It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Firearms resolution to soon be passed.

page: 26
14
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2018 @ 12:01 AM
link   
According to the Op, there is a bill that is going through congress, to require all firearms be fitted with a chip and a sensor to where they can not be fired, unless given a code and that all of this can be tracked by some authorities to track stolen weapons.

Now as far fetch as that sounds, and ultimately it would not work with various firearms, the problems would be that no one would be able to use it. The technology for such, is not present, or around to make it where a tracking chip, that would require a battery present, and to be charged on a regular basis, to fire a weapon would be even possible at this time frame, let alone the expense of retrofitting any and all older firearms.

it does not really seem plausible, and with no proof, this could be a hoax. The current feeling is that Guns are off limits, and those politicians who try to do anything about them, often find themselves either being recalled or just voted out of office.




posted on Jan, 8 2018 @ 12:09 AM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig

Well actually it is a bill being prepared to go through Congress & the Senate. I miss wrote that in the original op. And like i said earlier if congress works only 125 days in a year it would not be soon but later. I was informed that they could add it to the spending bill. And as Terry or Noiden said they couldn't.

But then the news broke today they are adding earmarks back into action so they can add things to bills in order to appease and get a passing votes. These earmarks may make it easier to slip in gun laws the Dems so badly want.

But the tech is out there, it is a viable market if the gun laws change to require smart gun technology, it is not just for gun makers but for computer programmers and server providers as well.

I don't know if they can refit older guns seeing their frames are not manufactured to hold the devices. So it looks as if only newer guns if required by law will have them.

Hey if you can hold an apple 10 in your hand, which is basically a computer with a phone, you can very easily design a firearm to have gps, and other disable features added to a gun. The tech is getting smaller. they have Integrated Chips out there now that fit on the head of a stick pin. Batteries would be the biggest issue I see hindering smart gun tracking tech right now.
edit on 8-1-2018 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2018 @ 12:14 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Lol.



posted on Jan, 8 2018 @ 12:14 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Any and all reference to such, pretty much is all old news, from what I could find and based on the history of such, probably will not go anywhere or get out of committee meeting. I did not find anything current on such a topic.



posted on Jan, 8 2018 @ 12:18 AM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig

Remember some of the snow flakes out there today are going to be in office as early as in 2024 So they will be the ones with the whole AI vision. Smart guns are just a part of AI. It will happen, but then again the Lord may return and they will be reduced to using bow and arrows and swords to fight with.



posted on Jan, 8 2018 @ 05:34 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn


it is a viable market if the gun laws change to require smart gun technology


With the current restrictions with satellites, it really isn’t viable. There’s just not the reliable coverage and ability to handle the extra signals and data.

Let’s look at what you posted on page 20.


FEASIBILITY OF INSTALLING
GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEMS ON FIREARMS

You asked whether it is feasible to install or attach global positioning system (GPS) equipment in or on firearms without impairing their usability. If so, you wanted to (1) know the added costs of adding such equipment and (2) the potential disadvantages of using such equipment.


Basically “is it worth it?”


While GPS works anywhere there is a line of sight with four or more transmitting satellites, there are locations such as the interior of large buildings where GPS signals cannot be received. This could interfere with the tracking of a GPS-equipped firearm. While other technologies could be used to determine the firearm's location, there may be locations where they also do not work.


Just as myself and others have said. The current GPS tech is unreliable enough for it to not be viable.



posted on Jan, 8 2018 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I do not think it is going to happen. And the main reason is that not many people want a firearm that they have to plug in to charge up or use. Nor do many people want to deal with the entire tech behind these smart guns.

Then there is the money aspect. First the industry has to develop this and still make a profit, and so far this is not proving to be reliable. And they have to secure it, and that is not going to happen, cause all it would take is a hacker to figure out how to break the code and then get in and able to muck about with the programming and alter it to the point where it no longer does what they want it to do. Then there is the gun Lobby, namely the NRA, that will use every penny in their bank, to either defeat it or get people elected to remove it.

So chances are it is not going to be a viable option,the technology is not really ready for a smart gun at this time frame, and no politician is going to want to commit political suicide over this issue.



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig

Except millennial's when they come into office circa 2020 through 2030, they will be pushing for it. If not they will pass bills wanting you to be allowed only to have a 3 to 5 shot hunting shotgun. And will demand all weapon be confiscated and we will end up like many countries in the EU where only criminals, police and military have guns.



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn


Except millennial's when they come into office circa 2020 through 2030, they will be pushing for it. If not they will pass bills wanting you to be allowed only to have a 3 to 5 shot hunting shotgun

So now it’s the millennials fault for something you’re saying they’re going to do? With no evidence, might I add.

EPIC LOL


And will demand all weapon be confiscated and we will end up like many countries in the EU where only criminals, police and military have guns.

Countries such as?
edit on 912018 by TerryDon79 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Changing the goalposts, again?

I thought you said that it was happening now, not next decade...

Why are you ignoring the plain fact that this plan, if it even existed, is unworkable?



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Before you condemn a group, perhaps a bit of evidence to state such?

Here is the problem right now: There is a valid problem in the USA. Now the solution, no one wants to talk about or do. And to make matters worse, is that the NRA uses his dollars to pay for the lobbying and to get people elected, and then both sides on this issue use this for political gain.

No one wants to talk about the problem, or even admit the other side have points that need to be considered.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig

Fully agree, and we can judge a fully a group of people by their actions.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

the proposals were and are being discussed by members of both houses and they are saying one of two opinions.

Both of which have been expressed in this thread already.

But with Earmarks coming back into play. stuff can be added to a bill to get things past. But remember Obama already signed an executive to go forward with Smart Gun Technology in 2016. Obama, the Elite, and the Illuminati (everyone is so quick to denounce) already know what direction the Nation will go on gun laws even 30 years into thefuture. So you can't stay in the past and yes goal post must be moved, the politicians do it all the time and In ever hear you comeplain about them doing it. Double standard I'd say.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn


But remember Obama already signed an executive to go forward with Smart Gun Technology in 2016.


There’s another little fib.

All EOs signed by BO in 2016

Notice the lack of anything smart gun related?



posted on Jan, 12 2018 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I am not condemning an entire group of people. However, some common sense approaches should be looked at, and agreed on. And when those are brought up one side or the other tends to bulk and shut down. And as sad as it is, the one group that tends to abuse the laws, are those that write them.



posted on Jan, 12 2018 @ 06:20 PM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig

I agree



posted on Jan, 13 2018 @ 07:40 PM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig


I don't think anyone will dispute that. Many gun owners fully support efforts to expand background checks, make NICS available to private sellers, report required data to NICS and enforce existing gun laws including mandatory minimums.

Do you know that the ATF prosecutes less than 1% of Disabled persons in possession of a firearm? Whether it is for domestic battery convictions, felony convictions or whatever the reason, people who aren't supposed to have firearms in the first place are the real problem. This problem is two fold.

1) It shows us criminals will acquire by any means necessary standard-capacity modern weapons. We need these (or better) weapons to protect against these individuals

2) We don't enforce the federal laws (which I believe has a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years) except for 1/100 cases. Yes, this is often prosecuted on the state level. But laws vary wildly from state to state, and often the charges are reduced or dropped in exchange for a guilty plea to the main offense (a robbery for instance, dropping felon w/ firearm charge in exchange for guilty plea)

There are some basic legislative steps that could be taken, but a majority of the above goals could be acomplished through BATFE/FBI clarksburg administrative rule rewrites without neccesarsily crafting new laws. A lot of private sellers already require a CHL/drivers license before conducting a private sale. Voluntary access to NICS would go a long way. Clearly it would require an act of congress to mandate the use of such a system in private sales, but there is so much more that can be done. Enforcing our existing laws against known criminals will make in impact on violent crimes in general.

edit on 1/13/2018 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2018 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn


One or two fringe Dem senators does not mean it is seriously being considered. A month ago, a couple of those same senators introduced articles of impeachment (which were of course voted down)

Groups like Moms demand action, gunsense and other activist groups have a few congressional reps in very blue states and these are the type of people "considering" such legislation. I have no doubt they are, but the rest of congress wouldn't dare get ensnared in a non-starter like gun control legislation. This failed during the height of Obama's administration, what on Earth makes anyone think it would fly now?



posted on Jan, 14 2018 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

Yeah that is true. But a copy of such was given to all of congress. But that was not to say they all want it or read it.

But now that earmarks seem to be going to be added back into action (that is why the inaction of the Dems with the DACA/wall funding), they are waiting for earmarks so they can get more of what they want that has nothing to do with DACA, Walls and other bills.

Seeing we have many Republicans incumbents now not running (which has nothing to do with Trump and more with not supporting his agenda) the Dems have a better chance of taking back the house and then we end up with bills being passed without being read. And if earmarks are added back in and bills get passed without reading it, we can expect to see stuff not even discussed on the floor being enacted i.e. gun control, smart gun tech and possibly areas given over to sharia law.



posted on Jan, 14 2018 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn


we can expect to see stuff not even discussed on the floor being enacted i.e. gun control, smart gun tech and possibly areas given over to sharia law.


You really think those wouldn’t get talked about?

Just on gun control, anytime ANYTHING restricting anything to do with firearms gets proposed, it’s talked about to death on the media. You REALLY think that would change?

As for your sharia law areas? Really?! REALLY?!

This thread really does show your complete lack of understanding of technology, bills, Congress and earmarks.

I won’t wait for a reply. You seem to be set on ignoring me because I can prove you wrong at each step.




top topics



 
14
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join