Gun Control

[StPaulHusker]

13 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

how would this be enforced?...

That's a very good question.  And it's one our politicians should be having

[ZRod]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

That all sounds great in concept, but totally impractical in reality.

Maybe at this 5 minutes, but you're phone can do it. A gun could easily do it right now and be made lighter, faster and better 10 years from now.

[BigRedBuster]

20 minutes ago, ZRod said:

Maybe at this 5 minutes, but you're phone can do it and a gun could easily do it right now, and me made light faster and better 10 years from now.

 

That might be all well and good for new guns.  But, there is no way in hell you are going to some how modify an antique or collector gun worth thousands of dollars to put something like this on.

 

Even then, just as a gun owner, I would hate it with new guns.  So....let's say I'm out with buddies shooting skeet.  My buddy can't fire my gun because it needs my finger prints on it to work?

Not.

[ZRod]

3 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

That might be all well and good for new guns.  But, there is no way in hell you are going to some how modify an antique or collector gun worth thousands of dollars to put something like this on.

 

Even then, just as a gun owner, I would hate it with new guns.  So....let's say I'm out with buddies shooting skeet.  My buddy can't fire my gun because it needs my finger prints on it to work?

Not.

I meant new guns only. I think it would be impractical, and mostly impossible to retrofit old guns.

 

Wouldn't be too hard to program around your skeet issue. You could set it to be unlocked for an hour or at certain locations, or add temporary finger prints. Next? 

[B.B. Hemingway]

2 hours ago, StPaulHusker said:

How about requiring biometrics on gun safes if you own specific weaponry?

 

That's great, until the biometric system fails, and you have to spend $200-$300 for a locksmith to come out and ruin the safe, just to get it open. You currently run into the same issue with keypad locks on gun safes. 

 

 

46 minutes ago, ZRod said:

. You could set it to be unlocked for an hour or at certain locations, or add temporary finger prints. Next? 

 

 

..... Stay away from my guns.

 

 

[ZRod]

4 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

That's great, until the biometric system fails, and you have to spend $200-$300 for a locksmith to come out and ruin the safe, just to get it open. You currently run into the same issue with keypad locks on gun safes. 

 

 

 

 

..... Stay away from my guns.

 

 

Don't let be scared of the future homie. Progress is marching ever forward.

[B.B. Hemingway]

2 minutes ago, ZRod said:

Don't let be scared of the future homie. Progress is marching ever forward.

 

 

Yep. Before we know it, you'll have to suck on a cotton-swab to provide your DNA, just  to get the thing to fire.

[StPaulHusker]

24 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

That's great, until the biometric system fails, and you have to spend $200-$300 for a locksmith to come out and ruin the safe, just to get it open. You currently run into the same issue with keypad locks on gun safes. 

 

What if someone takes an unsecured weapon out of your home and shoots up a school?  What's the going rate on funeral services?  Or janitorial services?  Or therapy sessions from PTSD?

 

The point is to find ways to keep people from accessing guns when they shouldn't be.  I couldn't care less what a theoretical labor charge might be if something were to maybe fail and keep the guns locked for an hour or 2.

 

It's about putting ALL options on the table to figure out what is best for ALL.

[B.B. Hemingway]

9 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

 

I couldn'tcare less what a theoretical labor charge might be if something were to maybe fail and keep the guns locked for an hour or 2.

 

 

 

I don't suppose you would. 

 

I would imagine there's a pretty long list of items that would need to be addressed before you got to the hypothetical "biometric safe". Which would provide the slightest of  advantages over a combination lock in the first place. Here's an idea, just don't tell your kids the combination . If you die before you tell your kids the numbers, they can call the locksmith.

[Danny Bateman]

3 hours ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

  

I don't suppose you would.  

 

I would imagine there's a pretty long list of items that would need to be addressed before you got to the hypothetical "biometric safe". Which would provide the slightest of  advantages over a combination lock in the first place. Here's an idea, just don't tell your kids the combination . If you die before you tell your kids the numbers, they can call the locksmith. 

 

This suggests there would be no failsafe in the event the biometric system wasn't a practical option. As an extreme example, let's say you lose the hand with the fingerprints you use to open the safe (or activate the gun). There'd have to be some type of backup method of unlocking it, just like when your phone registers too many incorrect fingerprints to unlock.

 

I was just tossing this idea out there as an example of currently advancing tech being used to potentially make our gun culture safer. Will it happen in any significant way? Probably not, certainly not for a while. Is it interesting to me? Definitely.

 

Plus, imagine if your gun could do this! (Borrowed from one of the best/worst vampire movies of all time, Blade) (warning: some mild gore)

 

 

[Landlord]

15 hours ago, dankebe said:

You can use a gun in a responsible way.....is it possible to use cocaine and meth in a responsible way?

 

 

I would posit that the responsible use of assault weapons is one where private citizens can't have them. 

[methodical]

If you think fingerprint scanners are somehow secure you're fooling yourself, you can defeat most of them with a printout of a fingerprint that you wet.  If a safe is in a house, you'd find a fingerprint pretty easily if you wanted.  Bio-metrics sound cool and futuristic and I know people are starting to trust them because of their phones, but they aren't really as secure as you imagine.

[Landlord]

39 minutes ago, methodical said:

If you think fingerprint scanners are somehow secure you're fooling yourself, you can defeat most of them with a printout of a fingerprint that you wet.  If a safe is in a house, you'd find a fingerprint pretty easily if you wanted.  Bio-metrics sound cool and futuristic and I know people are starting to trust them because of their phones, but they aren't really as secure as you imagine.

 

More or less secure than picking up any gun in the world and shooting it?

 

Also, to the bold, how much time would it take to find a fingerprint on a safe and be able to transfer it to a medium you could effectively use?

[StPaulHusker]

I can see that the point was again missed by people who don't actually want to have true discussions about what gun control could mean.   Which doesn't surprise me.

[BigRedBuster]

This is interesting.  

 

Just reading this article and knowing very little more about the exact law, I have to say I would have to vote against this NY law.  It sure seems like a law that was put in place by people who just want a law....but, didn't think very deeply into what that law should be.