If they can use video and controllers like that to control the gun, what would stop them from making it wireless?

I would imagine the benefit of using something like that remotely would be worth the risk of possible signal interception.

Complexity and reliability. If the batteries die on your xbox control mid-Halo, it's just annoying. If the batteries die on your remote machine gun with the enemy literally at the gates, it's life and death.

I don't think there's much need for wireless inside the tank in any case. Maybe for a remote placement turret without a vehicle mount it would be more useful.

I actually meant wireless so that you wouldn't have to be present inside the tank, you would control the gun remotely.

You would still use wired controllers, but you would use wireless networking to control the tank close by. As long as you maintain a connection with the tank, you are safe from enemy fire, and the enemy would be shooting at an empty tank, with no way of telling what your physical location is.

Even more increased complexity. That would require them to make electronic controls for the steering, gas and whatnot. More parts would thus be required.

In addition such a system is highly prone to jamming considering the kind of parts they have available, and the location of the controlling transmitter can be quite easily triangulated.

Just wanted to point out that it's not so easy to make a wirelessly controlled tank and the benefits can be dubious.

Yes, because the civil war in Syria was caused by Assad's violation of the Second Amendment.

How disgusting. Very easy for you to equate the sad situation in Syria with America's gun control gun-obsessed society issue, from the comfort and safety of your home.

(Shrug) For better or worse, there seems to be a sort of genetic memory in at least some Americans that dates back to the time when we had to do something similar to gain our freedom.

I'm not taking a stand either way, but considering that most of the people murdered by guns in the 20th century were killed by their own government and police forces, I can see why some people prefer not to give those entities a monopoly on the use of force. Perhaps you could open your own mind a bit to alternative points of view, and quiet that jerking knee.

Most people in the US have no intention to apply their guns to other US citizens, whether or not they were working for the postal service or issuing parking tickets. Your readiness to do so for political reasons is more similar to the readiness of Mussolini's blackshirts than to the mentality of normal beat cops or members of the highly professional, civilian-controlled US military.

Again, where have I advocated the initiation of any sort of violence? You seem to have some kind of projection issue going on, or else you're confusing me with someone else.

I think you have the wrong definition of genetic memory: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_memory_(psychology).