"Smart Gun" development

[Captain Mark]

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,63066,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_5

Opinions from more of you gun guys please.

 

[rev. 3:11]

HECK NO!!
The gun grabbers are always looking to impose non-existing technology on us. As a cop and a citizen, I don't want to be implanted with anything!!!
What if the chip fails?
What if weapon is damaged?
What if batteries die?
What if my shooting hand is disabled and I have to go "weak-hand"?
What if my partner has to use my weapon because I am taken out of action (and vice-versa)?
Too many ways it could go wrong, technically.
Too many ways it can be abused legally and Constitutionally.
We are taught weapons retention, and the occurance of an officer (or citizen) having his weapon taken away and used against him is very rare (despite what some special interest groups claim).
One study showed an 80 percent sucess rate w/ a "smart gun"; meaning it failed every 5th time it was used ... no thanks.
just my $0.02

p.s. it really irritates me the way they slip in the notion of children finding the gun a using it! (at least they aren't trying to manipulate us emotionally) My son has been around firearms all his life, and he knows weapon safety, not because of a chip, but because he was taught to respect things that can put holes in other things (knives, power tools, etc, not just firearms).
Other than that I have no opinion one way or the other.

 

[Captain Mark]

Originally posted by rev. 3:11
HECK NO!!
The gun grabbers are always looking to impose non-existing technology on us. As a cop and a citizen, I don't want to be implanted with anything!!!
What if the chip fails?
What if weapon is damaged?
What if batteries die?
What if my shooting hand is disabled and I have to go "weak-hand"?
What if my partner has to use my weapon because I am taken out of action (and vice-versa)?
Too many ways it could go wrong, technically.
Too many ways it can be abused legally and Constitutionally.
We are taught weapons retention, and the occurance of an officer (or citizen) having his weapon taken away and used against him is very rare (despite what some special interest groups claim).
One study showed an 80 percent sucess rate w/ a "smart gun"; meaning it failed every 5th time it was used ... no thanks.
just my $0.02

p.s. it really irritates me the way they slip in the notion of children finding the gun a using it! (at least they aren't trying to manipulate us emotionally) My son has been around firearms all his life, and he knows weapon safety, not because of a chip, but because he was taught to respect things that can put holes in other things (knives, power tools, etc, not just firearms).
Other than that I have no opinion one way or the other.

Well said sir. I agree with all that.
I thought I was just being paranoid.

 

[STAGE 2]

Completely ignoring the issue of whether or not it is feasible, practical, or legal to require LE or military to do such a thing, the logic is bass-ackwards. In essence they are further restricting the abilities of those who try and prevent gun related crimes.

This should serve to clearly illustrate the methods of the gun control lobby to anybody who is on the fence about gun issues. Rather than attacking the problem at its source, i.e. the criminals, they are trying to sneak in the proverbial back door and use LE and the military as a springboard for their agenda. Think about it. If you really cared about stopping gun violence and of course we can't forget "the children", why would you approach the police and make them jump through one more hoop. This seems even more absurd when you consider how many times a police weapon is behind the cause of a criminal shooting.

Why are they doing this then... well its quite simple. Since we know that safety and fighting crime arent their real concerns then what is. Simply put, this smart chip proposal is just a wolf in sheeps clothing to try and dismantle the second amendment piece by piece.

While the gun control lobby is jaded, short sighted and trapped in an ivory tower, they are not politically unsavy. They understand that an outright attempt to just ban guns would fail miserably. Instead they travel inch by inch, a couple rounds in a magazine here, a pistol grip there, and a drop test or two. This way they can look at you with a very large smile and proclaim that they have not banned guns in the least... they have just made them safer, just like this smart chip makes guns safer. After all, who needs those evil black rifles anyways. Probably just as many people who need those evil black cars.

... and that's my .02 on the subject