U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: do you support Biden's 'smart gun' proposal?
yes, let's move ahead with this James Bond-style tech that is already available 8 13.33%
let's hold off with any mandate, but maybe sometime in the future. 1 1.67%
no. 48 80.00%
other (please explain below). 3 5.00%
Voters: 60. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-28-2019, 07:15 PM
 
Location: USA
19,001 posts, read 9,259,440 times
Reputation: 14308

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91 View Post
No, Biden is promoting a technology that doesn't exist.

There is no firearm that can take DNA samples, process them, and then check for a match.

You are trusting the "expertise" of a man who once said, just shoot your shotgun through your front door if you think some bad guy might be out there. That is incredibly dangerous, and could be a serious crime in most situations.

No, seriously, Biden said that publicly.
Even if a gun could assess its owner, then what about a wife that needed to use if for self defense and couldn't? Also, criminals would be able to disable the technology and use them in crime. The push for smart guns is just to disarm the law abiding. What about all the guns already out there? Biden would ban and confiscate them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-28-2019, 07:34 PM
 
Location: Arizona, The American Southwest
51,959 posts, read 30,034,011 times
Reputation: 90968
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
It's simple. It checks your fingerprint and DNA as you hold the trigger. If there is not a match, the gun is electronically prevented from firing. Only the original owner of the gun can fire it. Presumably if the gun were legally sold, it could be reprogrammed for the new owner.
I wonder what Biden has been smoking lately? The concept only sounds simple and to actually make it a reality is a lot more complicated. He wants to depend on technology to extract a DNA sample from the person's trigger finger and scan the fingerprint before firing the weapon. Of course often times technology can disappoint you at the worst possible time, like when you want to use the weapon in a self-defense situation.

Finger print scanner won't work if the person using the weapon is wearing gloves, has a bandage on the trigger finger, or anything on the finger, like dirt, water, and food particles that will cause the scanner to not work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2019, 07:39 PM
 
Location: Arizona, The American Southwest
51,959 posts, read 30,034,011 times
Reputation: 90968
There should have been a 5th option on that list in the Poll - Don't Vote For A Democrat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2019, 07:52 PM
 
Location: Clyde Hill, WA
3,898 posts, read 693,547 times
Reputation: 1267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilot1 View Post
Even if a gun could assess its owner, then what about a wife that needed to use if for self defense and couldn't? Also, criminals would be able to disable the technology and use them in crime. The push for smart guns is just to disarm the law abiding. What about all the guns already out there? Biden would ban and confiscate them.
These are 1 in a million cases that should not deter us from adopting common sense technology. The wife could purchase her own gun, and have it tied to her DNA. It's like the guy who says, don't use a seat belt because you might not be able to unbuckle it in an emergency. You might drive into a river, have the belt malfunction, and die because you couldn't get out of your car.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2019, 08:54 PM
 
Location: United States
11,134 posts, read 5,163,148 times
Reputation: 5355
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
These are 1 in a million cases that should not deter us from adopting common sense technology. The wife could purchase her own gun, and have it tied to her DNA. It's like the guy who says, don't use a seat belt because you might not be able to unbuckle it in an emergency. You might drive into a river, have the belt malfunction, and die because you couldn't get out of your car.
You really don't get it do you?

There is no DNA gun, Joe completely made that up.

You may as well be arguing to set the phasers to stun.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 04:23 PM
 
Location: Clyde Hill, WA
3,898 posts, read 693,547 times
Reputation: 1267
Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91 View Post
You really don't get it do you?

There is no DNA gun, Joe completely made that up.

You may as well be arguing to set the phasers to stun.
OK, well, I did search around for info on how long it takes to analyze DNA. It turns out that there are different versions of DNA testing, but the quickest takes 1 to 2 days. I have to admit this would not be an acceptable delay for, say, a police officer facing a bank robber with an AK-47.

I have to assume that Biden had some inside info from experts that led him to say such a thing. We know that technology is always moving ahead. I will have to agree for the time being that this is not a practical solution to the problem of gun violence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 04:27 PM
 
Location: Upstate NY 🇺🇸
36,415 posts, read 10,802,339 times
Reputation: 34552
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
I'm not a big fan of Joe Biden, as I have often posted in the elections section. But I have to admit that of all the contenders, he has the best approach when it comes to gun violence prevention. He's always been excellent on guns. The 1994 assault weapon ban was actually his brainchild. But now, in contrast to the others, he's moving ahead with a fresh approach: mandate that all guns be "smart" guns.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...out-dna-match/

The smart gun is a gun that can be fired only by its owner. The gun WILL NOT shoot unless a fingerprint and DNA match is confirmed. Biden notes that we already have the technology.



This would virtually eliminate black-on-black gang violence, which conservatives so often bemoan. Most gang weapons are either stolen, or obtained via 'straw' purchase. The gang members would no longer be able to shoot such guns under Biden's plan. A key would be to require that police agencies, who have often been resistant in the past, to adopt the smart guns. Many cops are killed with their own guns; this would put an end to that. What do you think?

Again, I'm not surprised that those who know NOTHING about guns support this proposal.

As for the rest of us (I'm looking at you, gun enthusiasts), "smart" gun = battery.

Forget it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 04:57 PM
 
Location: Clyde Hill, WA
3,898 posts, read 693,547 times
Reputation: 1267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delahanty View Post
Again, I'm not surprised that those who know NOTHING about guns support this proposal.

As for the rest of us (I'm looking at you, gun enthusiasts), "smart" gun = battery.

Forget it.
Biden is a long time gun owner, and gun expert. It was Biden who originally crafted the 1994 assault weapon ban, even though Sen. Dianne Feinstein wound up with all the credit and accolades.

It's hard to know at this point whether Biden just got some bad info, or maybe as an expert, he knows something that the rest of us don't. We have to conclude that the jury is still out on this one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:00 PM
 
Location: Huntsville, AL
1,568 posts, read 734,951 times
Reputation: 1883
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
Biden is a long time gun owner, and gun expert. It was Biden who originally crafted the 1994 assault weapon ban, even though Sen. Dianne Feinstein wound up with all the credit and accolades.

It's hard to know at this point whether Biden just got some bad info, or maybe as an expert, he knows something that the rest of us don't. We have to conclude that the jury is still out on this one.
one know-nothing about the subject posting about another know-nothing
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:15 PM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
8,281 posts, read 2,855,021 times
Reputation: 4495
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
See the link in post #1. The technology is there. It's from a right wing source, no less.

It reads your DNA the second you put your finger on the trigger. If there's no match, the weapon will not fire.



If I get a smudge on the fingerprint scanner on my phone, it won't unlock.

How would you expect me to trust my life to the same type of technology?

Bad guy chases me outside my house, I run for the woods and slip in the mud......

Now I have mud in my fingers, maybe on the gun too.

Bad guys getting closer.....


Only his old Illegal "dumb" gun doesn't have a fingerprint or DNA scanner to worry about.......


Thanks but no thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top