Poll: Should this gun be used?
Poll Options
View poll results: Should this gun be used?
Yes
13 48%
No
13 48%
gunrack on gunrack etc...
1 4%
Voters: 27.
#1
http://news.discovery.com/tech/biotechnology/gun-shoots-dna-bullets-tag-criminals-130129.htm

Yay or nay?

I think it's kind of cool. Certain suspects who out run the police and get tagged with this thing can be captured later on. I do see how it can be a big risk towards those who could be deemed innocent though.

This isnt a gun control debate thread. Just your opinions on this gun in particular.
#4
The article already points out why this would be pointless. In order to find the person, you'd have to screen hundreds of people in an area. No thank you.
#5
I see no issue with it, though (as Cory points out) it may be a lot more work to find someone anyway.

That said, it's not like finding a criminal isn't a lot of work in the first place...
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Jan 29, 2013,
#6
pointless.

this would however be an effective technology in bank security, similar to "smart water"

1977 Burny FLG70
2004 EBMM JP6
2016 SE Holcolmb
#7
Better than cops killing kids with real guns

Quote by emad
jthm_guitarist
Warned for trolling!


Quote by metal4eva_22
Didn't you say that you had a stuffed fox that you would occasionally fuck?

Quote by Axelfox
It's not a fox,it's a wolf.
#8
I'm not sure how effective it would be, but sure. Why not?
Voted UG User of the Year 2015 & 2016
#10
Nifty idea but is probably more trouble than it's worth.
Quote by beadhangingOne
What happened to Snake?

Snake?

Snake?

SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE?!


Quote by TunerAddict
you can take my mouse and keyboard from my cold, slightly orange from cheetos, dead fingers


Quote by Baby Joel
Isis is amazing
#11
Presumably for it to work, as Cory said, there'd need to be records of everyone else's DNA, which is kind of weird territory.
#15
The article points out two problems with the idea:

1) It doesn't indicate what the person was doing.

2) Legal issues when trying to follow up on the tagging
^^The above is a Cryptic Metaphor^^


"To know the truth of history is to realize its ultimate myth and its inevitable ambiguity." Everything is made up and the facts don't matter.


MUSIC THEORY LINK
#16
They're pretty much already using this with paint, aren't they? Unless the idea is that it won't wash off your skin very well.

Quote by EyeNon15
Thats too bad, I was under the impression I was arguing something profound


1 3 5 R
2 4 6
#17
Wouldn't there be a way to muck up the DNA anyway? Sure you can't take it off, but I'm sure there's a way to make it useless.
^^The above is a Cryptic Metaphor^^


"To know the truth of history is to realize its ultimate myth and its inevitable ambiguity." Everything is made up and the facts don't matter.


MUSIC THEORY LINK
#18
Why don't they shoot little tracking devices instead like the movies. That works 100% of the time.
#19
Quote by rockingamer2
Wouldn't there be a way to muck up the DNA anyway? Sure you can't take it off, but I'm sure there's a way to make it useless.


the article said that it's fluorescent so you should be able to easily see where it is on your body with a UV light and a dark room. however, i always learned that uv light destroys dna in some way or another, so honestly i can't make sense of this. what is it actually? dna information suspending in some sort of protective molecule? and why did they chose to encode the information in dna? surely there is a simpler and less sensitive "polymer" to use.

i'm just really confused how this all works. the article spammed "DNA DNA EVERYBODY TECHNOLOGY" but didn't give the good juicy detals
Last edited by Eastwinn at Jan 29, 2013,
#20
I don't really see how this would be effective. In a both practical and legal sense.
BOOM-SHAKALAKALAKA-BOOM-SHAKALAKUNGA
#21
Quote by gabcd86
Presumably for it to work, as Cory said, there'd need to be records of everyone else's DNA, which is kind of weird territory.

From what I gathered it just shoots DNA at you, it doesn't matter what your DNA is actually. It is essentially like putting a big florescent A on your forehead as you run off, later they can find the guy with it and tada justice.

But yeah, making everyone get black light tested for this is kind of invasive and illegal and I hope they don't decide that it somehow is legal.
In my heart I'm with you

every night
Last edited by palm mute at Jan 29, 2013,
#22
what do they mean wash off? Just soap? How about a brush? An exfoliating scrub or even plain sea sand? It must come off with something, turps, a solvent .. it wouldn't be foolproof.
not going viral


Hot E-Cousin of rjaylaf

Non Evil E-Twin of stealstrings

E-NEMESIS of deathdrummer
#23
Quote by Weaponized
Why don't they shoot little tracking devices instead like the movies. That works 100% of the time.

Wow. That sig.
Didn't see that coming.
Voted UG User of the Year 2015 & 2016
#24
Doesn't DNA take months to process in a lab? How is that effective at all if you have to wait around for results?

And I agree that the follow-up seems flawed. Everyone would have to be getting tested constantly to find out who got tagged, and there's no way that's legal. And it better not ever become legal.
Quote by WCPhils
According to that chart, women like men with a Pringle canister down there.
Michael Kelly Patriot Glory
Ibanez RG8
Blackstar HT 20 w/ Jet City cab
whole bunch o' pedals
#25
Quote by palm mute
From what I gathered it just shoots DNA at you, it doesn't matter what your DNA is actually. It is essentially like putting a big florescent A on your forehead as you run off, later they can find the guy with it and tada justice.

But yeah, making everyone get black light tested for this is kind of invasive and illegal and I hope they don't decide that it somehow is legal.


Oh! Yeah, I reckon just use like permanent marker paintball.
#27
Quote by Joshua Garcia
Wow. That sig.
Didn't see that coming.

Don't say anything on UG, man. Some asshole might sig it!