Quote (Goomshill @ Oct 5 2017 04:11pm)

Nothing at all. The chips wouldn't be designed to be tamper proof, just tamper resilient at best. Ideally with a tracking system, if someone disables the chip, you can be (eventually) alerted to the chip going off the grid.
Such tracking would be far more useful at weeding out handguns off the street than a determined mass shooter

Quote (balrog66 @ Oct 5 2017 10:17am)

You're far better off etching/milling an ID into the gun, and registering those in a national database. Trade would require adjustment of the database.

NFC/RFID is a possibility but far too easy to tamper with. GPS is not applicable, the power draw is huge.

Quote (Goomshill @ Oct 5 2017 09:04am)

I've said the same thing for years: Black boxes tagging and/or trackers.
We have the technology to tag and track wildlife but when it comes to guns? It would drive the libertarian kooks wild as they call it the New World Order, but for 95% of reasonable average gun owners it would be a way to keep guns from getting stolen, create a trail when guns go off the grid, etc. Now the exact specifics and logistics are limited by technology and economic viability and would have to be hammered out, would it be mere data recording locally like black boxes, or chips with NFC tech, or 4G, or GPS? I'd like to imagine a world where police on a scene could instantly have a radar-style map of all nearby legal gun owners, where they could know anyone they stop with an untagged gun is carrying illegally, where they can know right away when guns are stolen or suspicious amounts of guns go off the grid in one area.
And if the anti-NWO nutters care so much, come the revolution they can just rip the chips off their guns all at once.

Quote (Goomshill @ Oct 5 2017 11:04am)

I've said the same thing for years: Black boxes tagging and/or trackers.
We have the technology to tag and track wildlife but when it comes to guns? It would drive the libertarian kooks wild as they call it the New World Order, but for 95% of reasonable average gun owners it would be a way to keep guns from getting stolen, create a trail when guns go off the grid, etc. Now the exact specifics and logistics are limited by technology and economic viability and would have to be hammered out, would it be mere data recording locally like black boxes, or chips with NFC tech, or 4G, or GPS? I'd like to imagine a world where police on a scene could instantly have a radar-style map of all nearby legal gun owners, where they could know anyone they stop with an untagged gun is carrying illegally, where they can know right away when guns are stolen or suspicious amounts of guns go off the grid in one area.
And if the anti-NWO nutters care so much, come the revolution they can just rip the chips off their guns all at once.

Quote (IceMage @ Oct 5 2017 10:25am)

How would that work with the guns already in circulation?

Quote (Magicman657 @ Oct 5 2017 12:11pm)

You don't actually know that the studies will necessarily tell us that more gun control will even be effective. That's presupposing a conclusion without having access to the data to support it.

Quote

“We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes,” Dr. Mark Rosenberg, who oversaw CDC gun research, told The Washington Post in 1994.“Now [smoking] is dirty, deadly and banned.”

Rosenberg’s statement coincided with a CDC study by Arthur Kellermann and Donald Reay, who argued guns in the home are 43 times more likely to be used to kill a family member than an intruder. The study had serious flaws; namely, it skewed the ratio by failing to consider defensive uses of firearms in which the intruder wasn’t killed. It has since been refuted by several studies, including one by Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck, indicating Americans use guns for self-defense 2.5 million times annually. However, the damage had been done—the “43 times” myth is perhaps gun-control advocates’ most commonly cited argument, and a lot of people still believe it to this day.