Posted on 03/10/2014 6:24:37 AM PDT by rktman
When the concept of smart gun technology was first introduced it was based on the premise that a growing number of police officers were being killed by their own guns which they lost in a struggle with the bad guy. Even though the technology at the time was far from being even remotely practical, there was legislation introduced in several places that mandated this technology be incorporated in all handguns as soon as it was shown to be workable. IIRC, NJ passed such a law. What was interesting was that in every example of this type of legislation, the police were excluded from having to comply with it.
Yup. That was the Soviet Unions strategy. Overwhelm them with numbers.
“SmartGun” supporters don’t want one; people who want guns want them to function when needed. “SmartGun” supporters want us to be compelled to buy one and to retrofit our existing firearms with “SmartGun” technology so that we no longer control our self-defense. That is not in any way okay. The only acceptable use for a “SmartGun” is to give it to an enemy (or to disable its “smart” features so it’s a real gun). I’ll be boycotting any business involved in the whole process, whether they are a manufacturer or a dealer.
Use one of the pots to bang the burglar over the head : )
BTTT!
If the OFFENSIVE ones are working correctly; then the others can fail all they want!
3.1 BILLION folks with muzzle loaders will ‘defeat’ 310 million folks with repeaters.
Open the pod bay doors, Hal.
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.