|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
| Comment by:
teebonicus
(6/19/2015)
|
"Smart technology – using fingerprint recognition, hand biometrics, coded locks or other features to make sure a gun can be fired only by its owner – could be used to prevent many of those casualties."
It can also be remotely disabled by EMP.
In other words, the government will have an "off" switch to disable your gun.
No thanks. |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(6/19/2015)
|
Kinda hard to make a 'persuasive argument' when you start with a falsehood; "gun shops won't sell them". Dealers of anything stock what their customers buy. Doing otherwise is economic suicide. That includes firearms. Since the advent of the microprocessor there have been numerous 'electronically-controlled' - long and short - firearms put on the market. Some by major manufacturers. None have been an economic success. And even this writer underlines the uncertainity of the concept with his "might". Quality firearms are too expensive an investment for the majority of buyers to plunge on a WAG.
But there is one ready market where the safety, reliability and practicability of this concept can be demonstrated; police issue. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
