Posted on 02/21/2014 4:10:44 AM PST by harpu
Seemingly inspired by James Bond, Massachusetts Democratic Senator Ed Markey has proposed "The Handgun Trigger Safety Act of 2014," which seeks to mandate so-called "smart gun" technology that would render a gun useless if someone apart from an authorized user attempts to fire it.
The Handgun Trigger Safety Act would mandate that, within two years of enactment, all newly manufactured handguns must be personalized, ensuring that they can only be operated by authorized users. Within three years of enactment, anyone selling a handgun must retrofit it with personalization technology before that sale can be completed; these retrofittings will be paid for out of a fund administered by the Department of Justice. The bill would also provide for grants through the National Institute of Justice to continue to develop and improve handgun personalization technology to simultaneously increase efficacy and decrease cost.
One problem: the personalization technology is nascent, and incredibly unreliable. What's worse is that the technology could lure people into a false sense of security and safety, meaning that a person would be more likely to leave a loaded gun around.
[...] Lawrence Keane, senior vice president and general counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, [...] isn't completely against personalized weapons, but he says the technology isn't reliable enough yet and could even make guns more dangerous.
"It can actually encourage people to leave loaded firearms accessible, relying upon the technology which can fail at the most inopportune time," he said.
Further, while the National Rifle Association does not explicitly disapprove of smart gun technology, it is opposed to bills like Markey's that would mandate it.
The National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action says it is not opposed to the development of so-called "smart guns," but rejects government mandates that require the use of grips with fingerprint-reading technology, according to a post on its website.
"[The] NRA recognizes that the "smart guns" issue clearly has the potential to mesh with the anti-gunner's agenda, opening the door to a ban on all guns that do not possess the government-required technology," the group said.
I think it's a pretty universally accepted truth that deaths and injuries from gun crimes and gun accidents are horrible, and any sensible action to reduce deaths from gun crimes and accidents should be pursued. However, criminals already don't follow current gun laws, and this legislation would just impede on the rights of legal gun owners. I would hate to imagine someone needing to use their gun to protect themselves, but be unable to do so because a fingerprint scanner failed. This bill has the potential to do way more harm than good.
Semper Fi, Doc.
MA - exporting tyranny from the massholes to the rest of the country again
Ed Markey’s last real job was as an ice cream man in Malden.
Let’s make sure that the Secret Service is the first to use this technology.
That was my first thought. Secret Service first, then require the police to use it. Then, once it's "perfected" require it of the hoi polloi. (This will NEVER happen!)
That was so long ago I'd bet even Ed doesn't remember.
Can’t this legislation be renamed to “Dual Class Weapons; Class-1 Unusable Weaponry for Citizenry; Class-2 Usable Weaponry for Criminals”
They managed to combine this BS with outlawing private sales.
MOLON LABE you bastards.
Let's have the police go first. If it works for them, great, they can keep it and still kiss my ass.
The issue of weaponry being a fundamental right is totally lost on Massholes and other Leftists. Yet, not surprising as these are the same people who want to geographically limit freedom of religion to the confines of a church (if then) and are A-OK putting government monitors in every news room.
HooRAH!
Long Live Big Brother!
IMHO
I think the proposed legislation should be amended to say that the technology first be used on, and only on, law enforcement officer weapons, for a period of two years. Then evaluate how well it’s working out!
It also doesn't matter if the technology works or not.
It is a crushing mountain of bureaucracy leveled at gun owning Americans. Antigun forces seek to make everything more and more difficult, and steadily chip away at what you are "allowed" to own, until the state has effectively disarmed you.
Note the almost religious zeal with which the antigun Left pursues its goals, and ask yourself if it seems like they have "safety" in mind.
Our rights, taken away by a thousand little cuts prefaced with “...any sensible action to...” Why do we have tens of thousands of laws on the books? Is life that complex? God only needed ten.
I'd make it a ten-year law enforcement test period. Also, I'd extend the requirements to cover police carbines as well, since every year there are several stories about police AR-15s being left lost or badly mishandled.
Not sure when the Lexington amnd Concord moment will be, but it's visible out there on the horizon.
Imagine if the “smart technology” included access from the web - like how you can turn unlock your door using your smartphone. It’s for your own good, you know, like a built in tracking device. Lojack for your gun. But then the gov’t can control your gun.
If anyone needs a refresher on what they are doing, study smoking or car safety. One little move after another. Each small step makes us less free.
Let’s make sure that the Secret Service is the first to use this technology.
So by executive order, as president, I hereby order the FBI to implement a plan to adopt this technology for all duty sidearms. The old guns will be sold by the CMP at market prices (by auction to individuals).
After five years of fully-implemented track record, we can discuss whether this technology would also provide a public safety benefit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.