Senate Panel Votes for Ban on Assault Weapons

[thucythucy]

94. Actually, some sort of safety feature,

or combination thereof, WOULD be a good idea. I would think that gun manufacturers and enthusiasts would be the proper folk to come up with these, since us non-technical folks obviously don't have the expertise, as you keep telling us.

One idea I've heard would be to mandate a safety lock that permits only the actual gun owner to fire the weapon. Just like you need a PIN number to use your ATM card, there should be some equivalent test for a gun user, a punch code or PIN number. This would prevent stolen weapons from being used in crimes, it might also have prevented Lanza from using his mother's guns, assuming of course she wouldn't have shared the number with him. Surely, with all the money spent developing and refining and marketing guns, someone should be able to come up with such a system that is not only relatively foolproof--in terms of a criminal not being able to circumvent it-- but convenient for the actual owner.

This wouldn't prevent the actual owners from going on a killing spree, but my opinion is that even marginal improvements justify the effort, when we're talking about the difference between lives being saved and lost.

For a more science fiction take-with the development of Wifi and cableless home internet access, I wonder if we couldn't develop a system where weapons are able to fire within the range of a particular router, but would lose that ability elsewhere. So a homeowner would be able to use their weapon for defense, but presumably someone breaking into the home with a weapon wouldn't be able to fire because their weapon isn't cued to the correct router. You could incorporate this into a carry-licensing system: that is, a homeowner would need to pass through a less onerous process to get a weapon cued to their home-based router, than someone who wanted a carry permit which would allow a person to carry a gun that fires independent of any router code.

Like I said, with all the heavy money spent on gun design and marketing, not to mention lobbying, you would think gun manufacturers would be able to come up with a system that works. Of course, when safety is concerned, manufacturers of any product generally have to be pushed into it by public and government pressure. Auto manufacturers for instance historically opposed seat belts, to cite just one example. So the gun industry will probably have to be prodded as well.

As for the "learning curve" on the Bushmaster, other folks who oppose the assault weapon ban have praised it for its ease of use, especially for people who might not be terrifically familiar with weapons, younger people, smaller people, etc. But maybe that's just manufacturer marketing PR, meant to sell more weapons

And regarding Ginsberg, NAMBLA, Burroughs and the rest, we are basically agreed. It still seems passing strange to me that anyone would cite Burroughs' opinion on gun control, but it sounds like GeoJohnson wasn't aware of the history, and everyone is entitled to a few (nonlethal) screw ups now and again.

Best wishes.