The Gun the NRA Does Not Want to be Sold

[ROGER4314]

It occurred to me that as these Liberal turd heads spout off, they are actually poisoning their own well. Every time Bloomberg speaks, legions of US citizens have vomit swell up in their throats as a result.

Yahoo has been flooded with articles trumpeting the $50 million Bloomberg has pledged to beating down the NRA. They all repeat the same theme. "Guns are bad and Bloomberg is good." Let 'em blow. They harm themselves more than harming us.

What happened to that movie that was being produced? Remember the one that "Will make the NRA regret that it was ever born?" It has gone nowhere but they got their moment in the sun just for announcing it. Bloomberg owns the media. What else would you expect?

Flash

 

[Younggun]

I'm sure they would just steal the gun, disable the device, and sell it.

Guns are mechanical, it wouldn't be that difficult to bypass the stupid electronic crap.

 

[franzas]

I'm sure they would just steal the gun, disable the device, and sell it.

Guns are mechanical, it wouldn't be that difficult to bypass the stupid electronic crap.

You can't do that! The gun can't work without the electronics!

 

[Saltyag2010]

I'm sure they would just steal the gun, disable the device, and sell it.

Guns are mechanical, it wouldn't be that difficult to bypass the stupid electronic crap.

But criminals can't do that. It's against the law. They're too dumb to figure it out if they tried. It's not like there's this huge inter-connected system of information sharing that's free to use that could have ideas, plans, or pictures on it.

 

[RetArmySgt]

No need to go door to door to confiscate them. just send out an EMP and then the guns are bricks..

Dont even need an EMP, they will all have a "fail safe" switch built in with the button in DC somewhere.

 

[rushthezeppelin]

Ironically enough, we could have said the same thing about Obama care back in 2009. And they expected it, which is where the "Buy insurance or be taxed to hell!" clause in the law comes from. They have to win to feel better about themselves SOMEHOW....

In any event, someone just posted this link to Forbes:

Why You Should Be Concerned About The New 'Smart Guns' (Whether You Love Or Hate Guns) - Forbes

While I don't read Forbes, I'm pleasantly surprised to see common sense beginning to take hold.

Gonna have to fav that link for everytime I argue with the libs on articles dealing with this subject. Basically hits the head of the nail on everything I don't like about smartguns, especially with the tech not being there. Hell were not even close to having a power source reliable enough for this, we need mini-fusion reactors around to keep these things going for millennia....that's the only way I would trust it not to die on me. And then there's really no way to safeguard against hacking (government and/or criminal) or to ensure that a good guy can use it after you go down.

The aversion of police to these so-called “safer products” is very telling; if the expert professionals don’t trust smartguns, why should civilians?

On a side note I thought this little gem was a bit funny. Granted yes if a PD trusts it it's a good bet you can to, but we only need to look to NYC to know that not every cop is an "expert professional" when it comes to guns. Not to say all are terrible with guns, some most certainly are very proficient. Some of the cops I've seen that attend competitions are very skilled marksmen as well as very safe.

 

[benenglish]

At least one state has a law in place stating once this type of system hits the market all firearms sold must have the device.

New Jersey.

I did a fairly thorough analysis of the situation when the gun first went on sale in California. The New Jersey law was NOT triggered by this gun. It did not come anywhere close to meeting the definition of a "personalized handgun" under New Jersey law.

If you actually read the law, you gotta hand it to the New Jersey pro-gun folks who helped to make the language less offensive. The NJ law sets the bar so high for what can trigger the "only personalized handguns from now on" provisions that, frankly, it's either impossible to meet or if it did, we wouldn't really have any practical grounds to object except for cost. Seriously, any gun that fails to read minds won't meet the NJ definition.

(If you need to bore yourself to sleep, an edited version of my analysis is here: Weinberg writes the AG to activate the smart gun law - Page 2 - Current Gun Law Discussion - New Jersey Gun Forums )

I side with the NRA, too. I don't think this gun should exist. But if it does, I don't really care.

Now, if NJ or any state changes their laws to say that all guns must have devices like this, I'm willing to throw a fit. The firearm just isn't a good or useful design.

BTW - If anybody likes the idea of having a handgun for personal protection that cannot be fired except by the owner, such handguns have been in reliable service for almost as long as I've been alive. See: Gun Safety Add-ons, Smart Guns, Magna-Trigger

 

[TXARGUY]

Ironically enough, we could have said the same thing about Obama care back in 2009. And they expected it, which is where the "Buy insurance or be taxed to hell!" clause in the law comes from. They have to win to feel better about themselves SOMEHOW....

In any event, someone just posted this link to Forbes:

Why You Should Be Concerned About The New 'Smart Guns' (Whether You Love Or Hate Guns) - Forbes

While I don't read Forbes, I'm pleasantly surprised to see common sense beginning to take hold.

Classic troll maneuver:

1.) Pop into random gun thread.
2.) gain context of said thread.
3.) say something re-fucking tarded (my apologies to my disabled TGT bros, whatever God you worship be with you).
4.) don't respond back ever to the discussion /argument/fight you created.
5.).......
6.) Profit

 

[Rangel]

but y'all understand I'm going to be watching the ensuing discussion with keen interest.

Classic troll maneuver:

1.) Pop into random gun thread.
2.) gain context of said thread.
3.) say something re-$#@!ing tarded (my apologies to my disabled TGT bros, whatever God you worship be with you).
4.) don't respond back ever to the discussion /argument/fight you created.
5.).......
6.) Profit

He admitted to this in the OP

 

[Gilgondorin]

He admitted to this in the OP

Actually I wasn't trying to start an argument. I've never seen the discussion dynamic on this particular forum in regards to politics, so I didn't know whether this was basically a free-fire zone or not, and let's be honest -- gun owners will tell you EXACTLY how they feel about something when you ask them, too.

That said, I was also trying to see what else I could learn from here on the subject as well, versus what else I have learned elsewhere. According to a 5 second Google-Fu review of some of the available patents used in the design of the gun, someone else concluded that the frequency the gun and watch use to intercommunicate, is unlicensed and very easy to unintentionally signal-jam even with something as simple as a garage door opener. Perhaps more worryingly, there are (as of right now) apparently only 1024 unique PIN numbers that can be used to lock the device against unauthorized use; such flimsy security would be childishly easy to hack once crypto-analysts get a chance to experiment with them.

In this same method of information collection, I've gained enough practical knowledge from my network of other resources to convince six skeptics I know that E-guns are a totally stupid and failed concept, since the time this thread was posted. Stuff like this is what news agencies should be hitting on, not some totally stupid story about twin brothers that got a show cancelled because they're religious.

 

[PhulesAu]

Nothing is fool proof.

 

[seeker_two]

MSNBC endorsing a firearm? That should give everyone pause....

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

 

[Distinguished Rick]

I'm in the NRA's corner on this one. I don't want it sold because of Pandora's box that this will open. As others have said its not just the price which will be a huge factor to everyone but the technology the government will want in all guns.

 

[bowserb]

The gun the NRA doesn't want sold | MSNBC

I think it goes without saying -- I smell fish.

Now I've never stepped foot in this section of the forum, but y'all understand I'm going to be watching the ensuing discussion with keen interest.

P L E A S E! Do not click the link and view the video. Unless you've spent the last ten years under a rock, you already know what it's about. If you click the link, though, you increase MSNBC's ad revenue, and they probably will also count your click through as another viewer. I clicked through, and then I had to contact the advertiser to voice my disapproval of them sponsoring a left wing cable channel.

OTOH, the Forbes article is worth a read. People on Wall Street have influence and are, at least in this case, worthy of our support. The Forbes article voices all the concerns I would have about a smart gun, plus one or two I hadn't considered.

I doubt that the NRA "killed" the smart gun. It's just on hold until Obama can figure out a way to get them a taxpayer subsidy and get the congress to authorize a tax credit for buying a smart gun.

 

[smschulz]

This is a ridiculous fantasy of liberals and MSNBC who promotes it.
Waste of time.

 

[kotetu]

RFID is incredibly insecure. I'd never buy one. Hell, bloomy and all of his illegal mayor's moms demand some action couldn't pay me enough to take one.

Did you guys see the "Kill switch" mandate for cell phones in California? How many milliseconds do you think it would take before a kill switch was mandated for smart guns if they ever became mainstream?

 

[Recoil45]

NJ has a law about this already. Once the 1st smart gun is available for purchase, all guns are required to have it within 3 years.

 

[Saltyag2010]

As far as this being a Pandora's box- it's a clear violation of 2A and it can't pass on a national level. Let them fantasize.

 

[Sapper740]

Won't do a damn thing to stop intentional homicides, will it?, which last I looked vastly out-numbered accidental shootings. People, do you realize how many brain cells you lose every time you watch MSNBC?

 

[franzas]

Won't do a damn thing to stop intentional homicides, will it?, which last I looked vastly out-numbered accidental shootings. People, do you realize how many brain cells you lose every time you watch MSNBC?

Answer: All of them