Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mass. Senator Proposes Bill That Would Cripple American Gun Industry
Townhall.com ^ | 02/20/14 | Christine Rousselle

Posted on 02/21/2014 4:10:44 AM PST by harpu

Seemingly inspired by James Bond, Massachusetts Democratic Senator Ed Markey has proposed "The Handgun Trigger Safety Act of 2014," which seeks to mandate so-called "smart gun" technology that would render a gun useless if someone apart from an authorized user attempts to fire it.

The Handgun Trigger Safety Act would mandate that, within two years of enactment, all newly manufactured handguns must be personalized, ensuring that they can only be operated by authorized users. Within three years of enactment, anyone selling a handgun must retrofit it with personalization technology before that sale can be completed; these retrofittings will be paid for out of a fund administered by the Department of Justice. The bill would also provide for grants through the National Institute of Justice to continue to develop and improve handgun personalization technology to simultaneously increase efficacy and decrease cost.

One problem: the personalization technology is nascent, and incredibly unreliable. What's worse is that the technology could lure people into a false sense of security and safety, meaning that a person would be more likely to leave a loaded gun around.

[...] Lawrence Keane, senior vice president and general counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, [...] isn't completely against personalized weapons, but he says the technology isn't reliable enough yet and could even make guns more dangerous.

"It can actually encourage people to leave loaded firearms accessible, relying upon the technology which can fail at the most inopportune time," he said.

Further, while the National Rifle Association does not explicitly disapprove of smart gun technology, it is opposed to bills like Markey's that would mandate it.

The National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action says it is not opposed to the development of so-called "smart guns," but rejects government mandates that require the use of grips with fingerprint-reading technology, according to a post on its website.

"[The] NRA recognizes that the "smart guns" issue clearly has the potential to mesh with the anti-gunner's agenda, opening the door to a ban on all guns that do not possess the government-required technology," the group said.

I think it's a pretty universally accepted truth that deaths and injuries from gun crimes and gun accidents are horrible, and any sensible action to reduce deaths from gun crimes and accidents should be pursued. However, criminals already don't follow current gun laws, and this legislation would just impede on the rights of legal gun owners. I would hate to imagine someone needing to use their gun to protect themselves, but be unable to do so because a fingerprint scanner failed. This bill has the potential to do way more harm than good.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: banglist; nra

1 posted on 02/21/2014 4:10:44 AM PST by harpu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: harpu

Semper Fi, Doc.


2 posted on 02/21/2014 4:13:52 AM PST by ComputerGuy (HM2/USN M/3/3 Marines RVN '66-'67)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: harpu

MA - exporting tyranny from the massholes to the rest of the country again


3 posted on 02/21/2014 4:14:04 AM PST by from occupied ga (Your government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: harpu

Ed Markey’s last real job was as an ice cream man in Malden.


4 posted on 02/21/2014 4:17:36 AM PST by AU72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: harpu

Let’s make sure that the Secret Service is the first to use this technology.


5 posted on 02/21/2014 4:19:01 AM PST by txrefugee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: txrefugee
Let’s make sure that the Secret Service is the first to use this technology.

That was my first thought. Secret Service first, then require the police to use it. Then, once it's "perfected" require it of the hoi polloi. (This will NEVER happen!)

6 posted on 02/21/2014 4:23:34 AM PST by Sooth2222 ("Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But I repeat myself." M.Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AU72
Ed Markey’s last real job was as an ice cream man in Malden.

That was so long ago I'd bet even Ed doesn't remember.

7 posted on 02/21/2014 4:25:02 AM PST by Paine in the Neck (Our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: harpu

Can’t this legislation be renamed to “Dual Class Weapons; Class-1 Unusable Weaponry for Citizenry; Class-2 Usable Weaponry for Criminals”


8 posted on 02/21/2014 4:26:31 AM PST by C210N (When people fear government there is tyranny; when government fears people there is liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: harpu
Within three years of enactment, anyone selling a handgun must retrofit it with personalization technology before that sale can be completed;

They managed to combine this BS with outlawing private sales.

MOLON LABE you bastards.

9 posted on 02/21/2014 4:28:43 AM PST by SIDENET
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: harpu
Idiocy at the highest level.

Let's have the police go first. If it works for them, great, they can keep it and still kiss my ass.

The issue of weaponry being a fundamental right is totally lost on Massholes and other Leftists. Yet, not surprising as these are the same people who want to geographically limit freedom of religion to the confines of a church (if then) and are A-OK putting government monitors in every news room.

10 posted on 02/21/2014 4:29:55 AM PST by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ComputerGuy

HooRAH!


11 posted on 02/21/2014 4:30:51 AM PST by harpu ( "...it's better to be hated for who you are than loved for someone you're not!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: harpu

Long Live Big Brother!

IMHO


12 posted on 02/21/2014 4:33:41 AM PST by ripley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: harpu

I think the proposed legislation should be amended to say that the technology first be used on, and only on, law enforcement officer weapons, for a period of two years. Then evaluate how well it’s working out!


13 posted on 02/21/2014 4:35:46 AM PST by FairWitness (Everything is easy, once you've done it once)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: harpu
This has noting do do with safety.

It also doesn't matter if the technology works or not.

It is a crushing mountain of bureaucracy leveled at gun owning Americans. Antigun forces seek to make everything more and more difficult, and steadily chip away at what you are "allowed" to own, until the state has effectively disarmed you.

Note the almost religious zeal with which the antigun Left pursues its goals, and ask yourself if it seems like they have "safety" in mind.

14 posted on 02/21/2014 4:39:13 AM PST by SIDENET
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: harpu

Our rights, taken away by a thousand little cuts prefaced with “...any sensible action to...” Why do we have tens of thousands of laws on the books? Is life that complex? God only needed ten.


15 posted on 02/21/2014 4:54:42 AM PST by ThunderSleeps (Stop obarma now! Stop the hussein - insane agenda!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
I think the proposed legislation should be amended to say that the technology first be used on, and only on, law enforcement officer weapons, for a period of two years. Then evaluate how well it’s working out!

I'd make it a ten-year law enforcement test period. Also, I'd extend the requirements to cover police carbines as well, since every year there are several stories about police AR-15s being left lost or badly mishandled.

16 posted on 02/21/2014 5:00:42 AM PST by Charles Martel (Endeavor to persevere...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: harpu
We are getting close.
I don't care how great the stock market is doing, or "corporate profits" (Kudlow's happy yardstick).
Ever-more brazen assaults on our 1st and 2nd Amendments is the real yardstick.

Not sure when the Lexington amnd Concord moment will be, but it's visible out there on the horizon.

17 posted on 02/21/2014 5:19:46 AM PST by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: harpu

Imagine if the “smart technology” included access from the web - like how you can turn unlock your door using your smartphone. It’s for your own good, you know, like a built in tracking device. Lojack for your gun. But then the gov’t can control your gun.


18 posted on 02/21/2014 5:33:19 AM PST by kdot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: harpu

If anyone needs a refresher on what they are doing, study smoking or car safety. One little move after another. Each small step makes us less free.


19 posted on 02/21/2014 5:41:44 AM PST by Seabeejas (h)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: txrefugee

Let’s make sure that the Secret Service is the first to use this technology.


Yes. And the FBI are the true leaders in the law-enforcement gun tech world. Local agencies follow the FBI on all their gun and ammo choices.

So by executive order, as president, I hereby order the FBI to implement a plan to adopt this technology for all duty sidearms. The old guns will be sold by the CMP at market prices (by auction to individuals).

After five years of fully-implemented track record, we can discuss whether this technology would also provide a public safety benefit.


20 posted on 02/21/2014 6:03:22 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed ("Income Inequality?" Let's start with Washington DC vs. the rest of the nation!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: harpu
There are numerous problems with this proposal. Fundamentally it comes down to two things. First, this proposal is wildly, obviously un-Constitutional. Second, it is doomed to be a failure at achieving the objective it is alleged to have.

Consider, to conform to this bill there will have to be some mechanism, some technology added to a firearm that a law abiding citizen would like to purchase. This technology and mechanism will a) raise the initial cost; b) interfere, if even only a little, in the normal operation of the firearm; c) cause the owner to incur additional maintenance costs throughout the lifetime of the firearm; d) introduce a risk, if even only a slight risk, that the firearm would fail to perform in a timely manner in a life-or-death situation.

How are those 4 considerations not an infringement upon our protected right to keep and bear arms? Remember the wording: ...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Extra costs that will prevent some people from owning a firearm, interference in the normal operation of the firearm... How could anyone not see that as clear-cut infringement?

If someone proposed a mandatory initial fee and a yearly maintenance fee for all social networking sites, along with the mandatory insertion of government code in the sites and apps that would occasionally delete posts, crash the app, or crash the entire site... Do you think people might see that as a 1st Amendment issue?

If someone proposed a "voluntary" initial fee and yearly "maintenance" contract so that government agents wouldn't kick in your door, point loaded weapons at you, and ransack your home...oh, but occasionally they will anyway 'cause they got your address mixed up with someone else's... You think that might be considered a 4th Amendment issue?

This excrement proposed by the MA Senator is no different. Absolutely no different nor any less ridiculous.

But wait, it gets even stupider. We haven't gotten to the practical side of this. There are two parts to this.

Practical consideration number one. Is anyone under any illusions that this would impact criminal behavior? Really? Just like "universal" background checks on private transfers would be ignored by criminals, a requirement for a smart technology retrofit would be ignored. Smart technology on stolen firearms? Criminal enterprises routinely come up with the technology and gear for thousands of illegal activities from illegal street racing modifications to vehicles, to drug labs, etc. Does anyone think firearms technology would elude them? Triggers are not particularly complex mechanisms.

Any bolt-on smart technology kit that can be added by the manufacturer or retrofitted by a gunsmith can be removed by someone with a few tools and a little skill. If you create the market - and this bill surely would - there will be a supply of "dumbing-down" kits hitting the black market. Every year tens of thousands of illegals, tons of illegal drugs, and {Diety} knows what else crosses our border. You think we could stop trigger kits for S&W and Glocks etc.? Ha!

Practical consideration number two. Can you make this work in common scenarios? I'll assume that these smart guns could be trained to recognize either my left or right hand, right? Guess that would include my wife and kids' hands too so if they were home they could defend themselves. Might as well include friends and neighbors too, 'cause if they are over visiting, having dinner with us, playing cards etc. and a home invasion occurs and I go down I'd like for them to be able to defend themselves... Guess that's just a matter of capacity, maybe 20 people, both left and right hands... But hmm, right now it is in the teens outside, wind blowing... If I'm carrying my weapon for self defense to the store, I'm probably going to be wearing gloves. Hmm. If you go with a token system then, not a palm print...then I need tokens for everyone and they have to remember to have them with...

Those are tough, but I assume they could be overcome - maybe. But not without further infringing upon my rights by making it ever more difficult to employ the firearm as intended. But step back a moment and ask "What are we really trying to prevent here?"

You want to prevent accidents? Accidents typically happen by people who should know better mishandling a firearm. Well guess what - these are the same people who would be printed into the weapon or have the token. So stupidity will win out - they will still do stupid things and cause accidents. Trying to prevent domestic shootings or suicides? Guess what, these are the same people who would already have access to the weapon/print/tokens to use them lawfully.

About the only scenario this proposal would impact would be where an unknown stranger manages to disarm you and then turn your weapon on you. That is a very small, very very small percentage of firearm crime and wrongful deaths. Why bother to even address it? Because this isn't about safety. This is about control and chipping away, little by little, at our rights. There are no "...reasonable actions..." where infringing upon our rights are concerned.

21 posted on 02/21/2014 6:11:51 AM PST by ThunderSleeps (Stop obarma now! Stop the hussein - insane agenda!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThunderSleeps

Markey doesn’t care. He is a Leftist among Leftists. The fact that such a man with such a profoundly anti-American political philosophy got elected again and again, and now a senator, says so much about the un-American voters in M-ASS-achusetts.

Oh, and Elizabeth Warren, the lying fake Indian, using diversity laws to falsely get a leg up on her job application, should get the nod by these same voters also means that corruption and dishonesty means nothing as long as the Leftist cause is forwarded.

SPIT.

(I know there are conservatives in Massachusetts, I was stationed there many years ago, but the Massachusetts Right have no political clout and cannot make a dent in Leftist stupidity and stridency.)


22 posted on 02/21/2014 6:23:16 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Alas Babylon!

This country needs a bill that would cripple liberals (for good)


23 posted on 02/21/2014 6:43:56 AM PST by DaveA37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: harpu

I can’t believe MA promoted “blowhard” Markey!?


24 posted on 02/21/2014 7:14:47 AM PST by JSDude1 (Defeat Hagan, elect a Constutional Conservative: Dr. Greg Brannon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sooth2222
Then, once it's "perfected" require it of the hoi polloi

By "perfected," you mean has a back door disable "feature" that can be enabled by any "law enforcement" or government official for the benefit of the people.

25 posted on 02/21/2014 8:10:17 AM PST by Only1choice____Freedom (As long as America's tolerence of failure is not overwhelmed by a desire to succeed, we will fail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Progov

Vigorous enforcement of the Constitution would do that.


26 posted on 02/21/2014 10:05:56 AM PST by fieldmarshaldj (Resist We Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: harpu

Gee, everyone in the family will have to have a gun now.


27 posted on 02/22/2014 12:08:01 PM PST by goldi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson