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

Penguin · 01-16-13, 12:43 AM

RFID chips are a terrible idea. They don't belong in passports, they don't belong in guns either. So does a lot of the stuff suggested in the article like GPS devices -

The potential for abuse is enormous. Apart from the potential abuse by citizens, the risk for abuse by the state is even bigger. History has shown that if you give instruments of surveillance to the government, they will use them, often only stopped by the courts, which remain one of the last resorts to defend citizen rights.

All the measures suggested in the article are too high tech solutions. This means a system could also have a high failure rate in situations where it must not. Despise the high tech, sensors, of any kind, are not that smart and can be fooled much easier than a human being.

A lower tech suggestion, to stop spontanious misuse could be fingerprint sensors. This way a weapon that is taken from you, can not be used against you - at least not directly. Of course the control, whose fingerprints are registered to the gun, should remain in the hands of the legal owner. For example your weapon for home defense could be green-lit to be shot by the owner, the spouse, the teenage kid, but not the 4 year old child.
I got this idea from Shadowrun, so there might be real life objections, or even tests which make my suggestion moot. I am open to hear which flaws you folks see in this idea.

Finally, the most efficient way to bring crime down in America, would be adopting a social security web that is worth its name. Maybe you would have more freeloaders, but imo the overall positive effects would trump the negative ones in any aspect.

01-16-13, 12:43 AM	#11
Penguin Ocean Warrior Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Rheinische Republik Posts: 3,322 Downloads: 92 Uploads: 0	RFID chips are a terrible idea. They don't belong in passports, they don't belong in guns either. So does a lot of the stuff suggested in the article like GPS devices - The potential for abuse is enormous. Apart from the potential abuse by citizens, the risk for abuse by the state is even bigger. History has shown that if you give instruments of surveillance to the government, they will use them, often only stopped by the courts, which remain one of the last resorts to defend citizen rights. All the measures suggested in the article are too high tech solutions. This means a system could also have a high failure rate in situations where it must not. Despise the high tech, sensors, of any kind, are not that smart and can be fooled much easier than a human being. A lower tech suggestion, to stop spontanious misuse could be fingerprint sensors. This way a weapon that is taken from you, can not be used against you - at least not directly. Of course the control, whose fingerprints are registered to the gun, should remain in the hands of the legal owner. For example your weapon for home defense could be green-lit to be shot by the owner, the spouse, the teenage kid, but not the 4 year old child. I got this idea from Shadowrun, so there might be real life objections, or even tests which make my suggestion moot. I am open to hear which flaws you folks see in this idea. Finally, the most efficient way to bring crime down in America, would be adopting a social security web that is worth its name. Maybe you would have more freeloaders, but imo the overall positive effects would trump the negative ones in any aspect.