Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.


Liberals Want to ADD Something On Your Gun That They Claim Will Prevent Accidents

On the chance Hillary Clinton is inaugurated on January 19, 2017, we must prepare for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment – actual or effective.

Gun control freaks and similar freaks acting like sensible mediators skip down Totalitarian Lane like giddy school girls on the alleged promise of “smart guns” — defined as any gun equipped with a feature that prevents the discharge of a bullet by unauthorized users. Let’s examine what’s available today. So far there are three methods.

First, RFID (radio frequency identification) – requiring an RFID tag on the gun, and a matching tag on a ring, watch, or conceivably anywhere on your person. If the tag on the gun doesn’t match the tag on the ring, etc., the gun will not fire. The downside is the gun only knows if the other tag is near, not that it’s the right person with the tag.

Another method is biometric. Similar to a gun safe or latest Apple device that scans your fingerprint, if the wrong fingerprint is entered, no joy.

The third is Dynamic Grip Recognition, which remembers the unique way you grab the gun. Get into a firefight or close quarters combat, if the grip isn’t right, the gun will not fire.

Given a 100% success rate (i.e. 0% failure rate), smart guns hold potential for saving children from accidental injury or death, or what is called “takeaway murders” when the firearm of a law enforcement officer is taken from and used against him. Tell me, what in your life is 100% successful?

This really comes down to what a gun is, and this of course is bad for Democrats and everyone else who isn’t on board with the 2nd Amendment. A gun is an inanimate object. It can do nothing without a human to control it. Put a hammer in the hands of a carpenter and give that carpenter some nails, it can build a home for the homeless. If in the hands of an immoral person, that same hammer can be driven into the skull of an innocent. The same principle holds with a gun. It can murder if used by an immoral person, but it can also defend the health, life, and treasure of an 11-year-old boy and his family.

Guns without technology can and do break down. Failure to feed, failure to fire, failure to eject, a compromised breach, these terms and more are part of a responsible gun owner’s bank of
knowledge. Devoid of any technology, some of these failures are out of anyone’s control, and can cause injury or death. Most firearms can be disassembled, fixed with or without new parts, and put back together for extended life. Treated well, a gun can last forever. Put a circuit board and wires in a gun, however, and you’ve brought the weapon to a new level of complexity and potential failure. Moisture, dirt, electrical failure, low or no battery, a lightning strike or EMP pulse that fries the circuitry – do we need additional elements in this equation? Should we include the lawyers in this potential mess, who would bring suit against smart gun manufacturers if it fails to protect you from an assailant?

Free market principles say anyone should be able to build a smart gun, and sell it to whomever he wishes. Godspeed to all players involved. But these same principles prohibit government from mandating the use of smart guns for private use.

Let’s keep it that way.

Share if you agree, when it comes to guns, leave well enough alone.

photo credit: DOF Photo Assignemnt via photopin (license); Emily Stanchfield

Michael Cummings

Michael A. Cummings has a Bachelors in Business Management from St. John's University in Collegeville, MN, and a Masters in Rhetoric & Composition from Northern Arizona University. He has worked as a department store Loss Prevention Officer, bank auditor, textbook store manager, Chinese food delivery man, and technology salesman. Cummings wrote position pieces for the 2010 Trevor Drown for US Senate (AR) and 2012 Joe Coors for Congress (CO) campaigns.