US Government Releases Proposed Guidelines For Smart Guns

big_aug said:
God forbid they try SOMETHING. Guns are a problem that need dealt with and yet anytime something is proposed that could be positive, people won't even hear it. Sure, it needs work. We have to start somewhere. At this point, we should be listening to and exploring all ideas.

But "'murica" and "muh guns!"
Click to expand...
Tell me again how your granny is supposed to defend herself?
 
This is the stupidest thing ever. Education is the key along with much harsher penalties. This will only work to imprison the populace further while liberating the criminals. Crim's will never fall for this stunt, oh wait they don't follow the current rules let alone new ones.
 
big_aug said:
God forbid they try SOMETHING. Guns are a problem that need dealt with and yet anytime something is proposed that could be positive, people won't even hear it. Sure, it needs work. We have to start somewhere. At this point, we should be listening to and exploring all ideas.

But "'murica" and "muh guns!"
Click to expand...

More lives could be saved in this country by simply reducing the speed limit to 10mph everywhere. If it saves just one life, isn't it worth a little extra time for everyone to get to work?
 
big_aug said:
God forbid they try SOMETHING. Guns are a problem that need dealt with and yet anytime something is proposed that could be positive, people won't even hear it. Sure, it needs work. We have to start somewhere. At this point, we should be listening to and exploring all ideas.

But "'murica" and "muh guns!"
Click to expand...

Start somewhere? So all the current FEDERAL gun control laws already on the books such as fully automatic bans, BATFE 4473, and NICS (not including individual state laws such as CA's magazine capacity limits) wasn't already starting somewhere? If those laws don't provide the means to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, then the government has failed itself and all law-abiding citizens. But, in typical form, the government wants to keep blaming all lawful firearm owners and push more gun regulation, control, and diminishment instead.

The USA does not have a problem because of the 240+ million legally owned (think hard about that number) inanimate pieces of metal tubes owned by 150+ million background-check-passed, responsible, safe, and law-abiding legal purchasers (think harder about that number) of those legally owned inanimate pieces of metal tubes ...the problem is criminals. Criminals that are not allowed to have them, but do. Go back and read my previous post to clearly and easily figure out the how and why.

Guns have existed for a hell of a long time and they exist everywhere on planet earth. Performing a wish dance consisting of jumping up and down on one foot while patting the top of your head with one hand and rubbing your tummy with the other will not uninvent them nor erase from existence the criminals using them...and, historically speaking, that can't be done by passing wish dance equivalent legislation, either.
 
ChristianVirtual said:
i never will understand why weapons are that important for some. I'm with the therory/utopie that if you don't have easy access to weapons the need to have access to weapon is also reduced. Sorry, I have that simple mindset.
Living for 50 years on this planet I never needed a weapon or even felt the need. Maybe because I grown up and live in societies were access to weapons are highly regulated. Worked for me.
Click to expand...
I call it luck and not everybody is lucky. Common sense comes into play here. Try it.

The smart gun sounds stupid. I like my guns just the way they are.
 
And without fail, numerous people spout the same nonsense that continues the plague of inaction. Maybe this is a terrible idea. Perhaps that's true. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be explored with an open mind.

Strawman arguments abound.
 
Could work in theory. Until the tech fails and the person gets shot who's trying to use the damn thing.
 
big_aug said:
And without fail, numerous people spout the same nonsense that continues the plague of inaction. Maybe this is a terrible idea. Perhaps that's true. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be explored with an open mind.

Strawman arguments abound.
Click to expand...
My open mind says get rid of the stupid people first.
 
MV75 said:
we havn't had one since nor have to live in fear of shootings in places that should be givens as being safe
Click to expand...
The chance of being caught in a mass shooting here in the states is something on the order of a million to one. The only people living in fear are those who watch way too much television and are prone to hysterics.
Eickst said:
More lives could be saved in this country by simply reducing the speed limit to 10mph everywhere. If it saves just one life, isn't it worth a little extra time for everyone to get to work?
Click to expand...
Better enforcement of existing laws and ending the war on drugs would be just a couple approaches worth consideration. The fact is for freedom there is often a cost to public health. Alcohol being one example.
 
MV75 said:
How did a backwards flag get past the patriots?

I'm glad I live in a country that did real gun control after our last mass shooting, (1996 Port Arthur massacre), we havn't had one since nor have to live in fear of shootings in places that should be givens as being safe. Plus we have a national agency that actually stops terror plots instead of just sees where they are taking it. You all should be mad as hell and demanding more than just do nothing public addresses from the President each time this happens. Stop buying into the bullshit. No mass killings here, yet our gun ranges and private ownerships are very very healthy. Our kids go to school without needing weapons detections, or fear of being shot, we can go to the movies without fear of being shot, same as public events, hell, even just taking the train.
Click to expand...

Your country is also heavily censored and basically a nanny state at this point. Countries like France are disarmed and they're getting shot up or ran over.

You think all Americans are cowering in fear every day due to fear of the gun? It's never been a thought on my mind, to be honest. I feel safe enough.
 
I hope they
big_aug said:
God forbid they try SOMETHING. Guns are a problem that need dealt with and yet anytime something is proposed that could be positive, people won't even hear it. Sure, it needs work. We have to start somewhere. At this point, we should be listening to and exploring all ideas.

But "'murica" and "muh guns!"
Click to expand...

How many lives would be saved if America made abortion illegal? God forbid we try saving over one million lives a year.
 
MV75 said:
How did a backwards flag get past the patriots?

I'm glad I live in a country that did real gun control after our last mass shooting, (1996 Port Arthur massacre), we havn't had one since nor have to live in fear of shootings in places that should be givens as being safe. Plus we have a national agency that actually stops terror plots instead of just sees where they are taking it. You all should be mad as hell and demanding more than just do nothing public addresses from the President each time this happens. Stop buying into the bullshit. No mass killings here, yet our gun ranges and private ownerships are very very healthy. Our kids go to school without needing weapons detections, or fear of being shot, we can go to the movies without fear of being shot, same as public events, hell, even just taking the train.
Click to expand...

Using the FBI definition of mass shooting there have been at least three mass shootings on Australia. Since the "gun ban". How many criminals still have guns? There were 312 gun deaths in Australia in 1997 and 230 in 2014. So there are still guns around. You must live in some bubble.
 
wizzi01 said:
I hope they


How many lives would be saved if America made abortion illegal? God forbid we try saving over one million lives a year.
Click to expand...

What is it with people like you and these absurd arguments? It's not even relevant or comparable. You're part of the problem.

You advocate for more government regulation in one instance (abortion) and less in another (guns). Get out with your bullshit.
 
big_aug said:
What is it with people like you and these absurd arguments? It's not even relevant or comparable. You're part of the problem.

You advocate for more government regulation in one instance (abortion) and less in another (guns). Get out with your bullshit.
Click to expand...

How is it not relevant? Lives are lives right? It just doesn't fit your narrative. People like you want to take a right away from me I want people like you to lose your rights.
 
They run their country how they want. Just be glad they don't live here. We have enough problems.
 
wizzi01 said:
How is it not relevant? Lives are lives right? It just doesn't fit your narrative. People like you want to take a right away from me I want people like you to lose your rights.
Click to expand...

No reasonable person wants to "take your rights away." That's what people say so they don't have to have the hard discussions about actually taking action.
 
big_aug said:
No reasonable person wants to "take your rights away." That's what people say so they don't have to have the hard discussions about actually taking action.
Click to expand...

Oh, so a reasonable person just wants to restrict law abiding citizens rights? There is a certain state that has a law that says once smart guns are feasible they are the only firearms to be sold in that state from then on. That is a restriction of rights. No reasonable person would want a restriction of rights though, right?
 
wizzi01 said:
Oh, so a reasonable person just wants to restrict law abiding citizens rights? There is a certain state that has a law that says once smart guns are feasible they are the only firearms to be sold in that state from then on. That is a restriction of rights. No reasonable person would want a restriction of rights though, right?
Click to expand...

I don't think you have the right to unrestricted ownership of whatever weapons you want. Yes, a reasonable person sets some restrictions. See your dumb ass abortion comparison. Keep trying though.
 
  • big_aug said:
    I don't think you have the right to unrestricted ownership of whatever weapons you want. Yes, a reasonable person sets some restrictions. See your dumb ass abortion comparison. Keep trying though.
    Click to expand...


  • Why should there be reasonable restrictions? I am a law abiding citizen I should be able tof own what I want. My reasonable le restriction for abortion would be no doctor can do an abortion. They take the hippocratic oath, and if the do an abortion that isn'the necessary to save the mother'said life they lose their license forever. There that is reasonable restrictions.
 
You just don't get it do you? Restrictions will do nothing but hinder the law abiding. The criminals will still do what they do. As for the name calling. That must be why you are so against guns. It seems like you don't have the maturity to trust yourself with a firearm.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
chenw said:
I mean, when it becomes that murder isn't even on the news anymore.
Click to expand...

The news makes a lot of money off of tragedy. If no murder's are happening, I am sure they can find something else salacious and awful going on.
 
big_aug said:
No reasonable person wants to "take your rights away." That's what people say so they don't have to have the hard discussions about actually taking action.
Click to expand...

That was exactly the undertones of Hitler's anti-Semitic speeches to remove the fear, uncertainty, and doubt from non-Jewish people that were worried about being the next in line for encampment and extermination.

Any reasonable person would actually look at hard facts and data to conclude that the anti-gun/gun control talking points being spewed by media and politicians is purely bullshit.
 
Eickst said:
More lives could be saved in this country by simply reducing the speed limit to 10mph everywhere. If it saves just one life, isn't it worth a little extra time for everyone to get to work?
Click to expand...

This country is driven on ambition and caffeine, total Type A personality. The government would have to be taken over by a bunch of monks for this to happen.
 
A firearm is a tool. When selecting a tool, you choose the most appropriate tool for the job. I can use a butter knife to remove a screw, but a screwdriver works much better!

For the "good guys" (law enforcement, law-abiding citizens) a firearm is a tool for protection against violence. Choose the best tool for the job. For myself personally, I don't carry a cheap junk firearm, simply because they are unreliable. This technology would have to be proven to be just as reliable as purely mechanical firearms before I would even consider it.

"Smart guns" seem to be more of a solution in search of a problem. The idea that a "bad guy" could take a "good guy's" firearm and use it against him is the driving force behind the technology, but how often does it actually happen? Don't count stolen firearms, because a thief would have mechanisms in place to bypass the "smart" features of the pistol.
 
jardows said:
A firearm is a tool. When selecting a tool, you choose the most appropriate tool for the job. I can use a butter knife to remove a screw, but a screwdriver works much better!

For the "good guys" (law enforcement, law-abiding citizens) a firearm is a tool for protection against violence. Choose the best tool for the job. For myself personally, I don't carry a cheap junk firearm, simply because they are unreliable. This technology would have to be proven to be just as reliable as purely mechanical firearms before I would even consider it.

"Smart guns" seem to be more of a solution in search of a problem. The idea that a "bad guy" could take a "good guy's" firearm and use it against him is the driving force behind the technology, but how often does it actually happen? Don't count stolen firearms, because a thief would have mechanisms in place to bypass the "smart" features of the pistol.
Click to expand...

Fucking nailed it.
 
Deadly Ramon said:
Illiteracy is a problem that needs to be dealt with.
Click to expand...

One of many.
Rustynuts said:
Go research how many gun laws there already are.

We'll see you back in a couple years.
Click to expand...


It's easier to get a gun than a driver's license. Months of education, supervised use, and proficiency tests are required to get a driver's license. I don't think anyone would argue those are bad things despite the fact that criminals don't follow the law and drive without a license all together. All that education and training is necessary because vehicles are dangerous. Very dangerous. They can be used as weapons as our poor friends in France found out. There is an entire industry that develops vehicle technology to make them safer. Vehicles that can detect objects and avoid collisions even when the driver does not. "Smart cars" so to speak.

And yet when anyone discusses changing guns or gun laws, it's off limits. Throwing out Hitler references? It's irrational.
 
How many people died in France from a Truck? . No matter the laws I can get as many guns as I will ever want much like illegal immigrant labor and drugs. Killing is easy, Defense is hard without an unencumbered right to own a gun.
 
big_aug said:
One of many.



It's easier to get a gun than a driver's license. Months of education, supervised use, and proficiency tests are required to get a driver's license. I don't think anyone would argue those are bad things despite the fact that criminals don't follow the law and drive without a license all together. All that education and training is necessary because vehicles are dangerous. Very dangerous. They can be used as weapons as our poor friends in France found out. There is an entire industry that develops vehicle technology to make them safer. Vehicles that can detect objects and avoid collisions even when the driver does not. "Smart cars" so to speak.

And yet when anyone discusses changing guns or gun laws, it's off limits. Throwing out Hitler references? It's irrational.
Click to expand...

So you are now comparing a right to a privilege. Firearm ownership is a right. Driving is a privilege. Comparing the two is irrational. Your arguments are getting weaker and weaker by the second. Also, like jpm100 said....look at Nice, France. One truck killed more people than a person with a firearm in a club in Orlando.
 
big_aug said:
One of many.



It's easier to get a gun than a driver's license. Months of education, supervised use, and proficiency tests are required to get a driver's license. I don't think anyone would argue those are bad things despite the fact that criminals don't follow the law and drive without a license all together. All that education and training is necessary because vehicles are dangerous. Very dangerous. They can be used as weapons as our poor friends in France found out. There is an entire industry that develops vehicle technology to make them safer. Vehicles that can detect objects and avoid collisions even when the driver does not. "Smart cars" so to speak.

And yet when anyone discusses changing guns or gun laws, it's off limits. Throwing out Hitler references? It's irrational.
Click to expand...
To get my driver's license all I had to do was walk in and take a written test and driving test. There were no prerequisites to it. Of course this was 12 years ago, so things may have changed since then.
 
jardows said:
A firearm is a tool. When selecting a tool, you choose the most appropriate tool for the job. I can use a butter knife to remove a screw, but a screwdriver works much better!

For the "good guys" (law enforcement, law-abiding citizens) a firearm is a tool for protection against violence. Choose the best tool for the job. For myself personally, I don't carry a cheap junk firearm, simply because they are unreliable. This technology would have to be proven to be just as reliable as purely mechanical firearms before I would even consider it.

"Smart guns" seem to be more of a solution in search of a problem. The idea that a "bad guy" could take a "good guy's" firearm and use it against him is the driving force behind the technology, but how often does it actually happen? Don't count stolen firearms, because a thief would have mechanisms in place to bypass the "smart" features of the pistol.
Click to expand...

A good holster in most cases is sufficient enough to prevent someone else from removing your firearm. And if you do get the correct angle to grab it, you are getting an elbow to the face as soon as there is any kind of movement felt from that location.
 
big_aug said:
One of many.



It's easier to get a gun than a driver's license. Months of education, supervised use, and proficiency tests are required to get a driver's license. I don't think anyone would argue those are bad things despite the fact that criminals don't follow the law and drive without a license all together. All that education and training is necessary because vehicles are dangerous. Very dangerous. They can be used as weapons as our poor friends in France found out. There is an entire industry that develops vehicle technology to make them safer. Vehicles that can detect objects and avoid collisions even when the driver does not. "Smart cars" so to speak.

And yet when anyone discusses changing guns or gun laws, it's off limits. Throwing out Hitler references? It's irrational.
Click to expand...
Right VS privilege.

Hammers are dangerous, knives are dangerous. Bricks are dangerous. A rock is dangerous. Your argument is invalid. And irrational.
 
wizzi01 said:
So you are now comparing a right to a privilege. Firearm ownership is a right. Driving is a privilege. Comparing the two is irrational. Your arguments are getting weaker and weaker by the second. Also, like jpm100 said....look at Nice, France. One truck killed more people than a person with a firearm in a club in Orlando.
Click to expand...
Did that driver have his CDL? The HORRORS!
 
Rustynuts said:
Right VS privilege.

Hammers are dangerous, knives are dangerous. Bricks are dangerous. A rock is dangerous. Your argument is invalid. And irrational.
Click to expand...

I have hurt myself with every one of those things thus far in my life. Thankfully have not been injured by a firearm. Now even an ammo box full of ammo has hurt my toe before too.
 
big_aug said:
It's easier to get a gun than a driver's license. Months of education, supervised use, and proficiency tests are required to get a driver's license. I don't think anyone would argue those are bad things despite the fact that criminals don't follow the law and drive without a license all together. All that education and training is necessary because vehicles are dangerous. Very dangerous. They can be used as weapons as our poor friends in France found out. There is an entire industry that develops vehicle technology to make them safer. Vehicles that can detect objects and avoid collisions even when the driver does not. "Smart cars" so to speak.

And yet when anyone discusses changing guns or gun laws, it's off limits. Throwing out Hitler references? It's irrational.
Click to expand...

First: Not true, you don't need a background check to buy a car. You do for a firearm, unless it is purchased in a private sale, a time when you couldn't enforce a check anyway.

Second: the closest thing to Gun rights for liberals is voting rights.

Restricting gun rights is not like licencing a privilege, it is like restricting voting rights.

If you can restrict gun rights without a constitutional amendment, then you can restrict voting rights without a constitutional amendment.

So a county could remove women's suffrage, or a city could remove people of color's right to vote.

Do you get the problem with that scenario?

Even the ACLU agrees with me: Until the No Fly List Is Fixed, It Shouldn’t Be Used to Restrict People’s Freedoms
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top