THE CRUX OF IT: Not implementing smart gun technology equals willful complicity

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why would anyone want to keep the act of killing as unintelligent as possible?

My natural cynicism provides an obvious answer to that question but let’s take a moment to deal in facts.

According to the Geneva-based Small Arms Survey – the leading source of international public information about firearms – the U.S. has the best-armed civilian population in the world, with an estimated 270 million total guns. That’s an average of 89 firearms for every 100 residents. Roughly forty percent of adults report that they live in a household with a gun in it.

It is reported that there are roughly 32,000 gun deaths in the U.S. every year. It is absolutely impossible to go a day without hearing or seeing something involving a gun death. It is also true that both the right and the left rail continually (but for different purposes) about guns and or gun control.

With all of that being said, why isn’t it a common goal of all sides to decrease those deaths?

I suppose it all depends on who is calling for that decrease and who’s doing the dying and killing.

There is an initiative by the Obama Administration to push law enforcement agencies to develop standards for the next generation of smart guns. Those guns would only operate using fingerprint readers and RFID  chips which would prevent firing by any unauthorized user.

Hence the word “SMART”…

Success in this endeavor would improve this country’s safety, lower healthcare expenses, and also prevent unintended deaths by unintended operators in households with guns.

This may come as a surprise but gun groups do not support this effort and prominent politicians like Chris Christie have vetoed legislation with these efforts at their heart.

Let’s now deal in some degree of speculation…

Researchers from Harvard and Northeastern University found that the number of police homicides, also known as “legal intervention deaths,” recorded by the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHRs) under-counted the number of police-caused deaths by more than half in 16 states from 2005 to 2012. This is the first point of curiosity.

If you look up stats, most gun owners are, in fact, conservative, southern, republican, men and women over 50. The aspect of speculation comes in my belief that those people feel that  the majority of people dying by gun violence are members of vastly different demographics from themselves and therefore have no interest in intervening actions. This is the second point of curiosity.

If smart guns would possibly implicate more officers of the law, and if smart guns would lower the amount of crime, which is most often exclusively focused within racial spheres (in other words- “Let them kill each other like animals.” being the thought process), is it surprising that the majority of owners and most common demographic of gun advocates are against any measure to implement those said smart guns?

NO!