Using Technology To Make Guns Safer 1013
Hugh Pickens writes writes "Farhad Manjoo writes that there are a number of technologies that gunmakers could add to their products that might prevent hundreds or thousands of deaths per year. One area of active research is known as the 'smart gun' — a trigger-identification system that prevents a gun from being fired by anyone other than its authorized user. Researchers at New Jersey Institute of Technology created a working prototype of a gun that determines whether or not to fire based on a user's 'grip pattern.' Gunmakers have been slow to add other safety technologies as well, including indicators that show whether a gun is loaded, and 'magazine safeties' that prevent weapons from being fired when their ammunition magazine is removed (PDF). That could save 400 lives a year. So why aren't gunmakers making safer guns? Because guns are exempt from most of the consumer safety laws that have improved the rest of American life. The Consumer Product Safety Commission, charged with looking over thousands of different kinds of products, is explicitly prohibited from regulating firearms. In 2005, Congress passed and President George W. Bush signed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which immunizes gun makers against lawsuits resulting from 'misuse' of the products. If they can't be sued and can't be regulated, gunmakers have no incentive to make smarter guns." Note that gun safety features (not universally loved) like loaded-chamber indicators, grip safeties, and magazine disconnects are constantly evolving and have been available in some form and in various combinations for many decades, so gun makers seem to have some incentive to produce and improve them, and that the PLCAA does not prevent consumer safety lawsuits, but does shield gun makers from suits based on criminal conduct by gun buyers (though imperfectly).
Dear "gun control" advocates (Score:3, Funny)
http://imgur.com/Jinky
Which one of these two guns should be banned and why?
what the hell is going on here? (Score:5, Funny)
The editor, timothy, corrected the egregious errors in the submission while letting the parts worthy of commentary and debate stand. He did what an editor is supposed to do! Maybe 12/22 will be the end of the world after all, and this is one of the first signs of the imminent apocalypse!
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Missing the point. (Score:4, Funny)
Which part of the 1911 should I remove that I will be able to reinstall quicker than unlocking the box it's in [firearmsdesigner.com]? Inquiring minds want to know.
At least when I was in the military, we had to drill on disassembling the gun completely and then reassembling it both as fast as possible, and then again the same drill in total darkness. Just inserting the bolt and loading it would take three seconds at most.
Until we knew the gun, we were considered a danger, not an asset.
If a gun is constructed in a way that it's not possible to render it harmless or bring it back to operational quickly, it is a flaw with the gun, and it would be better removed from the market and replaced with better options. This is 2012, not 1911.
Re:Science Fiction examples of weapons-id-systems (Score:1, Funny)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MEzCtyRWP8