Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Guns don't kill people. Gun manufacturers who won't use Smart Gun technology kill people   (bits.blogs.nytimes.com ) divider line
    More: Asinine, Buck Rogers, Robert McNamara, Smith & Wesson, gun deaths, registered owner, firing mechanisms, cell disruption, manufacturers  
•       •       •

1862 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Jan 2013 at 8:35 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



213 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-01-08 07:22:42 AM  
So burglars have to steal your jewelry too.
 
2013-01-08 07:46:36 AM  
FTA: But gun advocates are staunchly against these technologies, partly because so many guns are bought not in gun shops, but in private sales. "Many guns are bought and sold on the secondary market without background checks, and that kind of sale would be inhibited with fingerprinting-safety technologies in guns," he said.

WTF?  Are gun makers getting a cut of the second hand market?  It seems to me they could be making more money by being the only place to re-key a weapon to a new owner.
 
2013-01-08 08:08:25 AM  

Ennuipoet: FTA: But gun advocates are staunchly against these technologies, partly because so many guns are bought not in gun shops, but in private sales. "Many guns are bought and sold on the secondary market without background checks, and that kind of sale would be inhibited with fingerprinting-safety technologies in guns," he said.

WTF?  Are gun makers getting a cut of the second hand market?  It seems to me they could be making more money by being the only place to re-key a weapon to a new owner.


Couldn't you just allow the original owner to re-key it at sale time?  If I'm wearing The one ring that's paired with that gun, I should just be able to hit an "unpair" button that would make it un-fireable until the next guy pairs it with his precious.
 
2013-01-08 08:15:19 AM  
TFA touches on a good point, but the problem with that technology is that it's still iffy in terms of reliability from what I've read.  Good alternatives are locking your guns in a gun safe so those that shouldn't have access to your guns, won't.  I have one for my handgun and it has a 4 digit pin.  I've tested it and I can open it quickly enough to protect myself and my home.  Trigger locks and larger gun safes work well for larger weapons.

IMHO what has been overlooked in this tragedy is the negligence of the mother by allowing her mentally ill son unfettered access to a number of guns.
 
2013-01-08 08:25:50 AM  

slayer199: IMHO what has been overlooked in this tragedy is the negligence of the mother by allowing her mentally ill son unfettered access to a number of guns.


ding ding ding.  If she had smart guns, she probably would have left the key right next to them.
 
2013-01-08 08:39:20 AM  
Guns don't kill people, people do.

With guns, they kill them with guns.
 
2013-01-08 08:39:28 AM  
Tasers don't tase people, policemen do.
 
2013-01-08 08:39:49 AM  
This would never work because of packs of feral pigs, I am sure.
 
2013-01-08 08:40:19 AM  
Why can we open our front doors with our iPhones and have cars that drive themselves, but we can't make a gun that doesn't fire unless its registered owner is using it?

Imagine the consequences when a cop gets the equivalent of the Blue Screen of Death on his gun when a traffic stop goes bad. That's why people are not ready to accept this technology.
 
2013-01-08 08:41:10 AM  
Can't Fark just create a GUNS tab so the rest of us can go on with our lives?
 
2013-01-08 08:42:48 AM  

manimal2878: Why can we open our front doors with our iPhones and have cars that drive themselves, but we can't make a gun that doesn't fire unless its registered owner is using it?

Imagine the consequences when a cop gets the equivalent of the Blue Screen of Death on his gun when a traffic stop goes bad. That's why people are not ready to accept this technology.


Obviously, police officers would be exempt from any requirement to use such technology because police officers never have their weapons taken and used against them.
 
2013-01-08 08:43:43 AM  

bwilson27: Can't Fark just create a GUNS tab so the rest of us can go on with our lives?


I 2nd this motion

/The interest is there and Drew needs the beer money... win/win
//Also, no thanks to having a firearm dependent on a battery TYVM
 
2013-01-08 08:44:01 AM  
11,500 gun deaths in this country in 2012.

2% of those were done with a semi automotic evil "assault rifle"

Yup, demand the ban of all these evil guns. Makes perfect sense since obviously everyone with a gun will go murder someone.

This is the thought police, just becuase you have it doesn't mean you'll do it.
 
2013-01-08 08:44:05 AM  

manimal2878: Why can we open our front doors with our iPhones and have cars that drive themselves, but we can't make a gun that doesn't fire unless its registered owner is using it?

Imagine the consequences when a cop gets the equivalent of the Blue Screen of Death on his gun when a traffic stop goes bad. That's why people are not ready to accept this technology.


His gun might jamb too. We probably should arm Cops only with spears to avoid those problems.
 
2013-01-08 08:46:26 AM  

TIKIMAN87: 11,500 gun deaths in this country in 2012.

2% of those were done with a semi automotic evil "assault rifle"

Yup, demand the ban of all these evil guns. Makes perfect sense since obviously everyone with a gun will go murder someone.

This is the thought police, just becuase you have it doesn't mean you'll do it.


You have a keyboard and you post stupid shiat all the time. Ban keyboards.
 
2013-01-08 08:47:04 AM  

TIKIMAN87: 11,500 gun deaths in this country in 2012.

2% of those were done with a semi automotic evil "assault rifle"

Yup, demand the ban of all these evil guns. Makes perfect sense since obviously everyone with a gun will go murder someone.

This is the thought police, just becuase you have it doesn't mean you'll do it.


To provide fair consideration: assault weapons ban advocates are often extremely stupid.
 
2013-01-08 08:47:08 AM  
This sounds like a fantastic idea.
Let's have the secret service and all of the congressional security staff convert their guns for a trial program.

/there is no incentive to invent this because people who use guns don't want to be locked out of those guns.
/if you want to prevent kids from injuring themselves with a firearm, you lock it up.
 
2013-01-08 08:47:56 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: manimal2878: Why can we open our front doors with our iPhones and have cars that drive themselves, but we can't make a gun that doesn't fire unless its registered owner is using it?

Imagine the consequences when a cop gets the equivalent of the Blue Screen of Death on his gun when a traffic stop goes bad. That's why people are not ready to accept this technology.

His gun might jamb too. We probably should arm Cops only with spears to avoid those problems.


Then he would do an immediate action drill and unjam it. He isn't it going to be able to reboot the thing in the same amount of time.
 
2013-01-08 08:48:10 AM  

Fail in Human Form: bwilson27: Can't Fark just create a GUNS tab so the rest of us can go on with our lives?

I 2nd this motion

/The interest is there and Drew needs the beer money... win/win
//Also, no thanks to having a firearm dependent on a battery TYVM


I'm thinking we've gone way past beer money at this point and are probably looking at a second or third home.
 
2013-01-08 08:48:47 AM  

slayer199: TFA touches on a good point, but the problem with that technology is that it's still iffy in terms of reliability from what I've read.


manimal2878: Imagine the consequences when a cop gets the equivalent of the Blue Screen of Death on his gun when a traffic stop goes bad. That's why people are not ready to accept this technology.


As someone who designs electronics for a living, I can say that if I was the type of person to own a gun for "personal protection" I would not want to trust my life to a piece of biometric recognition firmware.
 
2013-01-08 08:49:02 AM  
If I take some friends out to do a little target shooting, I really don't want to have to take their prints first. Or shuffle a ring around. Just lock the things up, people.
 
2013-01-08 08:49:57 AM  

Ennuipoet: FTA: But gun advocates are staunchly against these technologies, partly because so many guns are bought not in gun shops, but in private sales. "Many guns are bought and sold on the secondary market without background checks, and that kind of sale would be inhibited with fingerprinting-safety technologies in guns," he said.

WTF?  Are gun makers getting a cut of the second hand market?  It seems to me they could be making more money by being the only place to re-key a weapon to a new owner.


You would think the government would have passed a law trying to prevent this way of selling guns since it bypasses the background check a lot of states have...
 
2013-01-08 08:50:04 AM  
What makes the Assault Weapon such a problem is that the owners of these weapons can never use it for its intended purpose, which is to kill people. Car collectors can drive their prized possessions and enjoy its performance. An ITG stroking his Bushmaster KNOWS in his heart of hearts that (unless he is incredibly lucky) an unarmed darkie will probably never try to burgle his home, that he will never get to know the true beauty of his Weapon, never get to merge his soul with its and create a perfectly efficient melding of man and machine.

Unless he saunters onto a playground, or into a mall, or a kindergarten, a McDonalds, a Luby's, a theatre etc etc.

The problem is not the weapon, it's the whackjob mentality that is drawn to these weapons.
 
2013-01-08 08:52:02 AM  

manimal2878: Philip Francis Queeg: manimal2878: Why can we open our front doors with our iPhones and have cars that drive themselves, but we can't make a gun that doesn't fire unless its registered owner is using it?

Imagine the consequences when a cop gets the equivalent of the Blue Screen of Death on his gun when a traffic stop goes bad. That's why people are not ready to accept this technology.

His gun might jamb too. We probably should arm Cops only with spears to avoid those problems.

Then he would do an immediate action drill and unjam it. He isn't it going to be able to reboot the thing in the same amount of time.


That might take too long. Gun technology just isn't ready yet for the police to use it. We need to stick with tried and true technology which will never fail the Officer in the field.

preview.turbosquid.com
 
2013-01-08 08:56:16 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: manimal2878: Philip Francis Queeg: manimal2878: Why can we open our front doors with our iPhones and have cars that drive themselves, but we can't make a gun that doesn't fire unless its registered owner is using it?

Imagine the consequences when a cop gets the equivalent of the Blue Screen of Death on his gun when a traffic stop goes bad. That's why people are not ready to accept this technology.

His gun might jamb too. We probably should arm Cops only with spears to avoid those problems.

Then he would do an immediate action drill and unjam it. He isn't it going to be able to reboot the thing in the same amount of time.

That might take too long. Gun technology just isn't ready yet for the police to use it. We need to stick with tried and true technology which will never fail the Officer in the field.

[preview.turbosquid.com image 600x600]


*Cop1* Which way did the criminal go?
*Cop 2* Just follow the blood trail
 
2013-01-08 09:03:14 AM  

SomeoneDumb: Fail in Human Form: bwilson27: Can't Fark just create a GUNS tab so the rest of us can go on with our lives?

I 2nd this motion

/The interest is there and Drew needs the beer money... win/win
//Also, no thanks to having a firearm dependent on a battery TYVM

I'm thinking we've gone way past beer money at this point and are probably looking at a second or third home.


If the hysterics at the opposite ends of this "debate" possessed the capacity to know when they were being manipulated, they wouldn't be hysterics.
 
2013-01-08 09:04:11 AM  

Insatiable Jesus: What makes the Assault Weapon such a problem is that the owners of these weapons can never use it for its intended purpose, which is to kill people. Car collectors can drive their prized possessions and enjoy its performance. An ITG stroking his Bushmaster KNOWS in his heart of hearts that (unless he is incredibly lucky) an unarmed darkie will probably never try to burgle his home, that he will never get to know the true beauty of his Weapon, never get to merge his soul with its and create a perfectly efficient melding of man and machine.

Unless he saunters onto a playground, or into a mall, or a kindergarten, a McDonalds, a Luby's, a theatre etc etc.

The problem is not the weapon, it's the whackjob mentality that is drawn to these weapons.


I am curious: are you "trolling", or are you actually unable to rationally argue in support of your position without lying?
 
2013-01-08 09:04:36 AM  

jso2897: SomeoneDumb: Fail in Human Form: bwilson27: Can't Fark just create a GUNS tab so the rest of us can go on with our lives?

I 2nd this motion

/The interest is there and Drew needs the beer money... win/win
//Also, no thanks to having a firearm dependent on a battery TYVM

I'm thinking we've gone way past beer money at this point and are probably looking at a second or third home.

If the hysterics at the opposite ends of this "debate" possessed the capacity to know when they were being manipulated, they wouldn't be hysterics.


I'm not being manipulated, I just really don't like the idea of waking up one morning and magically becoming a felon.
 
2013-01-08 09:05:17 AM  

bwilson27: Can't Fark just create a GUNS tab so the rest of us can go on with our lives?


So what you're saying is that the occasional civilian massacre is fine with you because it's just the price you have to pay for freedom?
 
2013-01-08 09:05:41 AM  
Instead of grabbing my M&P from the drawer since it is biometrically locked to myself, my wife will have to purchase her own firearm....and so will everyone elses spouse.

Obviously the NYT agrees that more guns is the answer.
 
2013-01-08 09:06:45 AM  

slayer199: IMHO what has been overlooked in this tragedy is the negligence of the mother by allowing her mentally ill son unfettered access to a number of guns.


So far where the guns were in the house hasn't been released.

Someone who was shot in the head can't effectively police a safe, even a good one. We don't know if it took him six hours to get the safe open after shooting his own mother. He was smart and determined, if still a crazy autistic (which probably actually helped him accomplish this) any house of that size is going to have any number of tools capable of getting even a good safe open given enough time and privacy.

She can be blamed, but for being a mother that didn't realize how dangerous he was.

Sorta like the white version of "my babby didn do nuthin!"
 
2013-01-08 09:09:33 AM  

moistD: Ennuipoet: FTA: But gun advocates are staunchly against these technologies, partly because so many guns are bought not in gun shops, but in private sales. "Many guns are bought and sold on the secondary market without background checks, and that kind of sale would be inhibited with fingerprinting-safety technologies in guns," he said.

WTF?  Are gun makers getting a cut of the second hand market?  It seems to me they could be making more money by being the only place to re-key a weapon to a new owner.

You would think the government would have passed a law trying to prevent this way of selling guns since it bypasses the background check a lot of states have...


The DOJ did a survey of inmates and found that person to person private sales only account for 2% of the illegal firearms used in committing crimes......so he is technically correct in the use of many, since it is more than 2 instances.

The majority of illegal firearms are from Fast and Furious type straw purchases.....and yet we are still only talking about around 10k deaths per year.
 
2013-01-08 09:09:49 AM  
haters don't hate..oh wait, i guess that one is true
 
2013-01-08 09:11:27 AM  

James F. Campbell: bwilson27: Can't Fark just create a GUNS tab so the rest of us can go on with our lives?

So what you're saying is that the occasional civilian massacre is fine with you because it's just the price you have to pay for freedom?


Much like letting the occasional murder go free due to the 4th or 5th amendment...yes
 
2013-01-08 09:13:52 AM  

Fail in Human Form: ...

I'm not being manipulated, I just really don't like the idea of waking up one morning and magically becoming a felon.


I'm not convinced posting on Fark makes any difference whatsoever.
 
2013-01-08 09:15:01 AM  

SomeoneDumb: Fail in Human Form: ...

I'm not being manipulated, I just really don't like the idea of waking up one morning and magically becoming a felon.

I'm not convinced posting on Fark makes any difference whatsoever.


Good thing I write my representatives and have joined and donate to pretty much every pro gun organization in existence then huh?
 
2013-01-08 09:16:02 AM  

Giltric: and yet we are still only talking about around 10k deaths per year.


Only 10,000 dead? How many dead would it take for you to become concerned?
 
2013-01-08 09:16:09 AM  
Smart gun technology did not prevent the massacre at Delos' West World.
 
2013-01-08 09:16:44 AM  

Fail in Human Form: SomeoneDumb: Fail in Human Form: ...

I'm not being manipulated, I just really don't like the idea of waking up one morning and magically becoming a felon.

I'm not convinced posting on Fark makes any difference whatsoever.

Good thing I write my representatives and have joined and donate to pretty much every pro gun organization in existence then huh?


I guess.
 
2013-01-08 09:19:41 AM  

Giltric: moistD: Ennuipoet: FTA: But gun advocates are staunchly against these technologies, partly because so many guns are bought not in gun shops, but in private sales. "Many guns are bought and sold on the secondary market without background checks, and that kind of sale would be inhibited with fingerprinting-safety technologies in guns," he said.

WTF?  Are gun makers getting a cut of the second hand market?  It seems to me they could be making more money by being the only place to re-key a weapon to a new owner.

You would think the government would have passed a law trying to prevent this way of selling guns since it bypasses the background check a lot of states have...

The DOJ did a survey of inmates and found that person to person private sales only account for 2% of the illegal firearms used in committing crimes......so he is technically correct in the use of many, since it is more than 2 instances.

The majority of illegal firearms are from Fast and Furious type straw purchases.....and yet we are still only talking about around 10k deaths per year.


interesting, thanks for the update.

for the record, I don't really think gun sales are a problem this way, but not wanting to use this smart gun technology because it would restrict those sales seems like a terrible argument.
 
2013-01-08 09:21:49 AM  
I'll translate that whole article.

"This technology would drive up the cost of guns for legal gun owners and make them more difficult to purchase for legal gun owners. Even better it might make them easier to track and trace. It will do accomplish nothing what so ever in the reduction of crime and will not prevent spree shooting but we're not really interested in that anyway. What we're interested in is taking away a tool of individual empowerment away from law abiding people so they will have to rely on government services for protection."
 
2013-01-08 09:26:00 AM  

randomjsa: it might make them easier to track and trace


Only if very poorly implemented.
That said, if the government did implement such a requirement, they'd probably do it poorly.

I'd worry more about the occasional situation where the gun owner gets taken out and another intended victim otherwise could have picked up the gun to defend himself, but now can't.  Ultimately that's his fault for not having his own gun though
 
2013-01-08 09:26:14 AM  
www.zombieranchcomic.com

Let's rock!
 
2013-01-08 09:29:36 AM  
Ares Macrotechnologies was unavailable for comment.
 
2013-01-08 09:32:35 AM  

Insatiable Jesus: What makes the Assault Weapon such a problem is that the owners of these weapons can never use it for its intended purpose, which is to kill people. Car collectors can drive their prized possessions and enjoy its performance. An ITG stroking his Bushmaster KNOWS in his heart of hearts that (unless he is incredibly lucky) an unarmed darkie will probably never try to burgle his home, that he will never get to know the true beauty of his Weapon, never get to merge his soul with its and create a perfectly efficient melding of man and machine.

Unless he saunters onto a playground, or into a mall, or a kindergarten, a McDonalds, a Luby's, a theatre etc etc.

The problem is not the weapon, it's the whackjob mentality that is drawn to these weapons.


I normally don't respond to trolls, but in this case, I'll make an exception with a hearty, good natured "EABOD." I love my AR for plinking, small game hunting and teaching my kids how to shoot. They've not shot it chambered in anything other than .22 yet, but when I put the .223 upper on it it will still be a great "learning" firearm for them. I'd sit here and argue the virtues of the buffer spring in my AR vs. the rubber plate at the end of the butt stock on my .270 deer rifle for recoil, but since you don't know jack shiat about firearms and aren't willing to look past cosmetics, there really wouldn't be a point.
When my AR isn't at the range or out at a friend's farm or in a field hunting, it's locked in my safe. I have no illusions whatsoever about using it for home protection. I like it because it's fun and easy to shoot.

As much as I've wanted to stay away from the car analogy, I'll drop this on you since you brought it up in the first place. You make the point that car collectors can enjoy the performance of their car - the intended purpose. Where exactly do they do this? Most of them - the vast majority - are certainly not renting track time. Nope - they get a couple of drinks in them, get a girl or a best friend in the passenger seat on a public road, and say "watch this." We all know that many, many more people are killed every year in car accidents, and while I have neither the time nor the inclination to look up the stats, I'd be willing to bet that most of those accidents are completely avoidable and caused by either drinking and driving, or doing something stupid behind the wheel. And that's why the gun/car analogy is absolutely perfect.

You want to restrict my rights to own and shoot an AR? Fine. Then this is my compromise. No more sports cars for anyone. Everyone must now drive a government approved Prius that is set to go no more than the speed limit on any given road it's on. We will use modern technology to develop these smart cars so that all roads and cars are chipped to ensure safe speed limits. It doesn't matter that you may be a good driver and can safely go faster than the posted limit - government knows what's best. Also - you will be required (per the suggestions of the past couple of weeks from the anti-gun crowd) to get licensed yearly, and that licensing process will include a background check, as well as a mental health review - just to make sure you aren't going to plow in to a group of fifth graders as they cross a street some day. Your car will also need to be equipped with a biometric sensor to make sure that only you are the person driving it, and of course, it will have a built in breathalyzer to determine whether or not you'd been drinking prior to starting it up. Families will be limited to one car per household, and your gas will be rationed so that you have just enough to get to work and back, and do one weekly shopping trip. If you want to use it more, you'll need to apply for a special permit so that you can use it for those trips the government deems unnecessary. Lastly, you'll need to make sure that if you do plan to drive it out of state, that you make sure they states you will be traveling in have reciprocity with yours and recognize your license. No sane person could possibly have a problem with this because it will save lives!
 
2013-01-08 09:36:52 AM  

way south: This sounds like a fantastic idea.
Let's have the secret service and all of the congressional security staff convert their guns for a trial program.

/there is no incentive to invent this because people who use guns don't want to be locked out of those guns.
/if you want to prevent kids from injuring themselves with a firearm, you lock it up.


The day my wife told me we were expecting one of my many instant decissions that day was "Welp time to invest in a real safe". A few days later and a 600lb monstrosity was in my basement. The kid will never get the combo.
 
2013-01-08 09:39:07 AM  
Didn't work out so well for this guy.
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-01-08 09:44:34 AM  
So, in other words, guns are still killing people.
 
2013-01-08 09:45:40 AM  

Epoch_Zero: So, in other words, guns are still killing people.


That's why mine are all locked up in safes. Little bastards keep trying to wonder off.
 
2013-01-08 09:49:04 AM  
I like the "one ring to shoot them all" solution.

There's a very good chance you use RFID or other radio technology to start your car.  It's very reliable.
 
Displayed 50 of 213 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report