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

Skip to comments.

Are 'Smart Gun' Laws Constitutional?
RealClearPolicy's The Mark Up ^ | February 20, 2014 | Robert VerBruggen

Posted on 02/22/2014 7:21:09 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet

A "smart gun," if you have not yet heard, is a firearm that uses some type of technology -- fingerprint recognition, etc. -- to ensure that it cannot fire unless it is being held by an authorized user. In 2002, New Jersey passed a law saying that once smart handguns become commercially available in the U.S., three years later gun stores won't be allowed to sell anything else.

Now a smart handgun is available in California, in the form of the Armatix iP1, a .22-caliber pistol that can't be fired unless the user is wearing the watch that unlocks it. But since the law's passage the Supreme Court has weighed in on the Second Amendment -- finding it to protect an individual right in Heller and then applying this protection against state governments in McDonald.

Can New Jersey's law survive a court challenge under this new regime? It'll depend on the makeup of the court that hears the challenge, of course -- the SCOTUS decisions thus far have involved sweeping bans on gun ownership and use, rather than just gun-store sales, leaving future judges some wiggle room. But there are signs in Heller that a law like this is not acceptable...

(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolicy.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; US: New Jersey
KEYWORDS: 2016election; 2ndamendment; banglist; chrischristie; election2016; guncontrol; nationalreview; newjersey; robertverbruggen; scotus; secondamendment; smartguns; supremecourt

1 posted on 02/22/2014 7:21:09 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

There has been a model out for a long time which requires the shooter to have a special ring before it will fire.

I can’t recall the model but the whole idea is just plain a bad idea for many reasons.


2 posted on 02/22/2014 7:24:55 PM PST by yarddog (Romans 8: verses 38 and 39. "For I am persuaded".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yarddog

Now that I think about it, the gun which requires a ring to fire is a modification rather than an entire gun. Maybe just S&W revolvers but I am not sure.


3 posted on 02/22/2014 7:26:52 PM PST by yarddog (Romans 8: verses 38 and 39. "For I am persuaded".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Patently unconstitutional! What part of this language do they not understand:

" . . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."





"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

4 posted on 02/22/2014 7:30:25 PM PST by ConorMacNessa (HM/2 USN, 3/5 Marines RVN 1969 <center> <tab - St. Mlichael the Archangel defend us in Battle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yarddog

“...requires the shooter to have a special ring...”

I wants my precious, I does.


5 posted on 02/22/2014 7:39:39 PM PST by beelzepug (if any alphabets are watchin', I'll be coming home right after the meetin')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ConorMacNessa

But they don’t seem to know what the word ‘infringed’ means. Maybe they should ask an 8 year old child to look it up in the dictionary for them.


6 posted on 02/22/2014 7:41:55 PM PST by 1_Of_We
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Any modification on only certain persons firing certain weapons is an infringement because a person cannot keep a weapon and bear it if he can`t fire it.

It might belong to his wife. During the Revolutionary War my ancestor`s wife and her son had weapons left in the house for protection when he went to Bunker Hill with his musket off the wall.

Of course it is unconstitutional because it RESTRICTS [infringes] THE USE and CONTROL [to keep = to control] OF A FIREARM>


7 posted on 02/22/2014 7:42:14 PM PST by bunkerhill7 ("The Second Amendment has no limits on firepower"-NY State Senator Kathleen A. Marchione.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Are “Smart Baseball Bats”Constitutional?


8 posted on 02/22/2014 7:47:38 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway-Enjoy Yourself ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Criminals will have gun jammers. A POS solution to a non-existant problem.


9 posted on 02/22/2014 7:55:02 PM PST by VRWC For Truth (Roberts has perverted the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug

And one ring to rule them all.


10 posted on 02/22/2014 7:55:37 PM PST by yarddog (Romans 8: verses 38 and 39. "For I am persuaded".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

A 12 year old can make enough Molotov cocktails in a day to supply a battalion of insurgents for a campaign. Are they going to ban gasoline?


11 posted on 02/22/2014 7:55:51 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (I will raise $2M for Sarah Palin's next run, what will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

This is simply a gun tax that selectively denies the poor access to a fundamental, God-given and constitutionally-protected human right. If forced to pay extra for this destructive feature, I would then pay even more to disable the unwanted feature. The bottom line: “poor and minorities hardest hit” as is usual for leftist laws.


12 posted on 02/22/2014 7:59:49 PM PST by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

It is a technical absurdity that will be used by the gun grabbers if possible. There is no need for this thing, and the means to disable it will appear almost as quickly as it does. The government is certain to possess those means, and professional criminals will soon develop them.


13 posted on 02/22/2014 8:03:14 PM PST by GenXteacher (You have chosen dishonor to avoid war; you shall have war also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VRWC For Truth
you damn well know COPS will have them!!!
14 posted on 02/22/2014 8:09:40 PM PST by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -vvv- NO Pity for the LAZY - 86-44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 1_Of_We
The maggots who control the media would never let the common sense of an 8 year old child, let alone that of a responsible adult, enter into the discussion.

They would advance the highly "nuanced" opinion of some leftist apparatchik like John F'in Kerry, who wouldn't know a basic human right if one smacked him in the head.




"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

15 posted on 02/22/2014 8:10:30 PM PST by ConorMacNessa (HM/2 USN, 3/5 Marines RVN 1969 <center> <tab - St. Mlichael the Archangel defend us in Battle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Any gun law is a Declaration of War......


16 posted on 02/22/2014 8:14:08 PM PST by S.O.S121.500 (Had Enough Yet ? ........................ Enforce the Bill of Rights ......... It's the LAW !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Shouldn’t they?

/s


17 posted on 02/22/2014 8:17:43 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway-Enjoy Yourself ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Chode

Oh the word criminals is loosely chosen here. The badged, political, military, and DemocRats and RINOs aka the power kooks.


18 posted on 02/22/2014 8:24:22 PM PST by VRWC For Truth (Roberts has perverted the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

If they can prove smart guns work, they will ban non-smart guns.


19 posted on 02/22/2014 8:27:42 PM PST by depressed in 06 (America conceived in liberty, dies in slavery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Sounds like it about time for voters in every state which has the initiative process to place a vote before the public to require local and state police forces and state protection details to deploy only smart gun technology. There cannot be a reason for government officials to operate with out of date technology. The safety of the public and of the police force depends on it.


20 posted on 02/22/2014 8:28:40 PM PST by Sgt_Schultze (A half-truth is a complete lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VRWC For Truth
i heard that...
21 posted on 02/22/2014 8:29:30 PM PST by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -vvv- NO Pity for the LAZY - 86-44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

All my guns require my brain to be in control of my trigger finger in order to fire. None have discharged without this sequence of events. If my brain becomes incapacitated I probably would have lost the watch anyway.


22 posted on 02/22/2014 8:36:00 PM PST by Starstruck (If my reply offends, you probably don't understand sarcasm or criticism...or do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: depressed in 06

I will not obey an unconstitutional law. “Shall not be infringed”


23 posted on 02/22/2014 9:19:52 PM PST by B4Ranch (Name your illness, do a Google & YouTube search with "hydrogen peroxide". Do it and be surprised.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I would suggest looking at the “militia” part of the 2A which was not erased by Heller and McDonald. Were have an individual right to possess firearms, and we also have a right to possess firearms which are suited for a militia.

A “smart gun” is unsuitable for a militia because it prevents a combatant from picking up the weapon of a fallen comrade and using it to press the battle forward against the enemy.

I think “assault rifle” bans and magazine capacity limits fail on the same ground. They make a weapon less useful to a militia.


24 posted on 02/22/2014 9:41:54 PM PST by CurlyDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Given that it adds cost, and that cost differential could deny someone the ability to own a firearm... yes, definitely unconstitutional.


25 posted on 02/22/2014 11:24:50 PM PST by ThunderSleeps (Stop obarma now! Stop the hussein - insane agenda!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThunderSleeps

This is the same as the government regulating the type of speech allowed under the first amendment. Mandating these types of restriction is a clear second amendment infringement and you’ll get the same situation as in Connecticut many times over.


26 posted on 02/23/2014 1:13:09 AM PST by JMS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: yarddog
“There has been a model out for a long time which requires the shooter to have a special ring before it will fire.”

The pistol in question was a prototype double stack 9mm built as a technology demonstrator by Colt. I don't remember if it actually functioned or not, but I would never bet my life on it working in the gravest extreme. If you want to see how well these “smart” guns are received, inflict them on your local and state cops — if you dare.

27 posted on 02/23/2014 2:30:04 AM PST by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MasterGunner01

The Magna Ring was for S@W revolvers. just do a google search and one well find a lot of info

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&cad=rja&ved=0CFEQFjAJ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPersonalized_gun&ei=IOQJU5H3MYrkyAGC-YDoAQ&usg=AFQjCNHFN9UBPwJJ—c5wtQMckcsGqYRWg&bvm=bv.61725948,d.aWc


28 posted on 02/23/2014 4:06:56 AM PST by riverrunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
...that once smart handguns become commercially available in the U.S., three years later gun stores won't be allowed to sell anything else.

Gonna create a whole new black market of "stupid" guns because you can be sure they will insist anyone who owns pre-smart gun weapons will be "asked" to relinquish them.

29 posted on 02/23/2014 5:16:27 AM PST by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: riverrunner
Indeed, Colt also had its own “smart gun” design based on the Colt 2000 9mm pistol. Here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/791413/posts
30 posted on 02/26/2014 10:39:31 PM PST by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | 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