« When can and how should sex offenders be responsible for harming property values? | Main | As notable new face joins Eighth Circuit, will court do better with SCOTUS on sentencing issues? »

May 16, 2013

"Can ‘Smart Gun’ Technology Change the Stalemate Over Gun Violence?"

The title of this post is the headline of this new piece of reporting over at The Crime Report, which echoes some ideas that I have been raising on this blog for a number of years and that I have given extra attention to following the Newtown massacre.  Here are excerpts:

Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter issued a challenge to the gun industry yesterday, arguing that the application of “smart gun” technology, designed to program firearms so that only their owners can fire them, could not only save lives but neutralize the concerns of gun rights advocates.

"Why don't you at least try?” Nutter, who also serves as president of the U.S., Conference of Mayors, asked Joe Bartozzi, vice-president of the Connecticut-based firearms manufacturer O.F. Mossberg and Sons.  “Put one on the market and see what happens."

But Bartozzi, speaking at a roundtable for newsroom editors and columnists at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York, insisted it wouldn’t work.  Bartozzi said Mossberg had already surveyed focus groups about some of the cutting-edge technology already available, such as personalized rings that could be digitally programmed to recognize the legitimate owner of a weapon.

The response, he said, was overwhelmingly negative.  Customers who wanted guns to protect themselves and their families considered such technology too unreliable, he said. "What if I have to hand the gun to my spouse in an emergency?”  Bartozzi recalled a focus group member asking.

"It’s hard to understand that it represents more than just a piece of steel or plastic.  It represents personal security; it represents security when the police aren't there.  It represents even food when there's no supermarket. It represents self-defense.  It represents liberty and freedom for a lot of people," Bartozzi said....

Nutter and fellow panelist Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak argued that finding technological solutions to the challenge of gun access represented a common sense approach to a problem both sides agreed was a key factor in reducing the kind of gun violence that has afflicted many U.S. cities: the easy access to guns — particularly those sold or trafficked on the black market — to youth gang members and others who otherwise could not get them legally....

The smart gun technology issue, ranging from biometrics to trigger locks, also reflects a wider challenge by gun safety advocates to treat guns as consumer products subject to national safety standards similar to seatbelts in cars or childproof medicine bottles.

Bartozzi, a member of the board of governors of the National Shooting Sports Foundation — the leading industry lobby group — insisted guns are unlike other consumer products subject to federal rules because they are protected by the Second Amendment.  “I think sometimes we confuse what our privileges and rights. Driving a car is a privilege.  You have the right to own a gun,” he said.

Rybak and other speakers at yesterday’s “Under the Gun” roundtable charged that leading gun rights lobbies such as the National rifle Association (NRA) and the NSSF made it harder to reach any compromise because of their objections to both technological solutions and efforts to modernize even the current system for tracking guns used during crimes.

Based in part on prior discussions on this blog (some of which are linked below), I understand fully the reservations that many gun owners and gun-rights activists have about using technology to try to prevent mis-use of firearms.  Nevertheless, I think the development of device that might at least enable one to eletronically disable a stolen or lost firearm could perhaps generate interest in the marketplace, especially if the federal government created tax incentives to encourage use of this kind of gun-safety technology.

More broadly, I think the development of a safer "smart gun" could and should be spurred by some kind of "Project X" private funding scheme through a university or think tank (see example here), especially now that it seems the private marketplace or governments are making much progress on this front.  I suspect just a few millions dollars as a "smart gun" prize (only a fraction of what is being poured into gun policy lobby shops and PACs) could go a very long way to moving forward and ultimately saving innocent lives.

A few recent and older related posts:

May 16, 2013 at 03:45 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e2019102379ad1970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "Can ‘Smart Gun’ Technology Change the Stalemate Over Gun Violence?":

Comments

Not likely. No one has managed to make a durable enough system that anyone would want to trust their lives to it over a conventional pistol. Even police officers, the intended market, have been cold to the idea.

Posted by: MikeinCT | May 16, 2013 10:12:40 PM

The biggest school massacre remains one carried out by using bombs.

An irate Chinese father rammed his car onto the sidewalk killing many kids.

The control of violence must incapacitate the the person, not the tool.

Mayor Nutter is an ultra-racist incompetent who has made Philadelphia unlivable for productive white people, Christians, and anyone else who is not a freak. He has no credibility.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | May 18, 2013 1:45:05 AM

Doug:

There is one thing I would like to add:

When it is necessary to pull a gun, whether as a police officer, homeowner, shopkeeper or whatever, you expect the gun to work 100% of the time. This is one instance (maybe once in your life), where a 98-99.5% probability just doesn't cut it.

As a lawyer, are you familiar with Murphy's Law. It applies in this instance. As an engineer, I am sure that I could jerry-rig any smart gun to be used by anyone - you have a chamber, bullet and firing mechanism. I can override, bypass or modify any controlled firing mechanism, even if it is simple addition or substraction to the mechanism. I don't believe smart guns are anywhere in our future and are a waste of brain space.

Posted by: albeed | May 18, 2013 10:29:21 AM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB