Evaluation criteria for Biometric gun control technology
Gun related violence is one of the primary causes of premature death in the US. Besides, there is a high number of non-fatal violent crimes and emergency cases reported in hospitals. In the U.S, gun control is a contentious issue with the American public almost split evenly on the issue of gun rights and gun control. With recent cases of mass shootings, the debate over gun control continues to rage on. Lobbyists for gun control have proposed changes to laws as one way to reduce gun-related violence. Of all control measures proposed, biometric gun control seems to be the best as it does not in any way interfere with the gun rights. According to Levin (2006), there is no denial that smart guns can help prevent or minimize cases of accidental shootings, suicides, homicides or mass shootings.
Given the opposition put up against any control measure, it is vital to evaluate the biometric gun control technology before or after implementing it. Therefore, the first criteria for evaluating the biometric gun control will be acceptability of the technology to gun users. Given the high number of gun owners in the US, it is critical that the solution is agreeable by owners, gun rights, and gun control lobbyists (Jacobs, 2002). Additionally, it is vital to consider the political circle whose support will go a long way in attaining the initial goal of the project. Regardless of the usefulness of new technology, whether it offers a solution or not, if the intended users are not going to use it the whole project will be considered a failure. The level at which the opposing sides will embrace the technology will, therefore, be used as a measure of project success. Another key criterion to be used is relevance and efficiency. Efficiency in the context of technology assessment is the degree to which a technology facilitates the achievement of a goal (Elton, Lucas, & Conrath, 2012). The criteria will be used to evaluate how well the biometric control helps to solve the problem in comparison to other gun control methods. The results of the execution of the project will be compared with other measures like gun control policies by comparing the level of resistance and acceptability by the warring sides.
Aside from the mentioned comparison, we can evaluate the project by looking at the implementation schedule and the number of reported cases of gun-related crimes, fatal and non-fatal emergencies. This is one criterion that was previously used in evaluating the effectiveness of banning certain firearms or ammunitions as one way of gun control. According to Hahn et al.(2003), statistics of violent crimes were looked at to determine whether there was either any increase or decrease in violence before and after the ban was imposed. Though this method can provide inconsistent results, especially if authorities fail to identify the type of gun used in crime, it can be useful in observation of the number of non-fatal accidents, homicides, and medical emergencies arising from gun use.
Compared to other gun control activities, the project will also be evaluated based on reliability. Reliability as a criterion will analyze the consistency, effectiveness, and possibilities of the biometric technology to offer a long-term solution to cases of guns misuse. Some biometric technologies for gun control such as deactivating or activating a firearm by voice recognition have been questioned by guns right activists claiming that it may cause a gun to fail. This concern should be addressed if an effective gun control has to be achieved. Considering this, the evaluation will look at the risks associated with the different methods or biometric technologies for gun control. The extent of the problem and the probability of the occurrence in each technology can be evaluated to help identify the best biometric technology for gun control. The impact of identified risks to the entire project can also be used as a measure of the success of the project.
In conclusion, the degree to which the use of biometric technology will be successful will be determined by the level of cooperation and involvement of key players, that is, pro-gun control, the anti-control, and gun users. This can be strengthened by a consensus from the political circle to support smart gun technologies. Therefore, for this project, the focus will be on how to include the input and concerns of each player. The project should identify a common ground that can help address all issues raised from each side. This will be followed by risk assessment with a clear definition of the positive and negative impacts of the technology. To improve on usability and acceptability, it is also necessary to address design issues of the technology to avert any failure in a given technology. Above all, formulation of policies by both the national and federal governments to increase adoption of smart guns can contribute significantly to efforts to reduce violence. The introduction of biometric technology by firearms manufacturers should be encouraged and supported by the government.
References
Elton, M., Lucas, W., & Conrath, D. (2012). Evaluating New Telecommunications Services (p. 333). Springer Verlag.
Hahn, R., Bilukha, O., Crosby, A., Thompson, M., Liberman, A., & Moscicki, E. et al. (2003). First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws. Cdc.gov. Retrieved 13 May 2016, from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm
Jacobs, J. (2002). Can gun control work?. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Levin, S. (2016). Smart guns: could fingerprint technology solve America's shooting deaths?. the Guardian. Retrieved 13 May 2016, from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/24/personalized-smart-guns- biometric-access-fingerprints-gun-control
