Brenon 1

Christopher Brenon
Dr. Amy L Trogan
ENC 1101

Smart Guns Save Lives, If Ignorance Would Allow It

In the article Smart Guns Save Lives. So Where Are They, Nicholas Kristof sheds light
on a need for safer guns. His focus is on current technology available regarding smart guns, and
what the delays might be in implementing a strategy or standard for getting smart guns out into
the world. Although Kristof explains the issue with supporting documentation and provides the
reader with multiple solutions, he loosely tries to connect laws to his opinions on why the
National Rifle Association and other gun enthusiasts are pressuring gun dealers.
Technology is getting more advanced with each generation, so why hasnt this translated
to something as important as guns? Kristof begins the article with three examples of children
accidentally shooting and killing another child, and in one instance a mother. While his focus is
mainly for improving child safety, Kristofs position could be applied to people of any age. Next
he tells shares a little history of child safety locks and goes on to say Smith & Wesson was the
first to bring one to the market, a feature that is no longer available. Smith & Wesson claimed
No ordinary child under 8 years of age can possibly discharge it. (Kristof) Kristof then details
new smart technologies being developed, which would make it more difficult for a gun to
discharge accidentally by someone other than the registered owner. Kristof names the Armatix
iP1 system as the best-known approach, where the gun will only fire if the shooter is wearing a
companion wristwatch. Those in opposition to smarter guns fear this would start a complete shift
in the ability to purchase guns without these safety features. Wrapping up the article, Kristof

Brenon 2
cites a Harvard public health expert, on thoughts to progressing forward with smart guns. He
advocates the way forward is for police departments or the military to buy smart guns, creating a
market and proving they work.
Kristof engages the reader on an emotional level as he details a scenario in a department
store in which a 2 year old pulls a gun out of his mothers purse and shoots her in the face, killing
her instantly. By going into a detailed description of the event as it transpired, Kristof forces the
reader to visualize the event as if it was happening right in front of their eyes. He then makes a
few statements that appeal to the readers rational brain. This toll is utterly unnecessary, for the
technology to make childproof guns goes back more than a century. Beginning in the 1880s,
Smith & Wesson (whose gun was used in the Walmart killing) actually sold childproof handguns
that required a lever to be depressed as the trigger was pulled. Doesnt it seem odd that while a
cellphone can be set up to require a PIN or fingerprint, there are no such options for a
gun?(Kristof) By now the reader is left in suspense and is wondering why guns arent any safer
than they were 100 years ago. Furthermore, cellphones can start a car, browse the Internet,
control the lights, and lock a house door from across the country.
Although Kristof explains multiple smart technologies currently available for guns, his
reasoning for why they havent been implemented is an interpretation. While he may be accurate
in his thinking, there is no real evidence to support this opposition. Kristof discusses a law that
was passed in New Jersey in 2002, stipulating that three years after smart guns are available in
the United States, only smart guns can be sold in that state. (Kristof) The author then goes on to
say The attorney generals office there ruled recently that the Armatix smart gun system would
not trigger the law, but the provision has still led gun enthusiasts to bully dealers to keep smart
guns off the market everywhere in the U.S. (Kristof) The reader is given a direct from the

Brenon 3
attorney general, yet Kristof is alleging gun enthusiasts are bullying dealers. There is no evidence
to back up this claim, nor does Kristof explain how he came to his conclusion. It would have
been better if the author did more research on the bullying claim. Imagine the story that could
come out of those findings?
In final consideration, Kristof does a great job playing off the emotions of his readers. He
provides detailed information on technologies available to make guns safer and prevent
accidental deaths, especially involving children. I would have liked to see Kristof go deeper into
the oppositions viewpoints on smart gun technologies with documentation supporting their
position. The reader is left feeling helpless and somewhat irritated about the remaining hurdles
facing smart gun supporters. Lastly, there is little evidence supporting Kristofs allegations
against the NRA and gun enthusiasts for the delay in implementing smart gun approaches.

Brenon 4
Works Cited
Kristof, Nicholas. "Smart Guns Save Lives. So Where Are They?" Sunday Review. The New
York Times., 17 Jan. 2015. Web. 15 March 2015.