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.

  • thumb
    Feb 16 2013: Today, the POTUS visited his home town of Chicago. Chicago has one of the most strict gun control laws and the highest rate of gun violence in the USA. In his speech, he spoke of more gun control for legal firearms. He did not address the problem of Chicago, where whole areas are totally lawless war zones ruled by gangs. And yes, they use guns... and knives and bats, and .... There is little to none police activity and if one of those gang members does stray and is caught. Little punishment. Gangs will have juveniles carry the weapons and commit most of the violent crimes. No jail time for those little kids. Remember Dicken's " Oliver " It's at a whole new level in Chicago.

    What I have been crusading about in this whole conversation is that politicians can not or will not address the problems. There are huge social issues that must be addressed and these politicians will pass some meaningless gun control laws, that will not violate the 2nd amendment and tell the world they took action to resolve the problems. Next year Chicago will have 500 violent murders and some insane person will shoot up a school and we'll dance to this tune again.
    • thumb
      Feb 16 2013: It might be the only way for your country, funny that.....They did say 2012 was a year of choices. Many things are on the agenda that is set to rock our worlds, gun violence, the choice of full citizen militia to gay marriage or the choice to give up the gun.

      In your countries case, militarize the nation, if things go belly up for your nation economically then no other world power will think about invading a country that is armed to the teeth.

      • thumb
        Feb 16 2013: Let's see, you have mentioned a number of social issues and a few legal issues on the political agenda of the USA. Further if the economy goes belly up, the USA will be armed to the teeth and no one would dare to invade us. OK, so what's the problem? If that all comes to pass, the worse scenario for other countries is... there is a loss of tourist destinations? If your country has put all it's eggs in the USA basket, and that basket falls, it would seem that that is a problem for your country. I am not aware of any country who is forced to hold it's destiny to the USA. You are right, it is a matter of choices.
    • Feb 16 2013: Mike I couldn't agree more. The reason the media and politicians are spouting off about banning firearms is because its can be carried out against the legal and law abiding citizens. All the comments from international contributors show a failure to comprehend that laws only work on the law adibing. These laws will have a negative effect on the safety of our citzens as demonstrated in England following the ban.

      A governments power doesn't stem from the support of law abiding citizens but from the power to punish law breakers. They continue to pass legislation making more things illegal until everyone is a criminal, all in the name of the greater good.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.