Posted on 01/18/2015 9:43:20 PM PST by WhiskeyX
The Attorney General told a House subcommittee they’re considering “gun-tracking bracelets” as a “common sense” way to reduce gun violence.
(Excerpt) Read more at downtrend.com ...
“Old article is old.”
Yes, and that is why it was not posted as news or current events.
Instead, it is relevant to the 2015 Second Amendment legislative agenda.
“But then I also remember that the United States voted in these insane people, not once, but twice.”
Did they, or did they not and the Democrats used massive vote fraud like all dictatorships do to give the false impression the United States voted in these insane people?
“No he’s not. The headline is sensationalist nonsense.”
While the headline is somewhat misleading, the end result would be the same if it were to be implemented. The owner of the firearm would be required to undergo a burdensome legal process to own a firearm, become identified with the particular firearm in a Federal Government database, be subject to even more burdensome rules to transfer ownership or briefly lend usage of the firearm, become obligated to wear a GPS bracelet like a convicted felon whenever the firearm was to be used or perhaps even carried.
Meanwhile, the Obama Administration is set to implement a United Nations usurpation of the Constitution’s Second Amendment with or without ratification by the U.S. Congress.
Such threats are credible enough not to be nonsense.
Commonly senseless.
Isn’t there an oxy moronish element of Holder trying to put a bracelet on a citizen holding a gun........
If there isn’t , there should be.
just when I think I’ve heard everything......
Those bracelets would have made for nice target practice at the gun club.
Worth repeating.
It’s not a fake news site, but Holder’s statements have been slightly misinterpreted. He was not asking for a tracking bracelet for all gun owners, but for more “smart” technology to be put into handguns. Some pro-gun people went from there and exaggerated what Holder was actually thinking about.
Mmmmmm....Holder going after gun owners?
Here’s an idea.
As you well know, everytime Holder had to enforce a US law he got constipated. Thus, he became addicted to Metamucil ....and wrecked his system.
To remedy the situation (or end up like Elvis—dying on the pot)—— Holder is now being prepped to have a pacemaker implanted in his sphincter muscle.
It would be useful if the surgeon implanted a GPS gizmo in Holder, as well.
Then we can keep track of Holder’s “comings and goings.”
ROTFLOL.
To the contrary - what makes you think it has anything to do with controlling criminals?
Heil Holder!
Obviously this is aimed at honest, law-abiding non-violent individuals, and not at violent career criminals.
The goal of the left is to take guns from law-abiding citizens and leave them in the hands of criminals.
Some might consider that as “the mark”. I might be one. I won’t take it even if it’s not.
Although if they required them, theRFID chip would make “ concealed carry “ an impossibility....
Guess that idea went no-where.
Well its the thought that counts.
as a great man once said: Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.
F*** ‘im.
He’s gonna have “bracelets” of his own one of these days, joined at wrists. And a nice orange jumpsuit to match.
A lying news site, then.
But the thread title is misleading, Holder was talking about high-tech safety technology not tracking devices. Safety bracelets aren’t happening, this was just Holder expressing his inner tyrant.
“But the thread title is misleading, Holder was talking about high-tech safety technology not tracking devices.”
You’ve got that all wrong. Note where the article says, “the gun talks to a bracelet....” In order for the gun to “talk” to a bracelet, the gun and/or the bracelet must transmit and/or receive radio frequency waves. Think of a Bluetooth device for example. Such FCC regulated devices can have their transmissions picked up by third parties, including snooping government surveillance. It matters not a whit that they claim the bracelet does not work like a felon’s GPS bracelet, because the system can still be tracked by unauthorized or unwanted parties. Furthermore, it also serves as the camel’s nose under the tent. Once the step is taken to compromise anonymity and personal security to that extent, it becomes that much easier to go before a Federal court to argue precedents have already granted permission for such surveillance activities.
So, take another look at that article and read it closely for its all too obvious implications in line with the intentionally provocative headline.
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.