The Pro's And Con's Of Gun Ownership

The Right To Bear Arms

So, how many of you are advocates of the second amendment of our Constitution?  We here in the United States, are of course blessed with many freedoms, and one that is probably extremely controversial is the right to possess guns and ammunition.  This is a debate which has greatly divided the nation, political circles, and even presidential campaigns. 

And as many of you know, the National Rifle Association is not only a powerful organization, but an extremely powerful lobbyist as well.  I have my views on this, but I will keep them aside in this posting.  On a different issue relating to guns, there have been many mishaps in which the trigger is misfired by pure accident, resulting in many unneeded, horrific deaths. To help alleviate this, Biometrics (especially fingerprint recognition) has been used to help protect against the so called “itchy-trigger finger”. 

Now, Biometrics is taking a different angle with regards to gun usage.  A Biometrics Vendor known as “FaceFirst” has just announced that it has come into a partnership with a Security Vendor known as “Safety Dynamics, Inc.” 

Here are the details:  “The companies’ combined system pairs Safety Dynamics’ highly-accurate (fixed or mobile) gun-shot detection technology with FaceFirst’s top-speed facial biometric processor to provide law enforcement agencies and private physical security firms pin-point location and shooter identity information in real-time . . . Technologies for gun-shot detection and facial recognition have evolved in recent years, and today many companies compete for various homeland security government contracts. With the Safety Dynamics-FaceFirst agreement, two of the top industry leaders will combine capabilities for selected customers in a singular best-in-class solution . . . When a gun-shot event is detected, Safety Dynamics’ high-speed gunshot detection system passes the azimuth and elevation of the location of the gunshot in less than one second to the camera to point a high-resolution camera to zoom in on the location from which the ballistic signal originated . . . When the shooter’s face is captured by the gun-shot detection camera, FaceFirst then either processes the identity of the shooter against customer “watch lists,” or creates a new facial record of the shooter.”  (SOURCE:  http://www.findbiometrics.com/industry-news/i/9495/).

My Take

I personally think this is a very unique and obviously very different solution from what I have come across in recent times.  It comes from a number of different points.  First, this is the only time something other than fingerprint recognition is being used.  As you can see from the above quote, it is facial recognition which is being used, and to be honest I have never seen it used before like this.  Second, this is the first time I have come across a solution which is designed to specifically ID the shooter, and in real time, using much more sophisticated technology.  Although I do have to admit that my knowledge of tracking down shooters is very minimal, as far as I know, it is very often the CCTV camera which is used. 

Although CCTV cameras have become a lot more sophisticated in recent times, the law enforcement official is often left to their own senses , training, and experience to in order to make a certain or positive claim on a shooter suspect.  Very often, this can lead to false arrests, and even worst, false convictions in a court of law.  Then at this point, it is only DNA which can set the innocent free from incarceration.  Or, if a CCTV camera is not available, then only eyewitness testimonies and mug shots can be used.  And we know how effective these can be. 

But with facial recognition, the law enforcement agent will have much more certainty now (I would even venture to say even as high as the high 80 – to low 90%’s) of who an actual shooter is.  Now, of course, facial recognition still has some of its flaws, so there will still be the need for human intervention in order to make the final decision in order to apprehend a suspect based upon the evidence collected.  Third, with this solution, the pin point location of the shooter can also be verified, thus providing more proof positive for law enforcement.  And on the fourth point, once comparisons are made when the facial recognition data is captured to what exists in terror watch lists, if a person does not actually exist, a new database record for them will be created automatically.  Now how slick is that? 

Personally, in my view , this solution can be used anywhere, but the major applications I see for it are in the border control and airport security realm of things.  Even this can be used at maritime entry/exit points.  I also wonder if this solution will take off in the United Kingdom, where CCTV cameras essentially rule the streets of London. But despite these very strong advantages, there will be some drawbacks, especially with regards to privacy rights. 

Gun owners will obviously want their identities protected if they are simply shooting for a hobby (such as animal hunting).  But some of the biggest controversies will be with the National Rifle Association.  Let’s see over due time how they react to claims of privacy rights violations.