|
|
|
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:
US Government Releases Official Guidelines for Smart Guns
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Back in June, the US Department of Justice proposed a list of specifications for manufactures of smart guns: a preliminary outline of the baseline features law enforcement agencies wanted to see in the future of pistol safety technology. This included a slew of safety features, failsafe countermeasures and requirements for rechargeable and replaceable batteries. Now, the government has made that draft official. |
| Comment by:
laker1
(11/21/2016)
|
| US Justice Department and smart in the same sentence is an oxymoron. The current more appropriate terms is the Department of Injustice. WE can all put a happy face on this knowing it will disappear January 20, 2017. |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
