
Gun Control on the Blockchain? - MichaelAO
http://www.ingenesist.com/gun-control-on-the-blockchain/
======
OopsCriticality
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
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.

------
LordKano
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
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. ;)

~~~
LordKano
_Owning a gun does not reduce the odds that you or someone you care about
being being killed by a gun._

Irrelevant.

 _So, you benefit just as much from gun control as everyone else._

Which is "Not at all".

 _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. ;)_

This would make me and a lot of people like me very rich.

~~~
Retric
Compare US vs UK violence statistics and the benefits are not trivial.

~~~
jMyles
Surely you realize you can't just say this in a vacuum. This is a huge topic
of debate. At the very least, you need to recognize the two basic challenges
of this argument:

1) Violence is no less typical in the UK; as I understand it, you are more
likely to be attacked with a knife in London than with a gun in any US city,
and

2) In several crucial ways, the UK and the US are completely different - not
least of these is that the US is the center of hegemonic influence in the
world. For sociopolitical reasons, it may not be wise to allow this hegemon to
be armed and unchecked, and this might not be so for other developed nations.

~~~
Retric
> Violence is no less typical in the UK

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate)

    
    
      United States intentional homicide rate: 3.8 
      United Kingdom intentional homicide rate: 1.0 
    

So, UK has plenty of issues with crime and is worse in many areas, they just
have vastly fewer deaths.

------
drivingmenuts
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
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
This may work when dealing with the incompetent but not the malicious.

