FN Herstal Firearms banner

1 - 1 of 1 Posts

3,341 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Sorry in advance for the length of this, but I think these are some good arguments for both sides of the aisle to repeal Smart-Gun laws and to scrap ones being considered. If you think these arguments make sense, feel free to use my text in any way you like. If you think they are stupid or naive, please don't hold back on posting below, it's easy to get lost in one's own thoughts on something without maybe considering everything :)

At least 3 states have versions of Smart-Gun Laws: California, Maryland, and New Jersey. And as far as I know, at least one of those states mandate that once Smart-Gun technology becomes available for sale, that all guns in the state will eventually need to be outfitted with this functionality. Similar Federal laws are sought enacted.

Gun owners resist this, because they know the moment a potentially bad technology enters the market, they will be forced to adopt it. As a result it is easier to force manufacturers and sellers to not consider Smart-Gun technology at all.

At the same time, most gun owners think that this technology need to be vetted by Federal and State Law Enforcement Agencies, as well as the Military. Reliability is one of the main qualities people look for in guns for self defense, and police/military use is a commonly held benchmark. At the same time police is at much higher risk to have their guns stolen or lost.

As such, Smart-Guns are never going to enter the market in most of the United States. Police and military will not adopt this technology until it has been proven rugged and reliable, and the people refuse to be the test case for it, while giving up their rights to a more reliable alternative.

The problem is there are cases where Smart-Gun technology could be beneficial, and can even create actual (not the euphemism) gun safety. Parents who wish to have a compromise between a gun in a safe and one sitting loaded and unsupervised on the night stand. Or for learning purposes for new or casual shooters. These types of situations are often a high risk for negligent discharges. Yet current Smart-Gun laws prevent the use of this technology, for the reasons above, where it could actually save lives rather than end them by failing at a critical moment.

Legislators who champion these laws tout safety as a concern, yet they write the laws in such ways that they will never reach their implementation goals. Gun-control proponents call for compromise all the time, but this is a clear example of where their all-or-nothing attitude preclude any form of real compromise.

The real compromise we should make with legislators on this technology is to ask them to repeal Smart-Gun laws in all states and create freedom of choice protections for gun buyers at a Federal level. They will ask how this is a compromise, and we can simply point out that their laws, as written, prevent this technology for use in situations where it would be a benefit, and where people would not be leery of its reliability.

The free market, not laws, will then create new and better technology. And maybe in time technology which is so good that those who could really benefit from it, police and military, will consider adopting it.

So if you live in a state which has these laws, or which is considering them, write and call your legislators and ask them to compromise by not passing laws regarding Smart-Guns. And instead allow the free market to determine the reliability of this technology and give those who want or need it a chance to use it, while leaving the rest of us alone.

Ask them, if repealing these laws could save lives in both situations where Smart-Guns are beneficial and where they are not, why not do it?
1 - 1 of 1 Posts