Be sure you are signed up for JPFO's periodical Email Alerts.
JOIN JPFO TODAY
Get a very aggressive defense of your rights.
Click on the above.
Help us avoid errors.
Should you prefer a full page of JPFO’s main links, then
Read these classic
rebuttals to "Gun Control"
They're at it again. Last Friday (4/4//14) Attorney General Eric Holder told a House appropriations subcommittee that his Justice Department wants millions from We the Taxpayers so he can "explore" so-called smart-gun technology. This includes (among other possibilities):
"Guns that won't work" is a handy phrase when describing the kind of weaponry Mr. Holder fantasizes about. So-called smart-gun technology is utterly unproven, faulty in concept, and wildly expensive (facts that haven't stopped some legislatures from trying to mandate it). Moreover, you can bet that once government-supported companies have introduced more of it to the market, governments won't be rushing to equip their own police, soldiers, and agents with such technology.
No. Governments will exempt themselves because every form of so-called smart-gun technology under Mr. Holder's consideration is dangerous -- to both innocent lives and freedom. It's conceivable that some gun owners (say, ones with toddlers around) might someday want "protected" guns, but there is virtually no consumer demand driving development. It's all coming from politicians, bureaucrats, and those who own them.
It's about control and money. It's about victim disarmament through government fiat and about crass crony capitalism.
How much poison can a few sentences hold?
Let's dissect just one of Mr. Holder's statements before the subcommittee. He said:
"I think that one of the things that we learned when we were trying to get passed those common sense reforms last year, Vice President Biden and I had a meeting with a group of technology people and we talked about how guns can be made more safe. ...
By making them either through finger print identification, the gun talks to a bracelet or something that you might wear, how guns can be used only by the person who is lawfully in possession of the weapon."
So who were these "technology people" Holder and Biden talked with? We don't know, but the particular tech Holder goes on to describe tells us that the "technology people" weren't impartial engineers (who would immediately recognize fatal flaws in the tech Holder wants to "explore"); they were lobbyists. They represented crony capitalists who want money from U.S. taxpayers in return for helping Mssrs Holder and Obama with their victim-disarmament agenda.
And what on earth is the Department of Justice doing "exploring" gun "safety"? The $2 million Holder wants for developing such dangerous technology is, in fact, only a tiny fragment of the $382.1 million in budget increases he's requesting for "gun safety." Since when did product safety become the bailiwick of the DoJ?
Holder's phrase, "... trying to get passed those common sense reforms last year ..." speaks volumes, too. Read it as, "We couldn't accomplish anything by legislation, so we'll do it by executive fiat."
And what of the tech itself? Anyone with the "common sense" Mr. Holder claims to value could see straight through it.
Fingerprints? Palmprints? What if a family member of the gun owner needs to use the gun for self-defense and that person's prints aren't registered with the firearm? What if the gun owner is wearing a band-aid, has a scab, or has acquired a new scar and no print can be read? What if the gun owner has very light prints (as is common with many Asian women) that can't be read? What if the gun owner has been using harsh cleaning chemicals, which can temporarily wear away fingerprints? What if the gun owner's hand is bloody and no print can be read? What if the print-reading tech simply fails
Bracelets and watches? One crazy-expensive gun with this technology has already hit the market -- (and hit so hard it bounced). Everyone except its maker immediately immediately spotted the problems. What if you need the gun in the middle of the night and just don't happen to be wearing your bracelet? What if the watch or bracelet on your bedside table gets knocked out of range? What if a family member needs the gun for self-defense and has no bracelet? What if your magical wristwatch gets stolen or lost? What if -- again -- the tech simply fails? Something as common as a dead battery or a bad wire could kill you.
And RFID tracking devices? No critique needed. These play no role whatsoever in firearm "safety." They might help get a gun back if it's stolen, but more commonly they'd be used to track and control gun owners. Not to mention that such technology can be used by authorities to disable our firearms from afar.
Money and power. That's all this is about. Mr. Holder and his ilk are terrified of peaceable American gun owners and they ultimately want to rid the world of us. If they can't do that, they'll be content to disarm us by trying to ensure that they have final control over the arms we're "allowed" to own.
While "smart-gun" technology may very well get Mr. Holder and his cronies more money, it won't get them more power. They can "explore" all the unsafe gun "safety" they want. Legislators or bureaucrats can mandate that manufacturers adopt it. But they forget: black markets, human ingenuity, and marvelous new developments like 3D printing will outflank bureaucratic control freaks at every turn.
You may get your money, Mr. Holder. But you will not get your wish of disarming American gun owners.