[quote=@Andrew Blade] If the mere sight of a gun reduces most criminals to flee, then why even carry a gun? Just carry a toy! Is this just something that you assume, or do you have actual data to support the idea that most criminals flee at the sight of a gun? And this biometric device can be built on new guns, sure, but what about all the guns currently on the market? Do you suggest forcing all the current owners to comply? And then there's this- almost all professionals use firearms while wearing gloves. The same would apply to hunters in the winter, as well as anyone that cares to protect their hands. But they can't use the gun if they have to wear gloves. Biometrics are nice as an option, but mandatory? Not reasonable. So, let's say we do get rid of guns, just hypothetically. We ban guns, we crush them all into dust, and they're gone. Now people are just going to commit mass murder with cars and bombs and knives. We haven't solved anything at this point except giving our government a citizenry that is completely at its mercy. If they say, "You have to join the military at age 18 and serve for at least four years," we can stop them from rounding people up and throwing them into the military. If the government doesn't like what someone is saying about them, there's nothing stopping them from crossing off the First Amendment and throwing them in jail. Again, Venezuela is a current example in the hear and now. So are Iran, Russia, and North Korea. You can't say, "it would never happen," because it's already happened other places. We are a government of the people, but the best way we retain that is by ensuring that our governing officials have a healthy respect for what we can do to protect our constitution without their assistance. [/quote] I don't have an exact number, obviously, but I'm just trying to argue my point. I doubt a regular gun owner in his house is wearing gloves in the middle of the night when a burglar decides to break in. I know obviously that professionals have their tactical gear--I was one of them, but I'm not worried about [I]their[/I] guns ending up in the hands of their 15-year-old nephew with a grudge who has a slight chemical imbalance in the brain. I don't think it's a bad idea at all...and if you already own a gun, well, trade it in or something. Such inconvenience shouldn't be avoided at the expense of the lives of others. Your scenario for hunters is an easy fix...fingerless gloves. Or even better, gloves with the option to keep the fingertips on or off. They sell them anywhere, especially up north where you need them the most. And again, I'm not saying ban all guns because it's not even an argument, but the government has to do [I]something[/I]. Sure, people may run others down with trucks, but they don't buy the truck with the sole purpose to commit murder. A weapon's only job is to kill, and if there are ways to help prevent innocent people from dying , why not go ahead and implement them? There's the right to own arms, and supposedly, the "right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness". Those kids had a right to live, as well as the thousands of others in similar tragedies. I'm not even arguing against the right to bear arms, but I'm arguing for the rights of innocent people to be able to live a full, happy life.