Galt's Gulch

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 10 months ago
    Of course, such technology would have a government "fail safe override" that would allow the government to turn off all weapons - for the "good of the people."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ Your_Name_Goes_Here 10 years, 10 months ago
      And wouldn't said "safeguard" be an infringement on the second amendment? I'm sure Mr. Holder, and our Dear Leader, Barack Hussein Obama (mmm, mmm, mmm), will assure us otherwise.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 10 months ago
        Correct. But the idiocracy will cozy up behind him and the sock-puppet press will tell all the sheeple that this is for their own good. Guns are bad. This is just a way to make sure that bad people don't use bad guns. All the while implementing a mechanism for good people to not be able to resist tyranny when necessary. And it's closer than many realize.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by tdechaine 10 years, 10 months ago
      That's the Left's secret ploy alright.
      When anyone starts to think about the potentially good feature of controlling the wrong uses of guns, this is all they need to realize.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by LetsShrug 10 years, 10 months ago
    Hmmm I think that might fall under "infringement". Even though I would never wear a bracelet with fringe. And the asshole has the nerve to call this a "common sense" approach. Lol do ANY of their wordings make sense? Catch phrase mind boggle ALL the time with these people.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Temlakos 10 years, 10 months ago
    Miss Rand certainly didn't think of this one. If she had, she would have substituted the surveillance apparatus for the weapon-of-mass-destruction Project X she invented.

    Even to threaten a thing like this--and when the AG talks about implementing it, that's a threat--ought to be an impeachable offense.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Owlsrayne 10 years, 10 months ago
    Maybe Eric Holder should be made to one of those bracelets around his neck so when he talks it will shut off his voice! Holder has no clue that it won't work on eastern european arms that have been imported and sold in this country. Plus it wouldn't work on older US made hand guns or rifles. I have a preference for Czech, Polish and Romanian handguns. So, if our idiot president trys to create a executive order for such a device that not only would take years to develop, but you would have gun owners trading in their new guns for eastern european arms.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Grendol 10 years, 10 months ago
    Who here honestly thinks that this master plan & control administration full of overreach would not put in a wireless function to disable firearms in the government's interest? This is begging to be abused against the adopters. First the Feds will disable them against some domestic criminal to introduce it softly then it will expand to state and local law enforcement in shootouts. Then they will disarm cities in civil unrest via this. Once the whole city is disarmed via technology they will feel empowered to do as they wish. The irony being that if the government has the ability, evil actors be they domestic criminals or foreign militaries will love this as it reduces violent defence. Guns are best in a purely mechanical design, the K.I.S.S. principal is best. If this is the upcoming new feature, buy old and stay alive.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 10 months ago
    November would only be significant for a gov't that actually observed the separation of powers. When it is "rogue" like this one, the congress is inconsequential.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by khalling 10 years, 10 months ago
    April Fool's was a week ago Euda
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by Eudaimonia 10 years, 10 months ago
      If this is a debunked April Fool's story, please let me know.

      It's no longer possible to know what's an outrageous joke.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by khalling 10 years, 10 months ago
        I wish. Let's just sew a star on right now
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by Eudaimonia 10 years, 10 months ago
          The stupid thing is, if these Marxist idiots would just let the market decide, it would.
          If this tech was available, wasn't mandated, and was foolproof, then I'd probably get one!

          If you mandate it, well, then I have a special finger reserved for such things (and I don't mean the trigger finger).
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by khalling 10 years, 10 months ago
            What about the market would like this? It's an extra step for the firearm owner that's unnecessary. Even if one could make a case for it who wants to wear a bracelet they otherwise wouldn't? In the name of convenience let's just go ahead and get the FREE! Obamacare RFID chip inserted in the arm like we do for petfinders. Out patient procedure. Relatively painless compared to ear tagging which was another proposal they briefly looked at
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by Eudaimonia 10 years, 10 months ago
              My thoughts on it were this.
              When my son lived at home, he would have his friends over all the time.
              And while my wife & I made sure that he was taught to know and respect firearms the same way he would any other dangerous tool like a chainsaw, we could not be so certain that his friends were also taught the same.

              Whenever his friends were over, I was *very mindful at all times* where my firearms were and in what state they were stored.

              I would buy tech like this specifically for situations such as this.
              It would provide a lot of peace of mind.

              I realize not everyone would want it.
              And I would not want it for every situation.

              So... let the market decide.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
              • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 10 months ago
                And what about the situation where you were confronted with an intruder? Would you want to have to find some bracelet and turn it on before you could use your weapon?

                And I still say that such technology would have a "backdoor" so that the government could turn all off, thus disarming the public.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ blarman 10 years, 10 months ago
      Actually, I saw this a couple of months ago. The technology is real. What bugs me - aside from the obvious infringement - is that anyone with a simple antenna tuned to the correct frequency can jam these and render the gun useless - and not just law enforcement. And that doesn't even account for having charged batteries...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by livefree-NH 10 years, 10 months ago
        But jammers are illegal so we would never have to worry about that. Actually there exists today a safety mechanism that inhibits the trigger from functioning unless a small magnet is held next to it, normally contained in / attached to a ring that the gun owner will be wearing. This is much more low-tech, but serves this purpose. And it is for the benefit of the gun owner and safety, and NOT for the (nefarious) purposes that this Atty. Gen. may have in mind.

        At best, at the VERY best, this is a solution looking for a problem. More likely, it is a "feel-good" proposition offered so that someone can say that they 'did something' or tried something, only to be shot down by the pro-gun nuts, or whatever the slander-du-jour is about us peace-loving, liberty-loving, freedom-loving, gun-owning libertarian wack jobs.

        Oh yeah, I forgot "common sense bla bla bla if it saves one child's life yadda yadda machine gun assault rifle schools not fair..." Now I get my google hit :)
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo