tion #2 directs the attorney general to “issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies” (White House, 2013a, p. 10).
In addition to user-authorization technologies, there are active measures (requiring an overt action by the consumer, such as gun locks, gun safeties, and trigger locks) that responsible gun owners can use to reduce unauthorized access to firearms and help reduce firearm-related deaths (Grossman et al., 2005). Other technologies, such as less-thanlethal weaponry, video surveillance, micro-stamping of ammunition, and gunshot recognition systems using acoustics triangulation, were not considered by this committee. However, technologies that can reduce firearm violence are critically important to complement behavioral and population-level interventions.
Outstanding research questions include an examination of the most effective application of gun safety technology, the potential for general acceptance and usage of the safety features, and different policy approaches to implementation. In order to address the gaps in knowledge related to public health, the committee has identified three priority areas for research:
1. the effect of specific gun safety technologies on firearm-related injuries and deaths;
2. past consumer adoption lessons to address the challenge of consumer acceptance of gun safety features; and
3. the experiences of various states and countries with gun safety technology to identify effective methods for introducing and disseminating gun safety technologies.
The Effect of Specific Technological Approaches to Reducing Firearm-Related Injuries and Deaths
Injury prevention science has compared the strengths and limitations of various active strategies to control injuries and has found that passive strategies have a greater effect than attempts to change individual behavior (Teret and Culross, 2002). Therefore, passive strategies, such as per-