So let me get this straight. You are okay with people getting killed for basically nothing? And most very sincerely, if you think that some sort of biometric defeats hte very purpose of having a gun, you also don't have ignition key or locks on your doors. They control access. But a gun? Completely differnt matter.
So does a safety defeat the purpose of owning a gun?
I have a manual lock on my car and ignition. Just like I have a manual lock on my guns when I'm not using them. An electronic lock that's always on, and cannot be unlocked if the battery happens to die makes the gun pretty much useless as a self-defense mechanism. Do your car doors lock automatically and refuse to unlock if you lose power? No? Because that's a pretty stupid fucking design decision? Then why should a gun?
Explain how this is going to cost billions of dollars.
How exactly are you planning on retrofitting existing guns for free? If you aren't retrofitting existing weapons, this is a completely useless exercise.
Explain what you want to spend billions of dollars on to save lives.
You could start by replacing anyone's car that doesn't have airbags and anti-lock brakes free of charge. It would save a hell of a lot more lives than this pointless endeavor. And you could make them hybrids to help with global warming to boot.
You'll have a difficult time, because you are trying to argue about "number of lives", when you are actually afraid that any change, any tiny thing you do, is going to allow the guvmint to take your guns away.
Anyhow, I expect an answer on the billions it will cost, and how many billions you suppport to be applied to the deaths that you actually give a fuck about.
I don't have a difficult time. This isn't a difficult subject to shoot down. It's a waste of everyone's time and money.