Not long ago I posted a question on here if people were willing to carry a smart gun in exchange for shall issue carry permits. This question really only applies to folks living in states that are May Issue and make it incrediblely difficult to acquire a permit. I would never expect any sane individual in a Shall Issue state to go for this sort of thing. Well, I opted to ask that question to the folks over at The Truth About Guns. TTAG is a blog I read almost daily. They have a very large following and are one of the top gun blogs out there. Their readers represent various groups of people ranging from the absolutists and hardcore gunnies to the moderate. It would not surprise me if they even had a few anti's that read them as well.
TTAG's post
You can see in the post my question (the editors appear to have shortened my email a bit which is fine as it's easier to read) was answered by many members of the community. I cannot believe how many people have commented in the first hour the post has been up; over 70 comments! Everyone commenting pretty much all said the same thing; NO or F*** NO! LOL. To be fair though, I think most people didn't bother to read the full thing. I probably wouldn't have either and just posted NO. I'm not saying I expected anything different from the readership but it's kind of amazing and a little exciting to see something of mine take off and get responded to. So far, many people have indicated one very specific reason (amongst others) as to why NO to smart guns; the potential ability of the/a government to "turn off" the guns. This concept is interesting and is worth being worried about as the state could very easily prevent folks from using their firearm in a time of need; such as a natural disaster. Additionally, many of the comments are in regards to giving up part of our rights; the "give an inch..." argument came up quite a bit. Also, the ability to track the gun via GPS was a major concern in addition to the firearm not being reliable and these laws being unconstitutional. The concerns about the state forcing a requirement to be able to track the gun and having any ability to disable the weapon remotely are, for me, automatic turn-offs. I would NEVER agree to the legislation if any level of our government had those abilities regarding my smart gun.
Why Even Suggest This?
I don't disagree with anything they've said. I completely understand their concerns and I agree with them but my idea was simply one possible way to coerce these states normally unwilling to budge into Shall Issue permits. Then take the state to court over the legislation to remove the smart gun requirement due to it being unconstitutional (for any reason is fine with me). The state would then be forced to remove the smart gun requirement potentially leaving the Shall Issue permit intact. This process could be very dangerous for our rights but we could end up gaining ground if it won't happen by itself. Part of me thinks that Shall Issue permits are the future despite these elected politician's and their inability to recognize our rights.
The process likely wouldn't happen this way but at least I'm trying.
Note: I will check back over the next few days to see what others have said. So far the comments have reached over 110. Very nice.
No comments:
Post a Comment