The only dumbgun technology I would accept MUST default to a lifesaving "all systems go" state in the event of electronic failure.
Very simple devices, without microprocessors, *could* be robustly safe from outside interference. But then again...?
Though the prospect could be horrifying for us as individuals, the future of stolen gun litigation would most likely shift the burden to the goon who leaves a failsafed gun in an unattended vehicle with nothing more than the car's glass to prevent theft, or perhaps to the lazy one (or the one who doesn't trust the technology) who intentionally leaves the gun in the failsafe operational state before the intervening accident (rare) or criminal act of a third party beyond anyone's control.
Those who leave failsafe-condition guns in locked safes, on their person, secured at home behind a second barrier (your home's glass windows are the first barrier) or otherwise reasonably secured, should ALSO BE IMMUNE FROM LAWSUIT FOR ACTIONS COMMITED FOLLOWING THE CRIMINAL THEFT OF THEIR FIREARMS. Note that this includes all of our current firearm models...
If the door could be made to swing both ways as described above, the old personal responsibility thing would be back where it belongs. Manufacturers would not be on the hook for the acts of criminals whom they cannot control. Victims of theft would also not be on the hook. But if you left the gun in an unlocked car, then I have no sympathy for you if a crime victim goes after your hide after the crook you should have defended against uses your gun to cause harm.
The rest of the agreement sucks, and is the product of our country's proclivity for wanting our Chief Executive to grant us favors more like a King does. Majority rule has compromised the inalienable rights of all, though exercised by maybe only third of the citizens. It's a sad day for R2KEEP&BA.
Re: "Dumb & unsafe" gun technology: as long as it is good enough for the cops, it's good enough for the Citizens who are supposed to be the Cops' BOSSES. Same for the military!
