[Wafflepudding]

The poll speaks for itself. This is not about automatics, high capacity magazines, pistol grips, concealed or open carry, or any other details. This is about core, fundamental opinion.

In this context, small arms are weapons that a single person may use, carry and operate and use bullets under 20mm caliber. This excludes rocket launchers, flamethrowers, grenade launchers, heavy machineguns and other typical military items.

[Wafflepudding]

The "firearms license" would be similar to the driver's license, with a few additional requirements. A mental health test, an aptitude test, a knowledge exam, a physical checkup (eyesight and anything else relevant), registry in a federal database with profiles and violations, etc. If anyone has any more ideas or requirements on a potential license I'm all ears.

The specific types of weapons and functions that should be banned is such a lenghty topic I think it should be discussed on its own thread (which I'll start when I think it through).

[-V-]

I took the liberty of adding an additional, more comprehensive option to make the poll more complete.

[Wafflepudding]

I think that's pretty much the same as the license one, except for the inclusion of weapon specific characteristics and removal of concealed carry.

My thought in mind when asking the question (even though it's missing the question mark, silly me), was who should carry, not what they should carry. I had thought about asking for some individual features, like semiautomatic, caliber ceilings, etc etc but then I came to the conclusion that the relevant features are too numerous, and I didn't want people avoiding one of the options because of details, like how 9x19 should be legal and .50AE shouldn't, etc.

Bottom line is I thought the question of "who" and the question of "what" are two different things.

Fingerprint ID doesn't work well under grimy or sweaty conditions. The training goes into the "aptitude" test of the license, with the difference that gun owners would pay it, not everyone. Same as a car, if you can't drive it, you'll get busted for being behind the wheel.

[-V-]

the problem was that I would only select option 3 and 4 if they were together but would not select either if they were not.

Then, without IDing technology ensuring who uses the gun, the testing, licensing, and training can be rendered irrelevant.

[Wafflepudding]

That was one of the reasons I made the poll multiple choice.

How is all of that irrelevant without ID technology?

[-V-]

That was one of the reasons I made the poll multiple choice.

that doesn't change the fact that the poll would not indicate what percentage of people would require both "a license" and "mental stability" because it is mixed with people who vote for one or the other.

How is all of that irrelevant without ID technology?
How relevant is all the licensing, testing, and training on one member of the family if literally anyone in the household can use the gun (kids included)?

[Jennifer_SFBA]

Ok, how about a retina scan gun site? Outside of hunting, target practice and tournament target shooting, a gun is for protection. If I had a gun for protection for which I was licensed, I might well want it for conceal carry protection.

[Wafflepudding]

I thought it would be common sense NOT to give a firearms license to someone with a history of mental stability issues. It would defeat the entire purpose of licensing, which is to keep weapons in responsible hands.

It is relevant because the member of the household who owns the gun is the one with responsability and accountability for proper use or misuse of the firearm. If someone in his or her household is using his/her firearm, that person should register the other persons who have regular access to them, that incluides their kids and life partner/spouse, and then they would have to go under the same process to test their fitness. If the person chooses to ignore the law, then we can arrest him/her.

I strongly disagree with built-in firearm fingerprint ID tech, for reliability issues. However if the fingerprinting was used in, say, gun safes, then I agree that it is useful. Even then combination boxes are preferable, because of the same reliability issues with the fingerprint ID system, but this is more of a personal preference.

Although that IS a valid point. Perhaps it would be good to add another safety factor: Along with the gun it should be mandatory to purchase a safety box to keep it in.

I don't know what your problem is with concealed carry, I haven't met someone with it until now. Concealed carry, in my opinion, increases safety for everyone because:

1.- It acts as a deterrent. I think if criminals don't know who's armed and who's not, they're more likely to not risk it altogether.

2.- Criminals would move over to a target they KNEW was disarmed, open carry would make that very easy.

3.- Open carry makes it easier for an attacker to plan ahead. Instead of facing you head on, he could try to take the gun away, and carrying the gun openly and unobstructed would make this easier. It would force him/her to make the first strike and compell a LETHAL first strike.

I think your problem with concealed carry is related to the trenchcoat factor. In that case gun searches would be more effective since you would have to search someone to know he/she was complying anyway. And if open carry was mandatory, really, how could you detain someone for carrying firearms in the open? wouldn't it actually make it EASIER for people like the columbine kids?

Jennifer: Isn't retinal scan technology expensive? I'm not really familiar with it.

[Jennifer_SFBA]

An electronic scan and electronic fire handgun would add $300.00 to $400.00 to the purchase price of a handgun equipped that way. Electronic scan devices may malfunction making a handgun so equipped, when it may be needed most, unusable. Electronic handguns are able to be jammed by authorities (2ND Amendment issue), but that hasn't phased legislators. See the 2003 article below:



New Jersey Smart Gun Legislation Enacted
Monday, December 23, 2002

TRENTON, N.J. — New Jersey on Monday became the first state to enact "smart gun" legislation that would eventually require new handguns to contain a mechanism that allows only their owners to fire them.

The law will not go into effect immediately because the technology is still under development and it could be years before it becomes a reality. But supporters hailed it as an important milestone in the campaign to reduce handgun deaths.

"This is common-sense legislation. There are safety regulations on cars, on toys. It's clearly time we have safety regulations on handguns," Gov. James E. McGreevey said at Monday's bill signing ceremony.

The New Jersey Institute of Technology is developing a smart gun prototype that would use sensors on the pistol grip to identify a user.

The owner would have his grip programmed at a gun shop or police range by practice-firing the weapon. A microchip in the weapon would remember the grip and determine in an instant whether the authorized user was holding the weapon. If not, the gun would not fire.

Under the New Jersey law, the technology will be required in all new handguns sold three years after the state attorney general determines a smart gun prototype is safe and commercially available. Weapons used by law enforcement officers would be exempt.

D.C. Gun Law Under Fire Got Some Extra Guns? Ashcroft Defends Proposal to Toss Gun Records Senate Unlikely to Follow Through With Pilot Gun Program Study: Guns No Safer When Locked Up Supporters say the law will help prevent accidental gun deaths and suicides.

The legislation "will soon cause the gun industry to forever change the way it designs and manufactures its products," said Bryan Miller, executive director of Ceasefire New Jersey.

But opponents argued that it makes little sense to legislate about a technology that does not yet exist and have raised questions about its reliability.

"No technology is foolproof," said Nancy Ross, spokeswoman for the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs. "Anyone who has a computer knows how many times it crashes."

NJIT researchers say a viable smart gun prototype can be developed in about two years with $4 million to $5 million more in funding.

"What we have is a demonstration concept," said Donald Sebastian of NJIT. "It is not yet a proven technology."

Gun manufacturer Smith & Wesson was awarded a $1.7 million federal grant last year to work on developing the technology and has spent $5 million on development since 1993.

The smart gun concept first started to receive attention in New Jersey when Jacob Locicero of Hawthorne, whose daughter Amy was murdered in 1993, approached Assemblywoman Loretta Weinberg, D-Bergen, about it six years ago.

Over the next several years, gun control groups, including Ceasefire New Jersey and the Million Mom March, made it their top legislative priority.

But the legislation was consistently blocked in the Republican-controlled Assembly, where former Assembly Speaker Jack Collins, R-Salem, called the bill "intellectually vacuous." This year, Collins' retirement and the transfer of political control of the lower house to the Democrats paved the way for passage.

"It's a beginning," Locicero said of Monday's bill signing. "I don't think that any law is ever the panacea that everybody thinks it's going to be, but it does provide an opportunity for tragedies not to happen."

Similar bills have been introduced in other states, including New York, Ohio, Tennessee, and in Congress.

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10828&page=7

[-V-]

i didn't even know the id technologies were that much of a reality. i could further debate about whether the reservations about applying the technologies are valid or significant enough to outweigh the benefits but i believe the bottom line is that it is a real solution that gives both sides of the issue what they desire most. Citizens get their firarms for protection and opponents and law enforcement get some measure of protection from them. And for the price of a basic tv? Just do it!

[Wafflepudding]

Electronic scan devices may malfunction making a handgun so equipped, when it may be needed most, unusable. Electronic handguns are able to be jammed by authorities (2ND Amendment issue), but that hasn't phased legislators.

Did you just miss this -V-?

If the authorities can jam firearms at will, the right to bear arms can be easily and quickly infringed. If the government can disarm you with the push of a button because of political motives, you just made the second ammendment a worthless token. Certainly the first thing the kind of opressive government the 2nd ammendment is designed to counter would do is disable all civilian firearms. Furthermore if the government can do it, other individuals, like hackers for example, can do it.

If you own a gun for self-defense but it doesn't work if you're nervous and your palms are sweaty or dirty, unless you're a cold-blooded killer with germophobia/OCD that's one damn useless gun. Fingerprint ID integrated with the firearm is UNRELIABLE ON FIELD CONDITIONS AND WILL LIKELY RENDER THE GUN UNUSABLE when needed most. That's the reason why policemen don't carry guns with ID tech.

If the ID tech could not be controlled remotely by anyone, and it was 100% or 95% reliable under tough conditions, like sweat, grime, a dented handle, etc. Then I would support this as well, but the technology is not at that stage now, and it might not be for a long time.

[-V-]

nope, didn't miss it. I indicated those issues are debatable but in the end it's called compromise. Compromises are always imperfect solutions. The same as immigration reform will be -- imperfect but better than the current system.

[Wafflepudding]

Gun owners are already compromising. The 2nd ammendment establishes the right to own weapons for the purpose of mantaining a militia. Not a professional army, not the national guard, not the state guard, a MILITIA.

That means directly under the 2nd ammendment, as an American citizen or LPR you have the right to have any weapons necesary for a militia, this includes machineguns, automatic rifles and submachineguns, RPG launchers, missile launchers, satchel charges, flamethrowers and any other infantry portable weapons incluiding those banned under the National Firearms Act of 1934, and BATFE classified destructive devices.

Why is this not enforced? the vast majority of gun owners agree it would be insane to trust mere civilians with Comp-B satchel charges, M2 .50 caliber machineguns and stinger missile launchers. By the same token most of them are okay with the current semi-automatic assault rifle situation (except for magazine capacity and accesories issues). That's compromise. The waiting periods, background checks, etc. are also sane and healthy compromises not contemplated by the law, and only the NRA lobbyists (funded by arms companies) and neocons chasing the gun owner votes oppose these measures.

There's a huge difference between imperfect solution and impractical solution. An artificially expensive self defense weapon prone to jamming, misfiring or dying on your hands if the handle or your hands are dirty, are not in direct contact with the sensors or if the mechanism malfunctions is not an imperfect solution, it's an impractical one. It also creates a gap where only middle class (and upper) America can practically afford legal firearms and minorities or blue collar workers (the persons who need them the most) can't.

Again, the 2nd ammendment was intended to give the citizens the option to defend themselves by force if necesary against threats from foreign or local opression. Giving the federal government the ability to castrate retaliatory abilities of the populace at will defeats the purpose of the ammendment and, at least in my humble and personal opinion, is not an acceptable compromise.

Furthermore, really, with FEMA establishing detention camps, corruption of the senate, the neoconservative propaganda machine blaring incessantly, and the neocon's blatant disregard for rule of law, the checks and balances system, civil liberties and freedom, do you trust them (or future maybe corporate administrations) enough to give them exclusive control of all firearms in the country?

Call me crazy but I do believe that the one thing standing between corporate government open opression (complete with forced labor reeducation camps for national dissidents and the such) and what we have now (which is "gentle fascism" for the lack of a better term), is the fear the elite have of the American public. Giving them a monopoly on the use of force would further their interests, not ours.

This is no doubt going to be seriously controversial, but I gotta say it anyways.

A peaceful resolution to conflicts should be always pursued and stressed. But in the face of brutal opression, we may be forced to defend liberty the way our forefathers did, as a militia, with our own arms. In that situation I would rather be armed with a 5.56 semiautomatic assault rifle than a "give peace a chance" or "impeach Bush" banner. As low as my chances would be against an M2 Bradley IFV with a rifle, my chances with a banner would be ridiculously lower.

[Jennifer_SFBA]

It appears the gun industry is going toward handgun grip pressure identification. Still, there would be an electronic component making the pressure determination UNLESS they can invent a mechanical handgrip pressure release mechanism.

[Wafflepudding]

http://www.pressureprofile.com/case-study-biometric.php?PHPSESSID=61658ba02c188eee348e4d3063 476e77

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/06/technology/circuits/06next.html?ex=1262754000&en=7ca4c9e3073fef12&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3920

Some sources I found on handgun pressure ID. It looks promising but what happens if you grip it the wrong way for some reason? an injury, using the other hand, etc.? Could the GPS related systems be used to track guns remotely?

By the way I've seen the metal storm weapons, that's one scary design, VERY high rate of fire.

[Jennifer_SFBA]

Cell phones have GPS in them that authorites are able to use to track a person. That was demonstrated with one of the Mount Hood hikers who died along with his two friends, unfortunately, this past winter. The hiker they found in the ice cave had used his cell phone, and authorites were able to triangulate his approximate position days after his last phone call. Terrorists in the Middle East who used their cell phones were able to be located within minutes and killed. Shooters with GPS in their guns would likwise be able to be located, maybe even pinpoint accuracy if authorites were equipped with the right GPS signal receiver systems.

The links you provided, wp, show "electronic" pressure detection. Wide area electronic jamming would easily nullify armed resistance. There will be an undergound market for traditional guns that don't have those electronic devices if authorities outlaw them, which I believe they will do. Some people will secretly build their own weapons. I knew a man who did just that in his house. I was invited to visit a few times and stopped going when I saw what he was into. He had lathes and tools all there, and he sold most of what he made to criminals at a good high price. I never saw him do it, but he said he did, and that was more than enough for me. Those guns he made and sold on the black market could not be traced. They were some of the best in the business too.

[Jumpin Jupiter]

What would happen to the MILLIONS of guns already out there in the hands of us citizens? People wont buy the new style of guns with this electonic gizmo for the simple fact "Big Brother" is over their shoulder. I dont see this a reality in the near future.

I just applied for my Conceal Carry Permit. It takes about 3-4 weeks to get it. I had one before and let it expire, my fault, but at the time felt I didnt need it either. Now I want to get back into shooting again, back in training.

[Jennifer_SFBA]

Hi, JJ. I'm glad your getting your permit back. Please see my post 10 above if you missed it. The government is just waiting on the technology. I imagine the government will make traditional handguns illegal and offer a buy-back program, something equivalent to the cost of the new "gizmos" as you say, $300.00 to $400.00 maybe for a good handgun.

[Wafflepudding]

Some people will secretly build their own weapons. I knew a man who did just that in his house. I was invited to visit a few times and stopped going when I saw what he was into. He had lathes and tools all there, and he sold most of what he made to criminals at a good high price.

I once saw online .PDF files for AK47 and M16A1 automatic 9mm recievers. If I remember correctly there were CNC files for use in computer controlled lathes as well.

I also know that some guns, like the Sten and M3 smgs, and the intratec Tec-9 are so simple and crude decently equipped bike repair shops can put them together.

Also I almost forgot. Good luck getting your CC permit. You let it expire? tsk tsk... :p