Let me guess, brad dave n 4never. mayb alp.
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
pudly;6759292[B said:]Translation: I will not state any position on the matter[/B].
-Peter Visclosky
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
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.
In your scenario, Bill, government subsidies would likely prevent that manufacturer from having to fold. Then the race for government subsidies to cronies would be on, and more laws would be coming.
I would put the techno-gun (note that I don't call it "smart" by any stretch of the imagination)
If people really wanted smart guns, you wouldn't have to REQUIRE businesses to stock them.
If people really wanted smart guns, you wouldn't have to REQUIRE businesses to stock them.
New Jersey and a few other states have something like this: law that says within X years of smart gun tech becoming available, only smart guns can be sold. Someone made one recently so now their clock's ticking. Never mind that the technology is still very unreliable and expensive (I'm talking $2k for a .22 pistol)
H.R. 6080: Modernizing Firearm Technology Act
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr6080/text
(1)Each licensed dealer shall maintain a personalized handgun in the sales inventory of the licensed dealer, prominently display a personalized handgun at the location specified on the license to deal in firearms issued to the licensed dealer under this chapter, and offer a personalized handgun for sale to members of the public who are not prohibited by law from possessing a handgun.
(2)Paragraph (1) shall not apply to a pawnbroker or a person who deals in only antique firearms.
Smart gun bill introduced in Congress
Unreasonable requirements by government for dealers are yet one more gun control scheme, period. The so called smart gun technology is too unreliable, and there are too many unknowns about it I believe, for most, if not all serious gun owners to be able to trust it. This overbearing government is pressing WAY too hard against the Second Amendment, and it needs to stop, now!