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.

Thoughts?

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Feb 6 2013: Lets admit some basic facts first;

    1) Gun kill people.
    2) It's easier to kill with a gun than without.

    Now the question of significantly reducing the sheer number of deaths by taking away guns, regardless of the victim's race, creed, color or country.

    The answer to this is, I am afraid that you'd have to take guns away not from Citizens, but away from Governments.
    • thumb
      Feb 6 2013: The point I have been trying to make is that this focus on guns in today's political climate without everyone coming to a consensus.... its like looking at a grain of sand and calling it the beach...


      Also.. it is not easier to kill with a gun, it is just less personal.
      • Feb 6 2013: To say that... "Also.. it is not easier to kill with a gun, it is just less personal. ', is just plain nonsense, and hardly worth me bothering with a reply - but i do, as I try to educate where I can.

        You seem to forget, or didn't know, the basic law of ANY and ALL inventions are..."To make things easier". That is and always will be the overriding tenant and motivating force behind any invention, weapon or no.

        It simply has nothing to do with being personal or no. Nothing. If you use a car or an egg whisk, it would be tantamount to saying that the car has been invented as walking is too personal, or so is beating an egg with a fork.

        To make things easier - with regards to weapons means quite simply - to kill more people with less effort.

        That would and does include hand-guns / semi-automatic guns / grenades / RPG / scud missiles / Napalm / Agent Orange / nuclear bombs ... and every other weapon throughout history ever invented too.

        The the majority of deaths are simply put committed by Governments.

        I suggest you watch "The fog of war" with U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara. He might be able to explain it better to you.
        • thumb
          Feb 6 2013: Thank you for your educational efforts, but I am old and set in my ways. I haven't forgotten about the necessity of invention. I am not sure of your experience of shooting another person.
          But I am sure that if you had, you would find it less personal then using a knife or your bare hands.
      • Feb 6 2013: As I said watch "The fog of war" with former U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara. It explains everything.

        P.S. Mike; you're never too old to learn, if it was true, you wouldn't be on here :)
        • thumb
          Feb 8 2013: Hi,
          I served in the US Military under Mr McNamara. I was in the war, he was in the fog.
          I'm sorry, his vision of how to conduct military operations for successful conclusion
          were... unsuccessful.

          From looking up from my point of view he was too smart to listen and too smart learn.
          I thumbed through the book when it first came out. I don't accept his apology for failure.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.