5 ms·

Gun Control on the Blockchain?

12 points by MichaelAO 11y ago

drivingmenuts 11y ago
That solution seems to assume that the prospective gun buyer is honest when creating their profile, without any way to check against third-party information sources.
- jMyles 11y ago
  The proposal is that, in the event of a discharge causing injury, they can reveal their persona in order to prove that they were were qualified to own the weapon in question. If, on the other hand, it turns out that they provided misleading information for this purpose, they lose the protections of the 2nd amendment for the purposes of the incident.
  - LordKano 11y ago
    This may work when dealing with the incompetent but not the malicious.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - drivingmenuts 11y ago
    It doesn't even really solve the problem, because a victim is still injured or dead somewhere. Biometric locks were a better idea that got shot down by the NRA. At least that one had the potential to reduce gun deaths, certainly far better than the current solution of "get everyone moar guns".
LordKano 11y ago
A big problem that comes with all of these novel proposals is that for me, the average American gun owner, they're not better than the current system. What incentive do I have to change from the status quo if the change won't result in a net benefit for me?
- Retric 11y ago
  I think this idea is ridiculous. However, ... Owning a gun does not reduce the odds that you or someone you care about being being killed by a gun. So, you benefit just as much from gun control as everyone else. PS: One option is to simply jack up the cost of each bullet. At 100$ a pop that still useful for hunting or self defense so no constitutional issues, but your not going to see teens firing thousands of rounds. ;)
  - jMyles 11y ago
    This proposal started as a Chris Rock joke and has become mistaken for a serious part of discourse about guns. Any time someone brings it up, it's easy to know that that person hasn't taken the time to gain even a cursory understanding of how firearms actually work in human society. So, let me state the obvious and dispel this notion: The last thing we want are unpracticed hands ahold of guns in our communities. Basic competence with a handgun takes many thousands of rounds of practice.
    - Retric 11y ago
      I hope you did not think I was serious. We would be much better off effectively banning guns in the US, but that's not going to happen. PS: You can practice just fine using rubber (wax etc) bullets. (which are still very dangerous.) There not ideal, but basic competence works just fine.
      - jMyles 11y ago
        I don't know whether you were serious, but some people who parrot this proposal are. And it's weird and scary. And while I respect your opinion about gun legislation, I disagree about the effects of disarming the populace living inside the belly of empire. I'm actually looking forward to traveling to places where guns are banned, but I don't think it's the right choice for the USA.
      - webXL 11y ago
        > We would be much better off effectively banning guns in the US, but that's not going to happen. The government's guns, too? Yeah, let's freeze hell and make that happen!
OopsCriticality 11y ago
I've long wondered if, in addition to opening up the NICS system to private individuals for private transactions, the blockchain could be used to demonstrate that a background check was performed without the hassles of dealing with an FFL or the negatives of storing 4473's. Could we eliminate 4473's altogether? Of course, if we're actually serious about background checks, we need to fix reporting into NICS system while we're at it, among other things. As to the linked proposal, it doesn't strike me as very informed… I still fundamentally don't understand the infatuation with insurance (other than as a backdoor way to limit ownership). Insurance may cover acts of negligence, but doesn't it exclude suicide/suicide attempts and criminal acts, right? What events are being insured, and who is paying out?
jMyles 11y ago
All in all, although this system may not be a drop-in replacement for "gun control," I think this is exactly the kind of discussion that makes sense to have in the 'hacker' community in light of the sudden insistence on the part of politicians to pretend that gun violence is a significant concern for the American public.

12 points by MichaelAO 11y ago

That solution seems to assume that the prospective gun buyer is honest when creating their profile, without any way to check against third-party information sources.

jMyles 11y ago
The proposal is that, in the event of a discharge causing injury, they can reveal their persona in order to prove that they were were qualified to own the weapon in question. If, on the other hand, it turns out that they provided misleading information for this purpose, they lose the protections of the 2nd amendment for the purposes of the incident.
- LordKano 11y ago
  This may work when dealing with the incompetent but not the malicious.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- drivingmenuts 11y ago
  It doesn't even really solve the problem, because a victim is still injured or dead somewhere. Biometric locks were a better idea that got shot down by the NRA. At least that one had the potential to reduce gun deaths, certainly far better than the current solution of "get everyone moar guns".

LordKano 11y ago

A big problem that comes with all of these novel proposals is that for me, the average American gun owner, they're not better than the current system. What incentive do I have to change from the status quo if the change won't result in a net benefit for me?

Retric 11y ago
I think this idea is ridiculous. However, ... Owning a gun does not reduce the odds that you or someone you care about being being killed by a gun. So, you benefit just as much from gun control as everyone else. PS: One option is to simply jack up the cost of each bullet. At 100$ a pop that still useful for hunting or self defense so no constitutional issues, but your not going to see teens firing thousands of rounds. ;)
- jMyles 11y ago
  This proposal started as a Chris Rock joke and has become mistaken for a serious part of discourse about guns. Any time someone brings it up, it's easy to know that that person hasn't taken the time to gain even a cursory understanding of how firearms actually work in human society. So, let me state the obvious and dispel this notion: The last thing we want are unpracticed hands ahold of guns in our communities. Basic competence with a handgun takes many thousands of rounds of practice.
  - Retric 11y ago
    I hope you did not think I was serious. We would be much better off effectively banning guns in the US, but that's not going to happen. PS: You can practice just fine using rubber (wax etc) bullets. (which are still very dangerous.) There not ideal, but basic competence works just fine.
    - jMyles 11y ago
      I don't know whether you were serious, but some people who parrot this proposal are. And it's weird and scary. And while I respect your opinion about gun legislation, I disagree about the effects of disarming the populace living inside the belly of empire. I'm actually looking forward to traveling to places where guns are banned, but I don't think it's the right choice for the USA.
    - webXL 11y ago
      > We would be much better off effectively banning guns in the US, but that's not going to happen. The government's guns, too? Yeah, let's freeze hell and make that happen!

OopsCriticality 11y ago

I've long wondered if, in addition to opening up the NICS system to private individuals for private transactions, the blockchain could be used to demonstrate that a background check was performed without the hassles of dealing with an FFL or the negatives of storing 4473's. Could we eliminate 4473's altogether? Of course, if we're actually serious about background checks, we need to fix reporting into NICS system while we're at it, among other things. As to the linked proposal, it doesn't strike me as very informed… I still fundamentally don't understand the infatuation with insurance (other than as a backdoor way to limit ownership). Insurance may cover acts of negligence, but doesn't it exclude suicide/suicide attempts and criminal acts, right? What events are being insured, and who is paying out?

jMyles 11y ago

All in all, although this system may not be a drop-in replacement for "gun control," I think this is exactly the kind of discussion that makes sense to have in the 'hacker' community in light of the sudden insistence on the part of politicians to pretend that gun violence is a significant concern for the American public.