Posted on 11/30/2016 4:22:05 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants
The New York Times has a problem with guns. The problem is both personal and professional, namely: the fellows who run the Times do not know all that much about guns, and they do not care to take any steps to learn about them.
The problem manifests itself heterogeneously: they cannot seem to get guns right no matter how they approach them. They do not understand concealed carry laws. They do not understand gun statistics. They do not understand assault weapons bans. They do not understand the rules of NRA conventions. They do not understand Australias gun control laws. They do not understand concealed carry demographics.
Add to this extensive list another thing about firearms the Times does not understand: smart guns.
In an editorial published this past Sunday, the Times asks: Why Not Smart Guns in This High-Tech Era? The papers editors, you see, think guns should be equipped with fingerprint scanners, radio frequency chips or other evolving technology that blocks anyone but the owner from using them, and they are frustrated that gun-lobby politics and threats are keeping smart guns off the market, thus causing untold numbers of murders and suicides.
This would indeed be very troublingif it were true, or anything resembling true. In fact, the gun lobby does not oppose smart gun technology. For example, the NRA, in its own words, doesnt oppose the development of smart guns, nor does it oppose the ability of Americans to voluntarily acquire them. Only in a New York Times editorial could you construe an explicit statement from the National Rifle Association to mean the exact opposite of what it means.
The Times refuses to look deeper than the false boogeyman it has created out of the NRA. There are three reasons gun-owning Americans are suspicious of, and reluctant to purchase, smart guns. These reasons merit serious consideration, which is perhaps why anti-gun folks are so reluctant to consider them.
At least it isn't a matter of life and death.
We can never allow any electronic control onto our guns or to become the norm. If the nation were to be attacked by an EMP weapon, all the electronic enabled weapons would be immediately non-functional. We need to be vigilant about keeping electronic control technology off of our weapons.
How does the Slimes feel about “smart” abortions, AKA adoption?
The so-called ‘smart guns’ will never be popular with people who know anything at all about firearms.
End of story.
Jocelyn Elders is back!!!
The danger is in liberal states mandating them.
Now that CA dems are a super majority in both houses, expect them to mandate smart guns. They have already mandated that no non-micro-stamping semi-auto pistols can be submitted to their roster of approved firearms.
As if criminals are going to be buying a micro-stamped firearm from an FFL dealer.
New York Slimes has lost any and all credibility on any subject. They are no longer “the paper of record.”
I’ll keep my dumb guns.
Exactly.
I think they figure if they can push the meme of “smart” guns, they will eventually be able to actually blame the guns instead of the perps....
Several days ago another Liberal moron congressman tried to introduce a law that would mandate that police shoot only to wound.
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.