Thursday, February 20, 2014

Gun owners should brace for onslaught of 'smart gun' idiocy

A "smart gun" mandate would require gun buyers to spend an exorbitant premium for technology that makes one's gun less likely to fire when the trigger is pulled. That's what the technology is designed to do, when it works perfectly (something it cannot be expected to do). That's a deal breaker even before one considers the idea of the government having an "Off" switch for the Second Amendment.


Anonymous said...

To all you Libtards and fellow traveler politicians -- YOU FIRST! You buy this newest, latest, "greatest", whiz-bang (pun intended) technology and test it for the rest of us unwashed masses.
You politicians, go ahead and arm your security detail and guards with this untested weaponry, and tell us after an assault and skirmish, how this "Hopey McChangy" works out for you.
For now, I'll keep my dumb, but reliable, technology.
See ya on the firing line!

B Woodman

PS-That is, assuming you can find any gun manufacturer that will make the Smart Guns for you. Maybe S&W?

Anonymous said...

Anything they can put in, I can take out.

Anonymous said...

Such things as "smart" guns will make it in the real world, about as far as the "smart" car. In other words, only idiots will be stupid enough to buy them. Every time I see one driving down the road, I make sure to point and laugh at them, because they're so obviously *suckers.*

LET them buy smart guns. When it really matters, they'll simply be culled from the shallow end of the gene-pool that much faster. :)

Anonymous said...

Every gun shop in California,as well as the country, should refuse to sell this handgun, and tell the company to go relieve themselves on an electric fence.

Ed said...

Is a "smart gun" one that has a "kill switch"?

Anonymous said...

Leaving the "control question" aside for the moment, if these guns are so "safe" what better ground to field these weapons than with the police ? The tens of thousands of police arms are in the public venue constantly. Every year we read of officers being shot with their own weapon. Contrariwise smaller numbers of private arms have limited public exposure in uncontrolled settings.

Why all the hoopla over a non-problem ?

On the "remote control" issue, if LE has access, how long until criminal elements have "equal access" ? I admire and respect most LEOs, but if it ain't good enough for them it ain't good enough for the rest of us ! Maybe we ought to legislate all pols BG corps be required to test the beta model. >Jeff

yanklll said...

Who cares.. the asshots can pass anything they wat, they7 will be added to the long list of No Show laws.. non compliance with traitrs is compliance with our rights.

Yank lll

MissAnthropy said...

They pushed for this crap back in the early 90s too. Colt was one of the manufacturers that produced some prototypes. Those prototypes depended on being in proximity to a transmitter, like a wristwatch, to enable the gun to fire.

At the time it was mechanically and economically unfeasible to produce, and that's probably still the case. Either way, it's a bunch of statist bullshit.