A more practical mechanism to prevent others from firing your gun would be an RFID mechanism. The user would have to have some sort of wristband that the gun can recognize.
I don't think the fingerprint scanning technology and other biometric mechanisms are advanced enough to fit in a gun and scan quickly when the user needs it.
I missed this before, but these are good ideas and you may be right about the current state of bio-metrics. Our idea was to put it into the grip and use the thumbprint.
Here's one: Find a spine. Don't compromise. Tell them to go fuck themselves.
Once again (like with the kill-switch argument) you've taken some things entirely out of context and/or thin air.
Who is making a compromise? This would be a good thing for decent people. Find a spine? I'm trying to do something about this problem that doesn't involve "Let's just ban the fuck out of them." Perhaps you're the one who should find a spine.
Also, I double-dare you to tell the police to go fuck themselves if they're ever kicking down your door. Or better yet, tell some armed crackhead to go fuck himself when he kicks down your door and you don't have a gun handy. (Catch yourself doing either one of these on video without either getting shot or getting the shit beat out of you and I'll pay you $100 for the entertainment alone.) That's not bravery - it's sheer stupidity, and I pity you for thinking it's anything else.
Regardless of what's decided upon officially, I'll have the guns and ammunition I do now and nobody is stopping me. I will literally die defending them if necessary.
Then you are exactly the kind of extremist person who should not own a self-defense firearm, and whom this system would be designed to deter. Also, nobody said anything about 'prying your guns out your cold dead hands,' etc. The system would be designed to work with any currently-existing firearm. You will be able to install this system on your existing firearms and (ideally) the government would subsidize it so no additional cost to you. If you're a regular person who owns a gun for self-defense and doesn't have anything to hide this system will benefit you in the long run. If you're a criminal who would shoot someone just because you can this system will be a detriment to you in the long run, and that's the fucking point. Everybody that matters wins, all the right people lose.
The very agency currently patting citizens on the head and telling them to trust that everything is fine when asked about warrantless wiretapping? [Ars Technica]
Look, I'm not endorsing the NSA. I'm just saying that agencies like them could be the managing party. Any entity could manage this thing.
And just imagine how quickly a freedom fighter could be taken off the field.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. If you're referring to some ex-mil merc who's doing a jungle-hump in the third world because he can't hack it back in the real world, well, I don't think you'll need to worry too much. Those countries will probably never implement a system like this. If you're talking about the so-called freedom fighters here, I say good, let em' get busted. Maybe then they can do something constructive with their lives instead of fighting (aka terrorism) for a cause (aka overthrowing the government) that would ultimately collapse American society and doom us all.
Last edited: