De Facto Repeal of the Second Amendment

0
Share

smart gun

Gun control activists and politicians want to eventually replace every gun in the United States with a smart gun and they are already passing laws to make that happen.

Any law that forces these guns on Americans in lieu of every other gun should have to be passed as if it were an Amendment to the Constitution.

The government wants people to buy smart guns which can only be used by the owner of the gun and they are looking for a way to force gun retailers to sell the gun.

Smart guns are not mass produced in the U.S. and there seems to be little interest in them though gun control activists see them as a way to reduce accidental gun deaths and suicides.

This is just another form of gun control though there is little doubt many of these gun control freaks have good intentions.

Smart weapons recognize their owners’ fingerprints or hand grip, or unlock when they wirelessly interact with a special watch or ring worn by the shooter.

The potential for mistakes is obvious.

In case you don’t believe this is about gun control, you should know about the law in New Jersey. Gun dealers wouldn’t sell the smart gun because of the 13-year old law that mandates all regular handguns sold in the state be smart guns when they become available.

One U.S. Senator has considering introducing a bill in Washington that would apply an even stricter law throughout the nation – requiring not only that all weapons imported, manufactured, or sold in the United States be “smart,” but that all conventional arms in civilian hands be retrofitted with “smart” technology.

Sen. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Concord, California, sponsored SB293 that would ban all guns without owner-authorized technology from retail sale in California 18 months after the state attorney general deems such technology to be readily available. It managed to pass the State Senate.

Steve Sanetti, president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), says it’s the anti-gun forces who want smart guns, not the marketplace. “It’s coming from people who, frankly, really want to put as many obstacles to a gun going off as they can,” he told Lesley Stahl of 60 Minutes.

They punish responsible gun owners who secure their weapons safely away from children or thieves and that manufacturers include safety mechanisms on guns, Sanetti said. “Why are you trying to take my firearm and add something to it that’s going to make it more prone to failure?” he asks, referring to the possibility that technology might malfunction, like the batteries in the “smart” devices could drain, causing the gun to fail. Another basic argument Sanetti makes is that Americans like guns the way they were. “Guns of the Old West, they like them the way Davy Crockett used them…years ago,” he says.

Undoubtedly, that would be a shocking statement to a liberal.

In some cases, smart guns only fire when aimed at inanimate objects which kind of ruins the whole self-defense thing.

This is new technology and in addition to the power source failing, the computer could fail. Authentication technology has a long way to go. Guns that require a special watch or ring or whatever end up being useless for self-defense.  It would also allow a criminal to grab the watch or ring and use the gun. Some smart guns use biometrics and they are slow and often wrong. There are times when someone else needs to use the gun for self-defense. Then there is the fact that the government would be able to track gun owners. Oh, and by the way, you can hack them.

None of this will stop criminals or the crimes they plan to commit.

SOURCE

Share