[yarddog]

There has been a model out for a long time which requires the shooter to have a special ring before it will fire.

I can’t recall the model but the whole idea is just plain a bad idea for many reasons.

[ConorMacNessa]

Patently unconstitutional! What part of this language do they not understand:

" . . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

[bunkerhill7]

Any modification on only certain persons firing certain weapons is an infringement because a person cannot keep a weapon and bear it if he can`t fire it.

It might belong to his wife. During the Revolutionary War my ancestor`s wife and her son had weapons left in the house for protection when he went to Bunker Hill with his musket off the wall.

Of course it is unconstitutional because it RESTRICTS [infringes] THE USE and CONTROL [to keep = to control] OF A FIREARM>

[Vendome]

Are “Smart Baseball Bats”Constitutional?

[VRWC For Truth]

Criminals will have gun jammers. A POS solution to a non-existant problem.

[Pollster1]

This is simply a gun tax that selectively denies the poor access to a fundamental, God-given and constitutionally-protected human right. If forced to pay extra for this destructive feature, I would then pay even more to disable the unwanted feature. The bottom line: “poor and minorities hardest hit” as is usual for leftist laws.

[GenXteacher]

It is a technical absurdity that will be used by the gun grabbers if possible. There is no need for this thing, and the means to disable it will appear almost as quickly as it does. The government is certain to possess those means, and professional criminals will soon develop them.

[S.O.S121.500]

Any gun law is a Declaration of War......

[depressed in 06]

If they can prove smart guns work, they will ban non-smart guns.

[Sgt_Schultze]

Sounds like it about time for voters in every state which has the initiative process to place a vote before the public to require local and state police forces and state protection details to deploy only smart gun technology. There cannot be a reason for government officials to operate with out of date technology. The safety of the public and of the police force depends on it.

[Starstruck]

All my guns require my brain to be in control of my trigger finger in order to fire. None have discharged without this sequence of events. If my brain becomes incapacitated I probably would have lost the watch anyway.

[CurlyDave]

I would suggest looking at the “militia” part of the 2A which was not erased by Heller and McDonald. Were have an individual right to possess firearms, and we also have a right to possess firearms which are suited for a militia.

A “smart gun” is unsuitable for a militia because it prevents a combatant from picking up the weapon of a fallen comrade and using it to press the battle forward against the enemy.

I think “assault rifle” bans and magazine capacity limits fail on the same ground. They make a weapon less useful to a militia.

[ThunderSleeps]

Given that it adds cost, and that cost differential could deny someone the ability to own a firearm... yes, definitely unconstitutional.

[trebb]

...that once smart handguns become commercially available in the U.S., three years later gun stores won't be allowed to sell anything else.

Gonna create a whole new black market of "stupid" guns because you can be sure they will insist anyone who owns pre-smart gun weapons will be "asked" to relinquish them.