Friendly Lich said:
DoPo said:
Friendly Lich said:
Invent a device that would be put on weapons like the ones used in the shooting that would alert schools within a certain range that the weapon is entering the area. That way the school could execute an emergency evacuation plan of some kind. I know that this could be done. However I lack the skills and means to invent it myself otherwise I would.
Can you help me develop/refine this idea please?
So-o-o, like an RFID chip? Like the ones you already have in your passport, on your purchases (it's how the alarm rings if you have unpaid stuff), some libraries have it in their books (mostly for the alarm thingie), also magnetic cards, some keys, etc. It's pretty widely used. It's also pretty easy to bypass, too. I can't think of anything that is essentially an RFID chip that you cannot ever take off or hide.
Oh, and by the way, you can easily clone an RFID signature. Without ever touching it. So, like, for example, if you have some sort of ID card (my uni has them), I'd suggest buying card holder slips, which mask it, while the card is inside.
Yes I think I know what you are talking about. Not every criminal would be able to figure out how to disable the device. The idea is too limit school shootings, completely preventing them is pretty impossible. Further If the device were soldered into the gun it would be even harder to remove and would take certain skills and resources to do. Thanks for your response it was very informative.
You don't need to remove them. They are also embedded in your passport and so on, but you can put that in the microwave and be done with it - 10 seconds should be more than enough, the chip fries and is nonfunctional (good practice, too, if you care about security. Or you're paranoid. There is little to distinguish the two). Of course, guns tend to be metal, and metal tends to not be good to be put in a microwave, but you can also cover the chip or disable it in another way. Not to mention all the guns that don't have RFID chips at the moment.
See, as much as I don't like the Nirvana fallacy (if it's not perfect, it's not worth it), this is one of the time that it's not a fallacy. Placing such a system in place would only lead to a false sense of security - the resources to be blown on a measure that would protect in only some of the cases, and only some of the time, is, frankly, better scrapped. You could just spend the money on more security personnel - that works for all the cases - if the gun has or hasn't a RFID chip, also they can
do something about it. Not perfect, but better than the RFID solution. Otherwise, you're introducing a pretty big point of failure - imagine you relied on a gun identifying system - if it fails to work, you're fucked, hence you need to overprovision with another system. So you have a system in place, with another system to watch it, because you know the first doesn't work... Yeah, you don't need the first system, if the second handles things anyway.