No Gun Control speech??

a reply to: windword

By and large, The most responsible people are gun owners. Most of them most of the time are well aware of the power they control over life, death and the possibility of accidents. Most gun owners.

But just like the few that misuse firearms, any control of their misuse is subject to misuse as well.

You can't legislate or digitize perfection to anything or anyone. Criminal intent is what matters and criminals on both ends of the law will find a way to carry out their criminal intentions, regardless.

Close parallel is the insistence on governments part to have access to encryption to peoples software. A back door for any is a hackable entrance for any.

a reply to: intrptrSo as truth seekers seeking truth, it is our duty to shatter the false hope many people have that government is an innocent good Samaritan watching its citizens and looking out for its well being.

This hope is delusional, naive and profoundly disconnected from reality, yet sadly this is the root of the logic many hold on to as they continue falling for the claims of our government wanting to keep everyone safe.

The illusion suggests that unless government is around, you will not be able to defend yourself, you are thus incomplete without government’s safety.
This illusion of course is based on the belief that government exists to protect you somehow.

a reply to: madenusa
Yah, pretty much. How much harm are they placing all of America in by waging endless, unjust war for profit overseas?

Do they care about us in that light? Hardly. They won't be affected by whats coming ether.

Theres a bunch of seething vengeful people out there and every time the US government drops another bomb over there, they create ever more "enemies".

Waking people up to that travesty of justice is key to changing things.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: madenusa
Yah, pretty much. How much harm are they placing all of America in by waging endless, unjust war for profit overseas?

Do they care about us in that light? Hardly. They won't be affected by whats coming ether.

Theres a bunch of seething vengeful people out there and every time the US government drops another bomb over there, they create ever more "enemies".

Waking people up to that travesty of justice is key to changing things.

America is a country which has killed at least 6 million people over the last half century
I don’t know what caused him to cry in his little performance about guns in America, but if you tell me it was because a decent human was overwhelmed momentarily by America’s hideously murderous society, I will not even bother to answer.

Smart guns and or the ban of guns will do nothing to prevent any crime
Because this
www.youtube.com... Home made shot gun will be the next thing
If someone wants to kill you they will find a way.


The youtube link shows a home made shotgun ,not how to make one

a reply to: Bluntone22

What about the double standard of freaking out every time he does speak and then freaking out when he doesn't?

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Bluntone22

What about the double standard of freaking out every time he does speak and then freaking out when he doesn't?

Because he always makes more sense when he doesn't speak.

a reply to: xuenchen
That has nothing to do with what I said, but glad you got your little pop shot in.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: xuenchen

The smart gun technology would have stopped the guy from pulling the trigger.

Why do you think that so many pro second amendment groups oppose such technology?

Genuine question.

How about this? That technology in addition to acting like a de facto ban on private ownership since no one could afford it but elites also leads to a situation where the federal government gets a vote on whether a gun owner can fire their gun. Since the 2A was written in large part to prevent Government tyranny by allowing citizens the option of armed resistance allowing the government to either ban weapons or to have in effect a kill switch against the very guns that would be used to fulfill the function desired to be enabled by the 2A is ludicrous. Thus pro 2A people will resist anything that would nullify the founder's intent.

gun kill switches enabled by smart technology or centralized gun registries of any sort or anything that would also render the 2A meaningless are never going to be supported by anyone who knows what the 2A is about.

The ignorant that think that the 2A is about hunting, sport uses, or even personal or home defense may be fooled into supporting "sensible" gun control. But those who know what the founders (including the author of it) argued about in their work to get the BOA ratified by the states know that there must not ever be government authority to control who gets guns and under what conditions.

originally posted by: madenusa

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: madenusa
Yah, pretty much. How much harm are they placing all of America in by waging endless, unjust war for profit overseas?

Do they care about us in that light? Hardly. They won't be affected by whats coming ether.

Theres a bunch of seething vengeful people out there and every time the US government drops another bomb over there, they create ever more "enemies".

Waking people up to that travesty of justice is key to changing things.

America is a country which has killed at least 6 million people over the last half century
I don’t know what caused him to cry in his little performance about guns in America, but if you tell me it was because a decent human was overwhelmed momentarily by America’s hideously murderous society, I will not even bother to answer.

if this were true then he would cry more than ex speaker boehner. but oddly he doesn't cry for but a few select victims. his normal reaction after a nasty murder is to go golfing within seconds a a brief prefunctory statement. the kind he cries for is normally a member of his own ethnic group who is also a criminal and the locus of a false narrative about victimhood used by racialist rabble rousers. He sure didn't cry when the illegal immigrant murdered that woman in LA. Was that not a horrible tragedy? did he cry about the benghazi murders? no i don't think he did. He had plenty of similar circumstances in which he could have showed great emotion but didn't. He is a disingenuous politically calculating asshole.

In short- I call BS on your entire absurd assertion. It's BS. He knows it. You know it. The liberal press knows it. Everyone with more than a couple of brain cells available for other than autonomic functions knows it. We are not buying it.

originally posted by: windword
And yet, there is an organized and concerted effort to block ALL smart gun sales in the entire USA, citing the New Jersey law. Go figure!

Which is anyone's prerogative, it still does not change on whom and how the law in New Jersey would affect/operate.

a reply to: stormbringer1701fear that smart guns would soon be the only guns people were allowed to buy...
I would buy one if the government stayed out of it

a reply to: madenusa

I don’t know what caused him to cry in his little performance about guns in America, but if you tell me it was because a decent human was overwhelmed momentarily by America’s hideously murderous society, I will not even bother to answer.

Some performance, that was.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: windword
And yet, there is an organized and concerted effort to block ALL smart gun sales in the entire USA, citing the New Jersey law. Go figure!

Which is anyone's prerogative, it still does not change on whom and how the law in New Jersey would affect/operate.

The New Jersey law effects my ability to purchase a smart gun here in California.

originally posted by: madenusa
a reply to: stormbringer1701fear that smart guns would soon be the only guns people were allowed to buy...
I would buy one if the government stayed out of it

some smart gun technology is RFID enabled. some is blue tooth or similar schemes. someone could turn off your gun forever. since one of the reasons (arguably the main reason) the founders had for creating the second amendment is to resist your own government if other means of redress are withheld by that government; anything that gives the government the means to disable your weapons or to confiscate them (registration/databases) is an infringement.

originally posted by: windword
The New Jersey law effects my ability to purchase a smart gun here in California.

How so? There is not a viable weapon on the market.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

There is not a viable weapon on the market?

How do you define "market".

Why aren't smart guns catching on in the U.S.?

Two major firearm manufacturers are offering smart guns for sale. The Kodiak Intelligun relies on fingerprint and hand grip verification while the Armatix iP1 only fires within 10 inches of a specific security watch worn by the shooter. And while the iP1 has sold well in Europe and Asia, both models have found the American market a much tougher sell.

In the past couple weeks, two different U.S. gun stores have announced the sale of the iP1 and then quickly reversed the decision after massive backlash from gun owners who see smart guns as a back-door form of gun control.

a reply to: windword

They are both not ready for the market, particularly the iP1 which can still be used if someone has the bracelet. None of this has to do with New Jersey law.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

They are both not ready for the market

How so? Do you have a source?

They are on the market in Europe right now. They were about to be on the market here in the US, but the sellers pulled back because of public backlash.

a reply to: windword



It would help if you educated yourself about the topic prior to posting.

The Kodiak is battery operated, if the battery dies it renders the handgun useless. It is also only available in one configuration, the Colt 1911 chassis. Additionally, an EMP will also render the handgun useless.

The iP1, as I mentioned above, can still be used if someone else has the special wristband required to fire it so it really is not that smart, it requires an additional device, at high cost, that does not differentiate between who operates the firearm.