The push to REQUIRE all firearms dealers to have a SMART gun available.

[Bill of Rights]

To be fair, I don't know that David has an "anti-gun agenda". I also don't know that he does not. All I know is that his posts in general tend to lean less toward individual liberty than, say, yours, mine, or most people's hereabouts.

In and of itself, that doesn't make him anti-gun, but perhaps anti-individualist/anti-individual rights.

Regardless, and unrelated to exclusively him or for that matter, exclusively you, let's keep the posts on topic, and off of each other. It's not about "his kind", whatever that is, but about the proponents of this move (requiring stores to waste retail space on a specific item that they otherwise would not stock.)

Statism and liberalism both contain ideas that their adherents think are so good, they (the ideas) should be mandatory.

Blessings,
Bill

Nobody wants to stock items that won't sell. Retail is all about dollars per square foot, and taking up display space with something you can't sell costs you money. If we allow this, the gun stores will eventually be forced to stock more and more crap that won't sell eventually forcing them out of business, which although unstated is the likely goal. Your kind is all about incremental destruction of the gun industry in this country; we all know it. You aren't fooling anyone into supporting your anti-gun agenda.

 

[pudly]

If passed, this bill would result in non-smart guns being outlawed for sale in New Jersey. NJ has long had the "New Jersey Childproof Handgun Law" which requires that as soon as any smart gun is sold in the US, that three years later, only smart guns could be sold in NJ.

Quality of options, consumer choice, affordability and usability for self-defense have nothing to do with that law.

 

[david890]

Your kind is all about incremental destruction of the gun industry in this country; we all know it.

 

[david890]

If passed, this bill would result in non-smart guns being outlawed for sale in New Jersey. NJ has long had the "New Jersey Childproof Handgun Law" which requires that as soon as any smart gun is sold in the US, that three years later, only smart guns could be sold in NJ.

How many handguns do you think they'd sell in those 3 years?

 

[david890]

Nobody wants to stock items that won't sell. Retail is all about dollars per square foot, and taking up display space with something you can't sell costs you money. If we allow this, the gun stores will eventually be forced to stock more and more crap that won't sell eventually forcing them out of business, which although unstated is the likely goal.

Perhaps you should re-read the OP:

"....maintain a personalized handgun in the sales inventory of the licensed dealer..."

So, as I read it, as long as there's a SINGLE "smart" gun on the premises, the dealer is good to go.

Also, are you absolutely convincedit won't sell?

 

[caverjamie]

Perhaps you should re-read the OP:

"....maintain a personalized handgun in the sales inventory of the licensed dealer..."

So, as I read it, as long as there's a SINGLE "smart" gun on the premises, the dealer is good to go.

Also, are you absolutely convincedit won't sell?

Who cares? The dealer should be the one to decide which firearms (or firearm) he wants on the premises, period.

 

[jbombelli]

Perhaps you should re-read the OP:

"....maintain a personalized handgun in the sales inventory of the licensed dealer..."

So, as I read it, as long as there's a SINGLE "smart" gun on the premises, the dealer is good to go.

Also, are you absolutely convincedit won't sell?

I've known a LOT of gun people over the years since they started talking about "smart" guns, and not ONE of them would even take one for free, let alone spend their hard-earned money on such a thing.

Then again some gun-hating liberal in New Jersey might, just to make sure nobody can buy a non-"smart" handgun in New Jersey ever again.

 

[MTC]

Lemme ask Chief Justice Roberts. Hold on.

He says that the federal government can do whatever it wants as long as his wife get invited to the right cocktail parties in Georgetown. Oh, and stop typing on INGO and go buy your health insurance mach schnell.

Der Professor trifft wieder den Nagel auf den Kopf!

 

[BluePig]

I am getting to the point nowadays that when I hear the title of a bill before Congress, it turns out to be just the opposite.
Smart guns must be very stupid.

 

[david890]

Who cares? The dealer should be the one to decide which firearms (or firearm) he wants on the premises, period.

Let's say Gunshop A carries the SMART gun, and there's a line around the block for it; hundreds in line, like it was a new iPhone. Owner of Gunshop B sees this.

What do you believe the owner of Gunshop B will do: sit out or compete?

 

[Bill of Rights]

Let's say Gunshop A carries the SMART gun, and there's a line around the block for it; hundreds in line, like it was a new iPhone. Owner of Gunshop B sees this.

What do you believe the owner of Gunshop B will do: sit out or compete?

Given that situation, the owner of gunshop B would likely choose to compete.

Let me offer an alternative scenario, though, under this new law: Let's say for the sake of the argument that a business has 30 days from the passage of this law to comply.

Using your original premise, with a slight modification:

Let's say Gunshop A carries the SMART gun, and there's a line around the block to shop at Gunshop B, specifically because he does NOT carry it. Gunshop A is being boycotted by gun owners. What will the owner of Gunshop B do?

That's right, he'll still HAVE to buy the da*ned thing and put it in his shop like the law demands, or have his business shut down by our government, because he no longer has the choice to run his business in the way that suits him and his customers.

Without this law, business owners have the choice to run their businesses as they see fit, for weal or woe. Under this law, that choice is taken away from them, and government is dictating their inventory (as well as marketing decisions such as product placement)

It's very similar to laws such as "smoking bans" or the "parking lot law" that forces a business owner to allow something on their property that they don't want there. (full disclosure: While I didn't support the idea behind the parking lot bill from an anti-big-gov't perspective, I happily avail myself of the ability it grants me to exercise my rights under the law to continue to be armed in as many places as possible. Some would call this hypocritical. I disagree, in that it is not hypocritical to be against a smoking ban and yet continue to breathe the air without cigarette smoke in it in human-detectable quantities.)

I think the market should regulate these decisions, not the legislature.

As a business owner, I'm thinking that unless the law disallowed such, I would put the techno-gun (note that I don't call it "smart" by any stretch of the imagination) in my shop "prominently", with an equally prominent price tag identifying it as:

Anti-American,
Government-Mandated
PIECE OF S**T
That Will Only Endanger Your Life

My purchase price: $800.
Your price: $2400.

I have to carry it
No one says you have to buy it.
Yet.
Vote intelligently!
​

Blessings,
Bill

 

[pudly]

I think the market should regulate these decisions, not the legislature.

That's deplorable.

 

[Bill of Rights]

That's deplorable.

Thank you! That's the nicest thing anyone's said to me all day!

 

[david890]

As a business owner, I'm thinking that unless the law disallowed such, I would put the techno-gun (note that I don't call it "smart" by any stretch of the imagination) in my shop "prominently", with an equally prominent price tag identifying it as:

Anti-American,
Government-Mandated
PIECE OF S**T
That Will Only Endanger Your Life

My purchase price: $800.
Your price: $800.
​

l

Again, as an FFL, you can deny any sale you wish, for whatever reason you wish (or so I've been told). No need to go beyond what that law requires, and that's *ONE* smart weapon for sale.

 

[stephen87]

That still comes from public funds, so nope. Make the sponsor(s) of the bill pay for it. Personally.

Nah. He gets paid from the taxes as well. Maybe we can fire him, empty his bank account, make him earn money by actual work, THEN require him to pay for it.

 

[HoughMade]

How An Idea To Develop A Safer, Smart Gun Backfired : NPR

Although I observed several INGOers who seem pretty satisfied with the idea of governments telling businesses what they have to do, so what's the big deal here?

 

[actaeon277]

How An Idea To Develop A Safer, Smart Gun Backfired : NPR

Although I observed several INGOers who seem pretty satisfied with the idea of governments telling businesses what they have to do, so what's the big deal here?

ROSE: The timing was awful. Just when Colt needed to convince potential customers they could trust this new smart gun, here's a front-page story in The Wall Street Journal saying they can't.

the timing sounded perfect. Better to find out then, than when police officers have bought thousands, and officers start dying because they're carrying around a paperweight.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Nah. He gets paid from the taxes as well. Maybe we can fire him, empty his bank account, make him earn money by actual work, THEN require him to pay for it.

He (or she) does get paid from public funds. However, by that logic, all money is "public funds", because at some point or another, it's all been in gov't hands... Used to pay taxes, etc., etc. Once he's been paid his salary, that money is in private hands and fair game for the court to take it in response to a judgment of guilt for introducing bills in denial of the rights of the people; bills meant only to curtail the free exercise of rights, the exercise of which has caused no damages, except to the amount of control a government has over its citizens.

"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their People!" };-)~

Blessings,
Bill

 

[2A_Tom]

Pete's reply

Congressman Visclosky letterhead
Dear Thomas:

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to H.R. 6080, the Modernizing Firearm Technology Act. I appreciate hearing from you.

Introduced by Rep. DeSaulnier, H.R. 6080 would require federal firearm licensees with a retail establishment to display and sell at least one personalized firearm. Personalized firearms, which are also referred to as “smart-guns,” are firearms that can only be fired by an authorized user due to technological features integrated into the firearm, such as radio-frequency identification (RFID) chips, fingerprint recognition, magnetic rings, or mechanical locks. Federal firearm licensees found in violation of this measure would incur a $1,000 annual fine.

H.R. 6080 was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, where it is currently pending consideration. The measure has no cosponsors and a companion measure has not been introduced in the Senate.

You should know that in January 2013, the Obama Administration directed the Department of Justice to review existing and emerging gun safety technologies and then issue a report on their availability and potential use. Most recently, in April 2016, the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and Defense released a report that outlined strategies to expedite the employment of gun safety technology, as found in personalized firearms. The report stated that this type of technology “holds great promise” and by “incorporating electronic systems into a firearm’s design, manufacturers can give gun owners greater control over how a weapon is used, both by limiting who can fire the gun and by making a gun easier to retrieve if it is lost or stolen.” However, specific to your concerns, the report stated that, while it recommends the development of new technology, it does not recommend
“a mandate that any particular individual or law enforcement agency adopt the technology once developed.”

Thank you again for contacting me. Be assured that I will continue to monitor H.R. 6080 with your views in mind. Do not hesitate to let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.
Sincerely,


Peter J. Visclosky
Member of Congress

 

[2A_Tom]

How An Idea To Develop A Safer, Smart Gun Backfired : NPR

Although I observed several INGOers who seem pretty satisfied with the idea of governments telling businesses what they have to do, so what's the big deal here?

Let me guess, brad dave n 4never. mayb alp.

Edit: Sorry, I have gone back and read the thread and I apologize to Alpo who i mis judged, brad and 4never who have as of yet chimed in and dave who while kind of being on board is not all out for it.