The problem is that we have stupid guns in the United States

[Platapus]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/09/opinio...-smarter-guns/

I am not going to quote the entire article as it is a bit rambling. But here are the highlights

What if we could design guns to be smarter and safer -- with hardware and software? The right technology could neutralize the killing capability of an assault weapon, even in a madman's hands. The root of the problem is that guns are "dumb." Pull the trigger and they discharge bullets mindlessly, regardless of who is doing the aiming or where they are aimed. Guns should "know" not to fire in schools, churches, hospitals or malls. They should sense when they are being aimed at a child, or at a person when no other guns are nearby.

...

How might this work? Start with locational "self-awareness." Guns should know where they are and if another gun is nearby. [no more defending yourself against an attacker armed with a chain saw or sword] Global positioning systems can meet most of the need, refining a gun's location to the building level, even within buildings. Control of the gun would remain in the hand of the person carrying it, but the ability to fire multiple shots in crowded areas or when no other guns are present would be limited by software that understands where the gun is being used.

[so if there are two nutters with guns standing next to each other, every thing is kosher]


Guns should also be designed to sense where they are being aimed. Artificial vision and optical sensing technology can be adapted from military and medical communities. Sensory data can be used by built-in software to disable firing if the gun is pointed at a child or someone holding a child.


Guns used by the police would be exempt from such controls. [only the police should be allowed to shoot children or people holding children]


Finally, guns should be designed to broadcast their location when they are loaded. Police could see if high-powered assault weapons are entering or getting close to a public place. Gun owners, too, could choose to broadcast their guns' locations publicly to increase deterrent effect.

...

Yikes. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but this guy? Guns like this would not only be big and heavy would probably cost $20,000 each. Perhaps that is the whole idea. Make guns so "safe" that no one could afford one.....if they were to purchase a legal gun that is.

[August]

Originally Posted by Platapus

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/09/opinio...-smarter-guns/

I am not going to quote the entire article as it is a bit rambling. But here are the highlights

Yikes. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but this guy? Guns like this would not only be big and heavy would probably cost $20,000 each. Perhaps that is the whole idea. Make guns so "safe" that no one could afford one.....if they were to purchase a legal gun that is.

This is what comes to my mind when I hear "smart gun".

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/...he-real-world/

TrackingPoint makes "Precision Guided Firearms, or "PGFs," which are a series of three heavily customized hunting rifles, ranging from a .300 Winchester Magnum with a 22-inch barrel up to a .338 Lapua Magnum with 27-inch barrel, all fitted with advanced computerized scopes that look like something directly out of The Terminator. Indeed, the comparison to that movie is somewhat apt, because looking through the scope of a Precision Guided Firearm presents you with a collection of data points and numbers, all designed to get a bullet directly from point A to point B.

[Stealhead]

This guy has no understanding of military technology.

Even a very expensive modern weapons system like that of say an Abrams MBT or the TADS system on an Apache attack helicopter require the person controlling them to positively ID what is being aimed at if they are incorrect they will kill an non combatant or allied unit these systems cost cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and are not compact.

This ding bat expects technology that is not currently existent(in non operation under certain conditions form) to be available in a compact form his ideas are very ludicrous to put it mildly.

[August]

A gun with a brain. What he is essentially describing is an armed security detail with strong ethics.

[Stealhead]

Or any person that understands the safe and proper operation of any firearm they happen to own or use.

Another factor the author failed to take into consideration is hunting and sport shooting.How would a firearm know the difference between a human and a deer or a bear or boar or fowl?

The idea of a firearm broadcasting its location is the best to me the tracking system would look like the stars in the sky utterly useless.

It is funny to me how stupid Americans are people get all worried about gun violence yet they will drive down the road texting which is many times more likely to kill you.People run traffic lights all the time in the US another activity much more likely to cause your death or they try to out run a train at a crossing.

7,770 people died in accidents caused by a vehicle running a traffic light in 2008 around 2,000 people each year die in railroad crossing accidents(sadly they suffer a double whammy as they also failed physics).I read in a Time magazine that since 1984 375 people have been killed in shooting sprees but that list included 3 sprees that occurred outside the US.I list shooting sprees because this is what everyone is concerned about.


http://www.tdi.texas.gov/pubs/videor...lroadcross.pdf

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/redlight/

[Catfish]

Here's a target-searching auto-gun run by Linux:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/...he-real-world/

And you can put that on a drone, and kill people abroad without needing a human anymore, via image recognition. Beautiful times ahead.

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

Or any person that understands the safe and proper operation of any firearm they happen to own or use.

Another factor the author failed to take into consideration is hunting and sport shooting.How would a firearm know the difference between a human and a deer or a bear or boar or fowl?

The idea of a firearm broadcasting its location is the best to me the tracking system would look like the stars in the sky utterly useless.

It is funny to me how stupid Americans are people get all worried about gun violence yet they will drive down the road texting which is many times more likely to kill you.People run traffic lights all the time in the US another activity much more likely to cause your death or they try to out run a train at a crossing.

7,770 people died in accidents caused by a vehicle running a traffic light in 2008 around 2,000 people each year die in railroad crossing accidents(sadly they suffer a double whammy as they also failed physics).I read in a Time magazine that since 1984 375 people have been killed in shooting sprees but that list included 3 sprees that occurred outside the US.I list shooting sprees because this is what everyone is concerned about.


http://www.tdi.texas.gov/pubs/videor...lroadcross.pdf

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/redlight/

Most states texting or using a phone when driving is illegal, yet everyone still does it.

[TLAM Strike]

Guns should also be designed to sense where they are being aimed. Artificial vision and optical sensing technology can be adapted from military and medical communities. Sensory data can be used by built-in software to disable firing if the gun is pointed at a child or someone holding a child.

Oh yea note to self: Use human shield...

[Méo]

@tater

I don't want to go in a ''I'm right and you're wrong'' discourse, I think that leads nowhere.

But I take the Montreal case again: it's a very multicultural city, in fact I hate this city, each time I go there I feel like I'm in a different country and it's very dirty. But nevertheless, it's the safest city (for a metropolis) in North America.

The only thing, I think there's less black people than in the U.S.

http://www.studyinmontreal.info/en/node/3092

In 2008, 8 of 29 murders were related to street gangs. Compared to the 14 street gang murders committed in 2007, this is a drop of 43%.

http://www.spvm.qc.ca/en/documentation/gd_19.asp

BTW, I know this city is only one city, and therefore isn't enough in a scientifical point of view.

----

And yes we have gun control laws, and that didn't prevent my friend (who's in the reserve) to spend nearly 10 000$ on several guns (maybe 5 or 6, I don't remember). There are maybe some limitations (I should ask him about it) but for sure I know he has a lot of fun whith it when he goes in the wood.

And I know laws are not the only solution, gun violence is surely a complex social problem (related to lot of things) to be examine by specialists.

----

Originally Posted by tater

That is a mental health problem and has exactly nothing to do with culture.

I'm glad you admit it, I think it's precisely one of the objective of gun control, to prevent nuts from having these, maybe also those who are on medication (and believe me you can be really ****** up on this, I know, I experienced it)

And the police really like to know what kind of weapon (if any) an individual can have when they go for an arrest (I know my own sister is a police officer).

----

On the other hand, let's face it, when you compare the stats between nations (by nations I mean western nations, not third world countries where gangs and drug dealers do almost whatever they want) US is by far the country where gun violence is at it's highest.

In the end it's a choice, I mean you could still think, ''no we want gun freedom at all cost'' everything is a question of values (although those values might change when you experience something dramatic).

I would even support those who want to create an independant country with their state (if they estimate their values to be dramatically different) as long as it's done democratically (even if I disagree with those values).

Peace out

[Armistead]

See that Obama unveiled his gun law proposals, same old stuff and will never pass congress.