (motion pictures, you tube, etc.) could show extreme positions more clearly than any serious written dialogue. We need Archie Bunker, Ralph Kramden, and Deputy Barney to jolt us into looking anew at the messages from both sides that are now simply repeated without thought or reason. Elmer Fudd and Dick Chenyt hunting a rabbits with an AK 47 is makes the thought that automatic weapons with extended clips are hunting rifles as the NRA has claimed comical even to the gun supporters. Edith Bunker being mugged while carrying a gun but unable to use it because it is locked only for Archie's use would show another issue. Six armed guards in a gun battle with each other because someone in a crowd started shooting and so now they are firing at anyone with a gun is a possiblity. The guard at the school who needs a guard because obviously any planned occupation will target the guard first could be a whole chapter. Yes, ridicule will get us much farther than personal opinion in this matter. Paint Your Wagon, It's a Mad Mad Mad World and Texas Across the River are fine examples we could follow, but for the best effect the Pink Panther series seems to be the most usable template here. We need the good Inspector Clouseau and bitting satire to allow us a fresh look at a serious matter.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.