Topic: Is Blockchain the solution to gun violence? - page 3. (Read 686 times)

Ahh... I love those crypto media so much. This is how they are making their articles: Is blockchain a solution for *shuffle cards* gun violence? Seriously, just add some random bullshit from fighting the poverty to war stoppage and you are getting some fresh content for your crypto website.
in this case author of the article is claiming that blockchain would help to check the background of gun owners. But no one said that this background in its current form works bad. So they took the problem out of their head and offered a solution just to make some content.
That's bullshit.

Blockchain is not gonna be a solution for the end of gun violence. Gun violence is all about the mind control, people explodes unexpected which is the reason for big crimes with gun. From my view through blockchain each and every data associated with guns manufactured can be recorder but there is no possibility for the restriction on usage.

1- Yes. At least submachine guns and military style weapons. Of course.
2- Dude... You can't bring a semitruck and run over kids inside a school building... You're going off a silly tangent to prove your illogical point.
3- I live in the US mate. Been shooting to a firing ring before and I've been offered all sorts of guns on my way out.
4- Sure let's make all students take weapons to school so they can defend themselves! Now is when you bring up the whole "let's arm teachers" argument, right?
5- Lol... Been hearing Eurabia for the past 35 years mate. How old are you? 18? I'm sure you're all into CoD and Fortnite but the real world is different son.
6- I don't even know what to respond. You want to keep your second amendment even at the expense of people's lives. You go buddy.

1. So you want guys with guns to take guns from people?
2. Sick people have access to semi trucks, gasoline, and explosives too, what is your point?
3. This shows me how ignorant you are of US gun laws and how you are only interested in your own bias.
4. You. Banning guns disarms innocent people, ie taking their right to self defense.
5. Yeah right, everyone knows now all the governments are trustworthy! BTW EUrope? LOL! Europe is a prime example why to KEEP your firearms. Europe is going to be Eurabia in 10 years. Quite a light on the hill you are.
6. Taking peoples rights so that you "feel safe" is not a right you have. Your rights end where another's rights begin.

1- Yes, police officers and trained people should carry guns to protect citizens.
2- Because sick people have access to all sorts of guns and submachine rifles. All they need is a driving license to get their hands on them.
3- Mmmmmm... gun restrictions? What gun restrictions are you talking about?
4- Who is holding innocent people responsible for anything? We're talking about confiscating guns to protect these innocent people.
5- This whole tyranny argument worked well in the 17th century mate. There's no need for this anymore. Take a look at Europe. No European country has citizens carrying guns in the street and no one is concerned about their governments going tyrannic on them. Like... come on...
6- How is prohibiting sick people from getting access to guns not a real solution? I'm giving you one REAL solution that works very well in Europe. The only thing you're telling me is "that's not fair what about the innocent people who don't use guns to kill other people". Well, mate, wont you rather give up your gun and have your kid feel safe at school?

Plus, to be honest, I'm more concerned with regular citizens being able to acquire military styled weapons. If we could get rid of these I'm sure the amount of public shootings would come down drastically. I can't see someone killing 49 people at a night club with just a hand gun.

Blockchain technology is a good first step to confiscating guns, and should not be used to track ownership of guns. The government would know precisely how many guns you own, and who owns guns. Blockchain technology to track gun ownership is little different than a gun registry.

I like the idea of blockchain technology to solve problems, but it is not something that can solve every problem, and in this case using it would be harmful.

In the old days they had cannons that shot shrapnel. Why not make guns that shoot out a blockchain?

 

Answer these questions, please:
If we cannot eliminate evil, is there a need for guns?
Why are children being killed every other week?
How have 85 years worth of gun restrictions helped prevent children from being killed?
Are there solutions that don't include holding innocent people responsible for the actions of the guilty?
Are there solutions that don't leave innocents susceptible to tyranny?
How can blame an inanimate object for your lack of real solutions?


BTW: Stop multi-posting.  You can reply to two people in one post.

In the meantime, keep watching children die at schools every other week. But then again, we're the ones with our eyes closed lol

The chances of someone killing children at a school with a spoon are very low, don't you think?

Nice insights!

What's next huh, this?



Point is, you ban something, people just move on to something else. You'd be surprised what prisoners can do with a sock.

We don't have a gun culture like the US but I don't have problems with it being allowed as long as it isn't ridiculously easy to get (like, in a fookin grocery) and that a psychological test must be made before being given a license.

As for having the gun info in a blockchain, good luck convincing criminals.

I think the article brings up some really good points, but what would get people to register their weapons? Even law abiding citizens may be slow to comply, if at all.

BUT... the idea for using blockchain to force registration and background checks for gun shows and private sellers is a really good idea in my opinion. That has to be addressed and would be a great first step in starting to at least try to make a change.

We won't register our guns and you can be damn sure criminals wouldn't either..

Absolutely true.  And if we can eliminate menstruation, women wouldn't attack their husbands with rolling pins.  Lets solve rolling pin violence.

And so by this logic; if we cannot eliminate evil, there is a need for guns, right?  So why are you and all your "gun violence" pals not focusing on the root cause, which is violence, without qualifiers.  Eliminating guns is a band-aid.  It doesn't solve the issues which lead to violence in the first place.

Gun control isn't about guns, it's about control.  It's not about preventing violence, it's about preventing decent.  It's about picking and choosing who gets to perpetrate violence against whom.  

Anyone who pretends that they want to ban guns for humane purposes is a hypocrite and a liar.  Banning the ability for a law-abiding citizen to defend himself is the most inhumane thing I can imagine.  If you actually care about people then wake up and open your eyes.  Stop believing the propaganda that's only meant to keep you in chains.  

Blockchain and any existing law would help the gun control for the people who abide by the law.

However, the solution we needed is actually outside the approvals, waiting times and background checking.

What we need is to authority to control/reduce all unregistered and illegal selling and buying of guns. So instead of solving the existing law, the authority must make sure to remove and track all the marketplace, transactions and deals of these criminals.

You can take a look at how gun laws function in every other first world country as well as the gun related deaths/capita and you'll notice that there's something odd going on in the US lol

If we could eliminate evil there wouldn't be a need fir guns, right?

As long as humans run the government there cannot be 100% trust to enforce these decisions on people. That is why it is necessary for everyone to be able to protect from bad actors, even in the government. The above examples from the article can all be manipulated by people for bad reasons, and guns are also a good deterrent for all criminal activity. People use guns all over the world to do bad things, and it is better to have that sense of security to know that someone can still defend themselves. In a way, the 2nd amendment is an extension of the 1st amendment. (Since criminals can always access/make guns, then there has to be the ability for any person to defend from that. The same way free speech works in that any negative thing someone is saying should be able to defend against it.) Since the threat of guns will always exist on the bad side, there has to be good people with guns. And now people can 3d print one, so it makes things even easier for a criminal to access a gun to do something bad. I would argue that the guns prevent more than they cause in harm. It especially gives women an advantage in security which is important.

The other negative is that if there is a database for guns, then a criminal can gain access to that list and also know who is defending themselves or not. People don't seem to think that people overall can turn bad or make bad decisions.


The only 2 examples in the article are where guns are not permitted. Of course any crazy person will target these places there is nobody defending them.

I'm all about banning ignorance, but look where that's gotten us.  So I have a question: what if we could somehow eliminate the root cause of all violence, would you still be "all about banning guns?"