ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Guns for Everybody!

Updated on May 8, 2012

I don't want to get into a long dissertation about whether guns should be legal or not. I am not on anyone's side in this argument. Instead I believe I have a solution to the argument that would please everyone.

Sadly, it is true that a large number of child deaths are caused by unattended or poorly hidden guns. It is in a kid's nature to look for that gun. Why? Because TV tells them that guns are cool. Perhaps dad having a gun tells them its cool as well. Either way guns are a part of life. Before there were guns there were other weapons that served the same role. Humankind has had to defend themselves from other human beings and wild animals since they first started to climb down from their trees.

So, in understanding the necessity of weapons in our society for hunting, (I have too many grocery stores and not enough wild animals where I live for that) and self defense. In this day and age where desperate men are being forced into desperate situations we need to look out for our kin and kind more than ever.

I believe that if a criminal knew for a fact that a homeowner possessed a firearm they would be a lot less likely to attempt a crime against them. So, what if every home owner had a hand gun? Today we have the sort of technology that could make it safe. How?

Fingerprinting is the answer. Make a gun operable only by the person who downloaded their fingerprints to the weapon. In addition make it a standard that each and every home have a gun. Each and every home, not just homeowners. Renters could simply download their prints.

The greatest benefit to this is the fact that your no good kid can find the gun. He can play with the gun, but he can never shoot the gun. His prints will not activate the gun.

This may be costly and would require a lot of cooperation from gun owners. Stubborn folks that they are it may be difficult to convince them to add some tech to their weapons. I understand as a collector of certain fun things how it would ruin a gun's worth if it were augmented in such a manner.

So then maybe there is this compromise. What if each handgun that was tied to each house only operated within the house? Using a small sensor on the gun and sensors in every door and window of the home the weapon would sense when it has left the building and instantly become inoperable. Thieves could steal a gun but they could not operate it. By placing the sensor in a sensitive area on the gun and causing the gun to become inoperable when that sensor is tampered with guns in the hands of criminals would become a thing of the past.

I know I may be speaking from the seat of my pants but if we as a nation really care about all of the criminal activities carried out by guns stolen from legal gun owners then something like this must be done. If nothing is done then nothing will change, as I have said before, revolution has proven that only through action, not words, can there be worthwhile change.

UPDATE - 04/03/2012

In retrospect, considering all that the mighty Jack Burton commented below, I have to consider now what I did not want to. Perhaps it would be best to eliminate handguns entirely. Since any other method of proper control and safety are too cost heavy then the only option seems to be tighter gun laws. I hate this route. I hate laws in general. If people could be trusted to act civil we wouldn't need laws but it just so happens that this country is chock full of no good third worlders who do not have the first clue on how to act civil. Nor do they understand how good they have it here in America and thus do not appreciate where they live.

Who are the third worlders? You know, those who cling on to the idea that the grass is greener somewhere else but never even leave the town they live in. Those who come from other countries and steal jobs but send the bulk of their earnings back home, to some backwater shithole of a country. Those employers who hire these people should be shot for lack of patriotism. I don't think they should be shot with a handgun since it might take more than one bullet and thus become less cost effective, maybe a shotgun would do?



Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Larry Fields profile image

      Larry Fields 5 years ago from Northern California

      Voted up. Kennesaw, Georgia already 'requires' that each household must have a firearm in working order. And their crime rate is well below the national average. Kennesaw's reputation provides an incentive for home invasion robbers to move on to softer targets in neighboring communities.

      Caveat: The law is not enforced. And the city ordinance does not have the high-tech provisions that you advocate.

      My understanding is that there are already secure gun safes. Without knowing the combination, your child can't get in. What about burglars?

      The bad guys want to get in and out fast. Cash, jewelry, electronics, and yes guns if they can be found. A typical burglary team doesn't have the patience to lug a 500-pound safe into the back of their pick-up truck, especially when the safe has been bolted down to the floor.

    • Barnsey profile image
      Author

      Barnsey 5 years ago from Happy Hunting Grounds

      Thank you, Larry! I didn't know Georgia had already thought of having a gun in every home. You give my idea some ground to stand on.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 5 years ago from The Midwest

      380,000,000 guns in the United States at best guess from about two years ago. About 200,000 incidents occur each year of bad guys using guns against innocents. Now, many of them are the same bad guy over and over but we'll ignore that part.

      This means that well over 99 percent of all guns are never, ever used by a badguy to do bad things. Yet Barnsey wants to subject the owners of those 99.8 percent of guns to spending untold billions of dollars on unprovable, unworkable technology because about one tenth of one percent of guns are misused.

      Perhaps this needs to be rethought with a little more concern for the reality that 370,000,000 guns hurt no one last year.

    • Barnsey profile image
      Author

      Barnsey 5 years ago from Happy Hunting Grounds

      Thank you for the statistics, friend, but nowhere do I see your stats on how many innocent children are shot and killed because of carelessly placed guns in the home. Or how many children take their parent's guns and go on a shooting spree, or do you not watch the news? Are you willing to accept comparitively few incidents, although still high in number, in order to retain your prescious handhold on a cowards weapon?

    • Trish_M profile image

      Tricia Mason 5 years ago from The English Midlands

      Hi :)

      It's interesting to me, as an Englishwoman, to read this, and other related articles, by American writers.

      It sounds as if guns are simply the norm in the USA. Yet, over here, they are not.

      Yes, some people have guns to go hunting, and there are criminals, who use guns illegally, but, for the most part, guns are not a regular part of our lives.

      So, yes, an article like this is really interesting.

    • Barnsey profile image
      Author

      Barnsey 5 years ago from Happy Hunting Grounds

      Honestly it depends where in the USA you live for that statement to be entirely true, I don't want to paint the whole country with the same brush. Thanks for reading!

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 5 years ago from The Midwest

      Barnsey sez: Thank you for the statistics, friend, but nowhere do I see your stats on how many innocent children are shot and killed because of carelessly placed guns in the home.

      Jack replies: About 50 children a year are accidently shot with firearms. You can find that statistic, and many more documented ones at www.gunfacts.info in their free book. While each death is a tragedy, it needs to be put into perspective.

      Many more children die from accidental drowning each year. There are few if little people who want to ban water, or post Hubpages denouncing the concept of allowing children to be around water. If “innocent children” were the real concern, there are many other accident death-causing objects than firearms that should be of much greater cause to post about. But some people want to focus solely on firearms in spite of the fact that they are waaaaay down on that list of accidental deaths. Any why is that?

      And that still leaves 379,999,950 guns that didn’t shoot a child.

      And BTW… I have taught dozens of children to be safe around guns. What to do… and specifically what not to do. Just as a comparison, I wonder how many children have you taught the four rules of gun safety, or how to recognize when a gun is cocked and ready to fire, or the specific harm a firearm can do to human flesh as opposed to the Hollywood or cartoon version of gunshots.

      Barnsey sez: Or how many children take their parent's guns and go on a shooting spree, or do you not watch the news?

      Jack replies: Yes, there are children, who for whatever reason, seek to do harm to others. It may be just evil in their hearts, or the medication they are on, or perhaps a flawed brain pattern. There are no common elements at this point. Are you aware that the Columbine shooters placed bombs around the school that would have done significantly more harm than the firearms they used. The bombs were made using normal, everyday material, and fortunately, did not go off.

      The two biggest mass murders in the US prior to 9/11 used a gallon can of gas in one and garden fertilizer in the other. The murderers of 9/11 used box cutters, not guns. If people seek to do harm, even in mass quantities, they will find a way that is faster, cheaper and much more effective than firearms.

      Barsey sez: Are you willing to accept comparitively few incidents, although still high in number, in order to retain your prescious handhold on a cowards weapon?

      Jack replies: According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism report of

      December 2000

      http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/economic-20...

      “…costs of alcohol abuse grew from $148 billion in 1992 to $185 billion in 1998, approximately a 25 percent increase” Who knows where it is in 2012, but with certainty it has not gone down.

      We can perhaps put a dollar figure on alcohol abuse, but that doesn’t even begin to put a face on the shattered lives, the beaten wives, the children who grow up under intolerable conditions, the jobs lost, the companies gone bankrupt, and the hazards it creates for everyone else who are innocent.

      The question is, are you willing to accept hundreds of thousands of incidents in order to retain your precious handhold on a substance whose sole purpose is to get people drunk and create chaos? Are you willing to stand with those courageous people who demand that all alcohol either be strictly controlled or banned all together?

      Anyone who is not an alcoholic would have no objection to the following laws...

      1) Every person desiring to purchase alcohol must have a buyers card, updated yearly, and signed by their physician that they are not addicted to alcohol.

      2) Only two beers can be purchased a day. If you give a 30 day notice to the local police dept of a planned party, then up to 20 beers can be purchased. The police have the right to come and check the home the day of the party to ensure no cheating on the alcohol consumption.

      3) Whiskey and other hard liquor is available only to those 30 years and older to prevent

      early onset alcoholism.

      4) If you're caught violating any of these rules then you are required to take an alcohol inhibitor such as Acamprosate or Disulfiram. Weekly mandatory blood tests will confirm the medicine intake.

      Seeing the out of control harm that alcohol is doing to our country only a fool would object to these provisions.

      And here are some few headlines from around the country over the past few weeks… it’s good to know that each and every one of these people are labeled “cowards” in your mind.

      • Man shot while trying to break into house, police say (LA)

      • Resident fires at 2 suspected of break-in (PA)

      • Store clerk's gunshot fatal to teen boy (MI)

      • Homeowner: Illegal entry was more than that (MI)

      • Drive-Through Shooting Leaves Would Be Robber Dead (CA)

      • Mobile home intruder met by gunfire (AK)

      • Robbery victim shoots attacker (South Africa)

      • Gun shop owner apprehends suspect during armed robbery (TX)

      • Prowler prompts man to fire gun (IN)

      • Fatal double shooting in Jacksonville ruled justifiable homicide (FL)

      • Jeweler gets best of robbers in gun fight (LA)

      • Gunman Shot By Store Clerks During Acampo Robbery (CA)

      • Robbery suspect killed at diner (TN)

      • Man kills burglar, police say (LA)

      • Police: Armed burglar killed by homeowner (TX)

      • Early Morning [Self-Defense] Shooting (FL)

      • Homeowner, 79, Not Charged For Shooting Intruders (KY)

      • Police say man was killed in self-defense (WI)

      • Intruder Shot To Death After Breaking Into Home (FL)

      • 79-Year-Old Shoots Two Intruders, Police Say (KY)

      • Merchant ends holdup, shoots robber (IN)

      • Suspect shot in head by liquor store owner (CO)

      • District attorney's office rules shooting was self-defense (NC)

      • Police: Burlington store owner shoots would-be burglar (NC)

      • Convenience store owner fatally shoots would-be armed robber (TX)

      • Police: Store Clerk Shoots Back At Robbers (NC)

      • Alleged Burglar Shot in East Montgomery (AL)

      • Teen Intruder Shot By Neighbor, Police Say (MS)

      • Man killed at Brooklyn Center apartment (MN)

      • Mother Fights Back Against Intruder (TX)

      • 911 calls reveal chaos in defensive shooting (CO)

      • Grand jury no-bills woman in shooting (TX)

      • 2 try to rob jewelry store; 1 suspect shot, still at large (AZ)

      • Jewelry Store Owner Grabs Gun, Chases Robber (MI)

      • Police: Homeowner shoots, kills intruder (TN)

      • One Man Dead, Another Arrested After Attempted Robbery (NC)

      • No indictment in fatal [self-defense] shooting (KY)

      But of particular note is this young widow and mother of a newborn who cowardly used her handgun to shoot two men breaking into her home with hunting knives when it took 911 over 20 minutes to get police out to help here…

      http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57352784-50...

    • Barnsey profile image
      Author

      Barnsey 5 years ago from Happy Hunting Grounds

      Hey, now, I am all for shooting someone in self defense, but if cowards weren't wandering the streets threatening innocent civilians it would not be needed at all. Just ask the lady from England. They don't need guns for some reason. Why is that?

      I am all for banning alchohol since indeed it causes way more damage than our nation would like to admit. Why? Because the gov. makes so much money off of it through taxes. Its all about the dollar bill.

      Certainly I would never infer that a policeman or military man is a coward. Bearing firearms is their job and they are supposed to be trusted at it. I won't mention all the times these particular individuals shoot innocent people either because of mental instability or drunken binges but those are acceptable incidents when you count them against the greater good. OK.

      Tell the 100 parents that the accident that killed their child, shooting themselves with a casually placed and loaded gun, is an acceptable loss. Go ahead. Tell them to their faces, I dare you.

      The poiint I was trying to make was not banning firearms but arming every citizen in a safe and foolproof manner. I simply had an idea I thought I would throw out there, sorry if I threatened your redneck way of life.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 5 years ago from The Midwest

      Barnsey sez: Hey, now, I am all for shooting someone in self defense, but if cowards weren't wandering the streets threatening innocent civilians it would not be needed at all.

      Jack replies: You’ve already equated “cowards” with “gun owners” so let’s expand upon that thought.

      For the record, do you believe that before the invention of firearms that no larger person, stronger person, knife or sword wielder, or a mob of people never, ever once harmed a weaker person or a woman based upon their greater strength and opportunity. If every gun was removed from the planet today, do you believe that it would be a paradise where the stronger always, in every case, protected the weaker instead of preying upon the weaker?

      Barnsey sez: Just ask the lady from England. They don't need guns for some reason. Why is that?

      Jack replies: Perhaps you ought to get back to me after you read this…

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-154307/Gun...

      http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/01/gun-controls...

      and

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-ord...

      Barnsey sez: I am all for banning alchohol since indeed it causes way more damage than our nation would like to admit. Why? Because the gov. makes so much money off of it through taxes. Its all about the dollar bill.

      Jack replies: Well, we tried that back in the 1920s and it lead to the greatest crime wave and social upheaval in our country’s history… one that we are still paying a price for. But our forefathers soon realized something that they momentarily forgot… and you seemed to not have learned.

      Freedom is not determined by those who misuse it. If the weakest, the least moral, the least ethical, the least able to control themselves are the ones we look to for setting the standard of freedom that we all enjoy… then we have no real freedom at all.

      You look at the criminal and want to build a jail around all the innocents and deny them rights in order to protect them from the bad guy outside. I look at all the innocents and rejoice in their rights… and deplore the bad guys and know that THEY are the ones to be punished.

      Barnsey sez: Certainly I would never infer that a policeman or military man is a coward. Bearing firearms is their job and they are supposed to be trusted at it. I won't mention all the times these particular individuals shoot innocent people either because of mental instability or drunken binges but those are acceptable incidents when you count them against the greater good. OK.

      Jack replies: Tell the families that the policeman that killed their innocent child with a careless or negligent shooting that you consider them acceptable incidents when you count them against the greater good. Go ahead. Tell them to their faces, I dare you.

      Barnsey: Tell the 100 parents that the accident that killed their child, shooting themselves with a casually placed and loaded gun, is an acceptable loss. Go ahead. Tell them to their faces, I dare you.

      Jack: And I suppose you also demand that every social drinker you know who has one or two cocktails a month must tell the parents of a child run over by a drunken driver that their child is an acceptable loss? Go ahead and demand this of your friends and family. I dare you.

      Barnsey wrote: The poiint I was trying to make was not banning firearms but arming every citizen in a safe and foolproof manner.

      Jack replies: As pointed out… 99.99 percent of firearms are kept in a safe manner. Spending a couple of billion dollars on an unworkable, unsustainable plan to improve this is not a very good “point.” Especially since the number of firearm accidents has been already steadily decreasing for the past several decades.

      http://www.saami.org/specifications_and_informatio...

      Perhaps the firearm owners know a great deal more about this subject than you do. As noted… we are the ones who are actually teaching firearm safety instead of merely posting about the need for it.

      Barnsey sez: I simply had an idea I thought I would throw out there, sorry if I threatened your redneck way of life.

      Jack replies: And this, Dear Readers, is the best that Barnsey can do, eh.

    • Barnsey profile image
      Author

      Barnsey 5 years ago from Happy Hunting Grounds

      God Bless America!

    • ziyena profile image

      ziyena 5 years ago from Southern Colorado

      I'm a believer.

      Z

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      Your premise is flawed. Less than 50 children a year (ages 0 - 12) are killed accidently by firearms. While that is still 50 too many, it's an amazingly small number, and many of those are caused by live-in criminal boyfriends who leave their illegal guns around.

      There is no crisis.

    • Barnsey profile image
      Author

      Barnsey 5 years ago from Happy Hunting Grounds

      Again, you would not say that if it were one of your children. It is so easy for the callous to look to stats and ignore the humanity. THis is the reason this country has gone down the tubes. Lack of sympathy for our neighbors. Thanks for pointing that out.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "It is so easy for the callous to look to stats and ignore the humanity."

      And it's so easy for the dishonest to ignore the facts if it proves them wrong. You said:

      "Sadly, it is true that a large number of child deaths are caused by unattended or poorly hidden guns."

      Less than 50 out of a population of 100,000,000 is just 00.00005%, and while I already said that is 50 too many, it hardly a 'large number"!

      This is a baseless emotional appeal.

    • Barnsey profile image
      Author

      Barnsey 5 years ago from Happy Hunting Grounds

      You're right. Guns are blameless. People are not however, therefore maybe an intelligence test for those wishing to buy a handgun would suffice? Something that would prove that they are smart enough to be responsible with the weapon and wise enough to know when and where it would be appropriately used and carried. Gun shows in the south are simply too happy to hand weapons to any jackwipe that walks up to their stand. Idiots in the city get a hold of these weapons and shoot many, many more children than 50 a year. Would you not agree with that? Are you denying the simple fact that there are thousands of guns floating around causing havoc in society each and every minute of every day? Does that lone stat you keep clinging to explain or downplay that sufficiently for your conscience?

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      Unfortunately, no law will either prevent criminals from obtaining guns or using them in crimes. If such laws worked, existing laws would have stopped gun crimes long ago.

      Gun accidents are actually quite rare with less than a thousand US deaths a year. Out of over 100,000,000+ lawful gun owners, we are remarkably safe.

      The majority of gun deaths are suicides, and there's no reason to believe that the majority of suicides would not simply find another way. Of the homicides, almost 70% are committed by inner city drug gangs who buy their guns from illegal street dealers. All gun show dealers must perform an FBI background check on buyers, and that includes where you live. Very few criminals buy guns from dealers or from private owners. They buy from street dealers.

      I've been involved in this for years, and I know what I'm talking about.

    • Barnsey profile image
      Author

      Barnsey 5 years ago from Happy Hunting Grounds

      Where I live illegal gun owners buy, as you said, their guns from street dealers. The street dealers acquire the guns from the trade shows, this is called a straw purchase. Capitalism is no excuse, the method is flawed, not mention the guns stolen from gun owners who think that because they own a gun they are immune to crime. They are not, in fact because they own a gun they are a target. Look, I went through all this already, I gave up once and I give up again. Because of the constant back and forth that goes on between the two sides of the argument, see this hub, the only real option is the elimination of hand guns entirely. No more hand guns, period. Don't need them for hunting and once they are all gone you won't need them for protection. This is not the wild west, time to grow a pair and use the fists god gave ya.

      I understand hand guns are a hobby but get a life. There are a hundred less deadly things you can do as a hobby that are just as amusing. Go do them.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "...time to grow a pair and use the fists god gave ya."

      Small men and women use legal handguns all the time to defend theselves against big, armed villains. You would leave them helpless?

      The UK essentially banned all guns, and the gun crime rate soared. UK criminals now own the only guns.

      Brilliant.

      I understand your purpose, but all you would do is disarm those who were never a threat anyway! The criminals would still be armed. It is already illegal for criminals to possess arms. Making it even more illegal is obviously silly and would not work.

    • Barnsey profile image
      Author

      Barnsey 5 years ago from Happy Hunting Grounds

      Small men and women use guns to defend themselves against big armed villains. So, this statistic is not ok for you to ignore? So, let me get this straight. You say that 50 kids a year accidentally shooting themselves, not a big deal. Yet on the other hand you want to make sure that on the relatively few instances when someone actually has an occasion to use their gun in self defense they are able to do so. Wow, wear that on you're sleeve, America! You're delusional ideal, freedom to wield a concealed firearm, is more important than children's lives! Love it. I do believe that is both sides of you're mouth those words are coming out of, big daddy.

      It has to start somewhere. Once the regular gun owner no longer can have his gun stolen, once the gun collector can no longer sell his hand gun to anyone, once there is nowhere left for the criminals to get them they will eventually disappear. Sure, there will be some silly stats that point out the few instances where someone was left out in the cold but hey, those would be so tiny in comparison, as you say, we could ignore that for the greater good. Right? Glad we finally agree.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      When your opponent stoops to putting words in your mouth, you know you have won the argument.

    • Barnsey profile image
      Author

      Barnsey 5 years ago from Happy Hunting Grounds

      Not an argument, a discussion. Anyone can read our comments and decide for themselves where you are coming from. I merely stated my opinion. Besides, I already failed in this discussion with the great Jack Burton! Conservatives will never give any ground, I have learned this, regardless of logic or altruism. Rather than helping to find solutions, they argue and worry about being right. Get over yourself.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "Besides, I already failed in this discussion with the great Jack Burton!"

      With whom I agree.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      Barnsey,

      Suppose you witness a man with a knife entering your daughter's bedroom in the middle of the night. In the hallway is a baseball bat. Do you believe you have a natural right to arm yourself with that baseball bat and attack the intruder?

      In the same way, I believe I have a natural right to arm myself with the most efficient weapon of all...a firearm.

    • Barnsey profile image
      Author

      Barnsey 5 years ago from Happy Hunting Grounds

      The honest truth is I do not disagree with you at all. The purpose of my hub was to try to find a solution for those folks who do actually actively oppose hand guns. I see both sides of the argument but as someone who has experienced a load of turmoil and never used a gun I felt I should fall on the opposite side of the argument. I have been held at gunpoint twice by angry, violent men who were not brave enough to confront me without a gun. Obviously I am going to hold those men and those like them in contempt. Obviously the every day citizen needs a more certain protection than calling 911 or prayer. I get that, my only hope here was to find a way to solve the problems that come with owning a gun.

      When I went to the extreme of banning guns it was only in response to what was a tidal wave of extremist naysaying.

      I apologize completely and thoroughly for misleading you and Jack. To be even more honest every day the news from the philadelphia area is so depressing and disstresing. Each day there are shootings both intentional and accidental. West Philadelphia is like a warzone and I can assure you the good people who live in those neighborhoods would either like to be allowed to have a handgun in their home or would like them banned altogether. One or the other. As I said earlier these are the people who are buying guns off the street from people who go down south and buy them legally at trade shows. There needs to be acknowledgement of this fact and there needs to some accountability by those responsible. The standard practice has failed.

      Finally, Jack I was trying to make a point, If I failed in your eyes again I apologize, I have chosen ont to publish your last comment not only because it was way out of line but i know you were simply reacting to my inflammatory comments and you are better than that. God Bless you both and please be at peace.

    Click to Rate This Article