Eric Holder wants gun owners to wear ‘smart gun’ bracelets

Posted by Eudaimonia 11 years, 11 months ago to Politics
47 comments | Share | Flag

November can't come quickly enough.

All Comments

  • Posted by starguy 11 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Sorry, but Holder and his boss, the idiot-in-chief, are all out of "competence".

    But keep that optimism!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Correct. But the idiocracy will cozy up behind him and the sock-puppet press will tell all the sheeple that this is for their own good. Guns are bad. This is just a way to make sure that bad people don't use bad guns. All the while implementing a mechanism for good people to not be able to resist tyranny when necessary. And it's closer than many realize.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Your_Name_Goes_Here 11 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    And wouldn't said "safeguard" be an infringement on the second amendment? I'm sure Mr. Holder, and our Dear Leader, Barack Hussein Obama (mmm, mmm, mmm), will assure us otherwise.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by tdechaine 11 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That's the Left's secret ploy alright.
    When anyone starts to think about the potentially good feature of controlling the wrong uses of guns, this is all they need to realize.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by livefree-NH 11 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    But jammers are illegal so we would never have to worry about that. Actually there exists today a safety mechanism that inhibits the trigger from functioning unless a small magnet is held next to it, normally contained in / attached to a ring that the gun owner will be wearing. This is much more low-tech, but serves this purpose. And it is for the benefit of the gun owner and safety, and NOT for the (nefarious) purposes that this Atty. Gen. may have in mind.

    At best, at the VERY best, this is a solution looking for a problem. More likely, it is a "feel-good" proposition offered so that someone can say that they 'did something' or tried something, only to be shot down by the pro-gun nuts, or whatever the slander-du-jour is about us peace-loving, liberty-loving, freedom-loving, gun-owning libertarian wack jobs.

    Oh yeah, I forgot "common sense bla bla bla if it saves one child's life yadda yadda machine gun assault rifle schools not fair..." Now I get my google hit :)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 11 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The problem is in producing said bracelets. A private business would lose its shirt. It would have to be a government subsidized operation, and therefore corrupted right from the beginning.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 11 years, 11 months ago
    *uck Eric Holder. Put his ass on trial for treason then lock him away..
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 11 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Actually, I saw this a couple of months ago. The technology is real. What bugs me - aside from the obvious infringement - is that anyone with a simple antenna tuned to the correct frequency can jam these and render the gun useless - and not just law enforcement. And that doesn't even account for having charged batteries...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 11 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Ah, no. It's "elite sense" - not for the common man. Eric Holder needs to be able to decide for the rest of us what justice means, don't you know?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by LetsShrug 11 years, 11 months ago
    Hmmm I think that might fall under "infringement". Even though I would never wear a bracelet with fringe. And the asshole has the nerve to call this a "common sense" approach. Lol do ANY of their wordings make sense? Catch phrase mind boggle ALL the time with these people.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 11 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I'm not sure competent is the word I would choose. How about impartial? How about just? How about transparent (and not Obama's version of said word)? How about someone who put the law before politics?

    The day we get one of those back in office is the day we have a President I can respect. Not that I will, but that I COULD.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 11 months ago
    November would only be significant for a gov't that actually observed the separation of powers. When it is "rogue" like this one, the congress is inconsequential.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Ah, but competent in what is the question. This one is very competent in subverting the constitution.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Not going to happen with this or any other admin. My guess is that he's already got a permanent and full pardon locked away in a safe somewhere.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    And what about the situation where you were confronted with an intruder? Would you want to have to find some bracelet and turn it on before you could use your weapon?

    And I still say that such technology would have a "backdoor" so that the government could turn all off, thus disarming the public.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ johnrobert2 11 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    See my post regarding this in the other thread regarding the same subject. You and I are on the same track.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo