Quote:
Originally Posted by Indydealmaker
One important point to remember: Any gun that can be immobilized remotely can be hacked by others including your government.
Within 60 days after such a smart gun hits the market, you will be able to download a hack from the internet. Hundreds of millions spent and nothing accomplished.
The pressure on the gun shop owner was due to the fact that New Jersey had passed a law that required ALL gun owners to use such smart gun technology within 90 days after it became available. This is in violation of the 2nd ammendment. If you can't afford it, you lose your guns and your right to protect yourself.
These gun laws are not about safety. It is about taking away your rights.
The only people who will be controlled by these anti gun laws are law abiding citizens. Criminals will ALWAYS be able to get guns. No form of prohibition has ever worked in this country...not drugs, not alcohol, not speeding, not running red lights, not common courtesy. None.
|
No, it is about SAFETY. Just think of the large number of children who take a gun to school just to show it off; think of the children who find a parent's gun and shoot one of their friends as a game; think of a burglar stealing your pistol. Without the safety device, the guns are useless and deaths are prevented.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that safety devices cannot be placed on guns. No one is taking guns away from you. If a person can afford a gun, they can afford a safety device so that arguement is out the window.
It is all about SAFETY.
Do you agree that the store owner should have been threatened with having his store burned down and with his life being threatened?