The Cavalier Daily
Serving the University Community Since 1890

​WONG: Mandating smart guns is not a solution to America’s gun violence

Though promising, requiring the purchase of such guns in their current state would be unreliable at best

<p>Gun violence in america is a complex issue that would not be entirely addressed through the mandating of "smart guns."</p>

Gun violence in america is a complex issue that would not be entirely addressed through the mandating of "smart guns."

The United States, by all accounts, suffers from unprecedented levels of gun violence and deaths in comparison to other first-world nations. An article from the BBC reported “the number of gun murders per capita in the [United States] in 2012 … was nearly 30 times that in the UK, at 2.9 per 100,000 compared with just 0.1.” A report by the Center for Disease Control noted 33,599 people were killed by firearms in 2014, “accounting for 16.8 percent of all injury deaths in that year.” The National Rifle Association defines a smart gun as one “that incorporates technology that would prevent the gun from being used by an unauthorized person.” Although intriguing, mandating "smart" guns for users would nonetheless have a negligible effect in solving America’s issues with gun violence, while also introducing new security holes into already-dangerous tools.

The benefits of a "smart" gun would be twofold — first, in preventing accidental deaths from firearms. An article published by USA Today found over 1,000 incidents of death and injury from accidental shootings “involving children ages 17 and younger from Jan. 1, 2014, to June 30 of this year [2016].” Of those incidents, “deaths and injuries spike for children under 5, with 3-year olds the most common shooters … the vast majority of which were self-inflicted.” In this respect, "smart" guns are indispensable in preventing accidental death or injury from firearms, and preventing untrained or unknowing individuals from injuring or killing themselves. Smart guns would also, in theory, be inoperable when stolen, preventing thieves from using such weapons.

Yet, such tools would, in a larger scale, have a negligible impact on the scale of gun violence in America. Data compilation performed by FiveThirtyEight found that of the more than 33,000 fatally shot in the United States each year nearly two-thirds of gun deaths were suicides. Furthermore, FiveThirtyEight found that “another third of all gun deaths — about 12,000 in total each year — are homicides. The remaining gun deaths are accidents or classified as undetermined.” Although smart guns may be able to distinguish between authorized and unauthorized users, smart guns still serve the same purpose as standard firearms. Analysis of 62 mass shootings from 1982 to 2012 by Mother Jones Magazine found, in 49 incidences, firearms were legally obtained and “of the 143 guns possessed by the killers, more than three quarters were obtained legally.” Furthermore, the purpose of a smart gun is unchanged from that of a regular firearm — a motivated individual would, at most, be inconvenienced by the safety measures on a "smart" gun.

Ironically enough, introducing "smart" gun technology into firearms would introduce numerous security holes not found in standard firearms. Computer-aided weaponry has been hacked in the past. In 2015, researchers Runa Sandvik and Michael Auger were able to “make the [Tracking Point TP750] rifle inexplicably miss its target, permanently disable the scope’s computer, or even prevent the gun from firing.” Indeed, numerous other smart devices have already been proven to be vulnerable — from televisions and thermostats to hospital equipment. In an article published by WIRED, an internet-accessing car was successfully hacked, allowing the hackers to use “software that lets hackers send commands … To its dashboard functions, steering, brakes, and transmission, all from a laptop that may be across the country.” Unsurprisingly, introducing security weaknesses into lethal weaponry would prove dangerous to law enforcement, who would have to face the possibility of their smart weapons being disabled during critical moments.

Admittedly, gun control policies are exceptionally unlikely to make any progress in the federal government due to Republican control of Congress and the presidency. However, promoting or mandating the sale of smart guns in the current state — while undoubtedly useful in preventing accidental shootings and negating the usability of stolen firearms — would be, at best, inefficient in dealing with America’s long-standing issues with gun violence. Smart guns have the potential to create additional security concerns for law enforcement and gun owners, introducing new vulnerabilities not found in standard firearms.

William Wong is an Opinion columnist for The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at opinion@cavalierdaily.com.

Comments

Latest Podcast

The University’s Associate Vice Provost for Enrollment and Undergraduate Admission, Greg Roberts, provides listeners with an insight into how the University conducts admissions and the legal subtleties regarding the possible end to the consideration of legacy status.



https://open.spotify.com/episode/02ZWcF1RlqBj7CXLfA49xt