Get used to it wingers; any civilian gun must be a smart gun

[zebonaut]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by maddezmom (a host of the Video & Multimedia forum).

and no whining that t is too much of a burden for you

[AtheistCrusader]

1. After the cops and the military start using it, I'll consider it.

Till then, my guns go bang when the trigger is pulled, like they are supposed to.

Keeping them out of the wrong hands is done via other mitigation strategies.
Also, when you whip out 'wingers' you're smearing a shitload of democratic households in the US that own guns too. Just FYI. There's only a 20% delta between republican and democratic households that report owning a gun, or multiple guns.

[Skittles]

2. you sound so threatened, poor thang

[TreasonousBastard]

3. You're expecting shootouts with cops and military?

[AtheistCrusader]

16. I have no idea how you extrapolated that out of what I said.

If the cops and military start using it, that would imply a level of reliability that I might accept as a consumer and a firearm user. I might consider buying one.

For instance, my duck shotgun is meant for hunting, but it is based on the Mossberg action that survived milspec certification. Why? Because if I'm slogging around in the muck and the reeds, I want it to still go 'bang' when I disengage the safety and pull the trigger.

A self-defense pistol, first and foremost, MUST go bang when you pull the trigger, because the ONLY time you are morally or legally authorized to deploy it, is when your ass (or someone you are protecting, strict letter of the law varies by state) is immediately on the line, in the face of an existential or grievous bodily harm threat. If it doesn't go bang, you're probably even in deeper shit than you were when you started.

Job 2 is making sure it doesn't go bang when you DON'T want it to. That means hammer drop safeties, mag disconnects, etc. My carry pistol is also a service pistol for some police departments, and I chose it for the same reason. It will go bang when it is supposed to, and it will NOT go bang when it is not supposed to. BUT, I lack the 'smart' user-authorization technology showcased here. So that means I keep it in a safe or on my person at all times. I have to be the mechanism that controls access, because the pistol has no features for that.

If a police department picks this product up and uses it as a service weapon, I might consider it. I would STILL never leave it out and about, because that's not my training, but I might still find that added safety worth the cost. It just has to work.

[TrollBuster9090]

7. If, by 'delta' you mean the difference between the number of Democratic vs. Republican households

that own guns, you're probably right. The majority of Americans in both parties believe that responsible, law abiding citizens should be able to own guns for sport, hunting, and self defense.

However, the delta between Republicans who believe that there should be no restrictions on the types and numbers of guns and types of ammunition civilians should be allowed to own; that there should be no records kept on who bought vs. who has them; and there should be no background checks on who's buying guns, and Democrats who believe the same things is considerably larger. People who believe there should be absolutely no restrictions on the number and types of guns, and types of ammunition civilians should be allowed to buy, and believe there should be no background checks on gun buyers, no controls on the re-selling of guns to criminals, no regulations on safe storage of firearms, and no records kept on gun ownership are definitely 'wingers,' in my opinion.

[Hoyt]

9. +100. Guns on their terms only, no matter how irrational.

[AtheistCrusader]

17. Apparently the 'difference operator' is not the common usage of the term.

I will find something better for future use.


I agree, and that is what sets me aside from NRA-member political right-wing gun users; I do believe in common sense regulation such as registration, safe storage, etc.

OP didn't make that distinction, unfortunately.

[kristopher]

12. I don't think gun ownership per se is the defining difference

That difference is found in the willingness to accept common sense constraints on the presence of guns in society generally. IOW the rejection of modern NRA insanity.

[AtheistCrusader]

18. I agree, but Zebonaut's post didn't imply a difference.

(And I reject the idea that 'any civilian gun must be a smart gun, there are a HOST of drawbacks to this first version/first iteration of this particular design)

[kristopher]

19. Host of drawbacks? Not really.

If there are then they are subject to rejection by the marketplace. That isn't what is going on. See my post below and the Chris Hayes coverage.

[AtheistCrusader]

20. There are several.

First off, I can't hand my pistol to my wife and expect her to be able to use it. All of my current self/home defense weapons are dual-purpose, fitting her and me.
Second, this weapon cannot fire in the off-hand. If you are unable to draw it with your 'normal' hand, it is a brick. Most self defense training courses cover drawing and firing with the off-hand.
Third, you have to wear the watch on your 'strong' hand. That means, if you're right handed, you have to wear your watch on your right hand, in order for the weapon to function.
Fourth, you have to wear a watch at all. Fuck that noise, give me a chip implant, like my dog or cat's 'home again' system. In fact, then you could stick one in both of my hands, and code them the same for my wife.


I do agree, however, insofar as the NRA's objections are nonsense. At least, outside New Jersey. As long as there is no state law requiring all firearms to have this technology, I don't see a problem.

[AtheistCrusader]

21. Oh yeah, THANKS for the video...

I could have gone ALL DAY without hearing Sarah Palin's voice, and been a happier person. Bonus points for Cruz.

Today will not be a 'check my blood pressure' day.

[kristopher]

22. How'd you watch a 10+ minute video in less than 7 minutes?

No reply necessary.

[AtheistCrusader]

23. I started watching it when I saw the link. Palin and co pop up about 60% of the way through.

[Make7]

4. Huh? Any civilian gun must be a smart gun? ( n/t )

[Niceguy1]

5. op woke up and decided he was king.

[geckosfeet]

6. In your dreams grabber.

[TrollBuster9090]

8. Smart gun technology has been around for quite awhile, and some of it is much cheaper than that.

For example, MAGNETIC RING smart gun conversion has been around for quite awhile. The cost of this conversion kit is only $95.

http://www.smartlock.com/smartgun_detail.htm

I remember hearing about the magnetic ring smart gun for the first time in about 1989. The talk at the time was that Police and prison guards would use them, so that no bad guy could grab their gun and use it AGAINST them. If you're not wearing the ring, the gun won't fire. (There were a couple of high profile cases of crooks snatching the gun out of a cop's holster, and shooting them with it.)

I remember thinking that if just ONE major city started having their police use these smart guns, it might set a trend. Unfortunately it never happened. Maybe now's the time to revisit the idea.

[oneofthe99]

10. 10 round magazine

Ten round magazine


Nobody needs ten rounds

[mikeysnot]

11. The new Gun Nut Anthem...

[kristopher]

13. Chris Hayes is focused on this and calls it the hottest story in the country right now.

He also did a short segment last friday and he will provide more coverage tonight (Tues).

[Stellar]

14. If they must sell guns...

I think that's the only way to go. Of course the NRA doesn't like that at all and will fight it to the end.

[heaven05]

15. with 100-million plus guns

in this country alone, maybe in 300 centuries smart guns will make a difference.

[maddezmom]

24. Locking

Sorry this does not meet the SOP for the forum.