

Ask HN: Open source app idea. Get rid of my gun app - harichinnan

Hello There<p>This is in response to the horrible story from Connecticut. I live in Massachusetts with a little child. I was concerned and thought of creating a website/app in AWS that would basically let people give away a gun for guaranteed destruction.<p>Let's say it would be a webapp, developed on github and deployed to AWS with money raised from say Kickstarter. The web site would give away tweetable/facebook badges and would profile people who give away their guns in support/memory of victims.<p>The features of the web could be developed through an open source community. We may be able to enlist help from sympathetic celebrities.<p>Please respond with what you know about the below.<p>1. Will you be interested in a weekend hacking session on a Python or Java app. We could launch a Google Hangout and put a website/raise money over kickstarter.
2. How can somebody in US get rid of a gun legally. I'm talking "assault weapons". There should be a guarantee that this will be destructed and not resold anywhere(Except may be resold to US army or so for a charge that would go into say gun control legislation lobby).
======
gavanwoolery
Gun or not, the criminally-insane will always find ways to kill. You can make
about 100 different types of bombs using household chemicals, all with far
more lethal and discreet potential than a gun. Maybe we should start burning
all cleaning agents.

Take a hard look at history, namely Prohibition. What happens when you
restrict access to a resource in demand? People find new, illegal, and
potentially more dangerous ways to sell it.

Let's disperse with the idealism that regulating/destroying guns will somehow
create world peace. It will create new opportunities for criminal-
entrepreneurs. Black markets. Increased crime. More guns in the hands of
criminals, and less in the hands of honest people (I don't particularly care
about how many "honest" people have guns, but I do care about the consequences
of over-regulation).

~~~
harichinnan
People with mental health issues usuaaly won't have the techincal know how/
skills to build a bomb using toilet cleaners. I come from India, where there
are groups that make low tech bombs. Not individuals. Often times they injure
themselves than kill a lot of people. The ones that kill 100's often require
well regulated chemicals.

~~~
gavanwoolery
Mental health does not always negate mental power. Sociopaths and Psychopaths
(a very similar classification) have perfectly normal brain function, only (to
some degree) violence does not bother them -- some even enjoy it. Not all
socio/psychopaths are killers though, in fact some are very good people (it
has been theorized that a few US Presidents were sociopaths). Often times
sociopaths can be very intelligent people, especially with regards to social
hacking (they can be very charming on the outside, and very manipulative).
(Source: my parents are psychiatrists who deal with the criminally insane,
among many other types of mental cases).

------
csense
Let's imagine -- and this is a hypothetical that treads on fantastical ground
-- that due to this tragedy, the US quickly passes a new Constitutional
amendment banning guns.

There are millions of guns that are _already in circulation_. Anyone who wants
to flout the new law will have plenty of warning and opportunity to start
stockpiling them.

Gun control might work, if guns had just been invented and were only in the
hands of a few governments and manufacturers. Or if we were some
European/Asian country that's had a tight grip on weapons for a long time.

~~~
serge2k
There isn't an instant solution so just do nothing?

------
1123581321
1\. I'm not interested. It's a pretty simple project if you take my advice at
the end of this post, so you could easily do it yourself.

2\. The three ways to legally destroy a gun are: 1) destruction by the owner
(google instructions), 2) giving the gun to someone who can legally possess it
who will destroy it, 3) turn it in at a police station to be destroyed,
although the guarantee depends here as some departments resell and won't
necessarily tell you. You will need a federal license from the ATF to broker
guns which is what your service will be doing despite your goals. You will
probably need one organization per state since you can't easily trade guns
across state lines. The military will absolutely not buy from you, even if you
go to all the trouble to become a federal vendor.

Because of these difficulties, I suggest you stick to a simple pledge plus
social media share system, provide destruction instructions and suggest gun-
regulation lobbies to interested donors.

------
redspark
I respect what you are trying to do, but do you really think the ones who
commit these types of crimes will be using your system? In all honestly,
anyone who would voluntarily give up their firearm, _probably_ aren't someone
we need to worry too much about.

~~~
thoughtcriminal
I think you're missing the point. It's about a society that doesn't want guns
anymore. It has to start somewhere.

~~~
harichinnan
If successful, this would become a grass roots level gun control movement with
lots of press coverage. However I couldn't find any documentation that has
instructions on how to get rid of a gun if the owner changes his mind/fears
misuse by family members.

------
propercoil
ban also knifes then. Today in China someone killed 22 children with a knife.

~~~
harichinnan
A man stabbed 22 children. Nobody died. They are in hospital.
[http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/man-
stabs-22-child...](http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/man-
stabs-22-children-in-china/article6353552/?cmpid=rss1)

I wish the man in Connecticut stabbed the kids instead of using an assault
weapon to blast them away.

~~~
nhangen
A pistol is no more an assault weapon than a knife.

There are far more dangerous types of guns than a 9mm pistol.

I'm a gun owner, former Army, and gun rights advocate, but I'm not crazy, and
I do recognize the need for change. I just want to discuss it with level head,
outside of the gun/anti-gun lobby confines.

~~~
powatom
> A pistol is no more an assault weapon than a knife.

You're just arguing semantics here - if you assault somebody with a pistol,
then it's an assault weapon.

Saying that there are more dangerous types of guns than a 9mm pistol is like
saying that getting hit by a lorry is worse than getting hit by a car: it
doesn't fucking matter, it's still going to kill you.

~~~
nhangen
My point is that if a pistol is an assault weapon, then so is a knife.

~~~
powatom
Well, yes - but you don't use a pistol to cut your steak.

~~~
propercoil
How is it that you can't see that banning weapons will quickly escalate to
other things even in the tech world? "Let's ban X because someone met a group
using service Y and killed them", "Let's regulate X because Y happened, hey we
did that with guns".

~~~
powatom
Show me why you believe that this is what will happen: don't just tell me that
this is what will happen.

This is _precisely_ why we do everything in our power to stop countries like
Iran getting nukes. It's only a matter of time before some nutjob actually
goes and uses one - so the sensible thing to do is make it _really, really
difficult to get one in the first place_.

~~~
propercoil
Well Hitler was pro banning guns for a reason and so does any other tyrannical
regime. Here is what happens shortly after:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15KLhgZaRvc>

~~~
powatom
Well sure, if I only ever listened to views that echoed my own, I'm pretty
sure I'd feel like that too.

A few points from this video:

1: Horrible presentation: this is fear-mongering at its finest.

2: Not a _single_ argument presented from the anti-gun perspective.

3: Admissions that length of sentences are not high enough (nothing to do with
guns at all).

4: Admissions that police are hilariously under-equipped to respond and deal
with crime (nothing to do with guns).

If your police force cannot do its job, and your justice system is a joke,
then surely you can see how _that_ would reduce the risks for would-be
criminals and make it more likely for them to commit a crime? Why is 'no guns'
the only explanation for an increased crime rate (if indeed those figures are
valid)?

You can't just say that gun control = tyrannical regime (note: I have never
once actually advocated an outright gun ban). Stop being ridiculous.

What level of weaponry do you believe individuals should be allowed to own?
Would you be happy for Joe Schmoe to own that same level of weaponry?

Gun advocates are fond of saying 'guns don't kill people, people kill people'.

Yes, people kill people. Using guns. A gun is such a devastating weapon to the
human body - the only reason to point it at somebody is if you want them to
die. If it's trivially easy to get hold of a gun, then more people are likely
to use them against other humans. This isn't complicated.

The pro-gun lobby seems to think that anybody who advocates gun-control is
some kind of idiot: that we don't understand how _not_ owning a deadly weapon
reduces the ability to defend myself. Of course we understand that - but we
believe that the risks of easy access to guns far outweigh the benefits. I am
fully aware that criminals will still get hold of guns - but they have access
to them anyway if guns are legal. I'd rather have the odd armed criminal than
all of them armed.

~~~
propercoil
Listen powatom, I think we aren't going to change each other's opinions. In my
past life i lived in a war zone, been to the army and witnessed first hand
what governments can do. Our country is no different, it can easily escalate
in the same way here.

There is a clear pattern in history for tyrannical regimes. Every enlightened
society in history thought the same as you do now, there is absolutely no
difference except that today, citizens can trackback and view what happened in
the past and maybe fight for there freedoms and prepare themselves. Gun
control is the most frightening thing for me and for millions of Americans
because we know that martial law will come soon after.

The only thing i can think of that would maybe make you look at it from a
different angle is asking let's say, your grandparents (if they are alive)
their thoughts about it. If you do that i bet you'd be very surprised by their
input.

~~~
powatom
Anecdotal evidence is not evidence at all. Tyrannical governments come about
through incredibly complex situations that can't simply be reduced to an arms
race between government and civilians.

------
lingbing
next we can decide to ban cars, since well they cause more deaths than guns.
right?

~~~
Toadsoup
I realize that you are trying to be facetious here, but I don't know of any
cars that are specifically designed to cause harm to people.

And if there was one, how many do you want in your neighborhood?

~~~
csense
> I don't know of any cars that are specifically designed to cause harm to
> people.

You should really learn to use the Internet one of these days. I hear it makes
you less ignorant about the world.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_armored_cars>

