Mass. Senator Proposes Bill That Would Cripple American Gun Industry

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.

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.)

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

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

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.

Vigorous enforcement of the Constitution would do that.

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