Recent update on so-called “smart gun” regulations.
Upshot: it’s voluntary…. with an implied *for now attached. Leave it to the government to call for a way to make a perfectly reliable, simple, mechanical system, and apply a high-tech solution to a social problem that a) won’t fix the problem, b) discriminates against the poor, c) will make good systems less reliable, d) etc [insert all the usual litany of problems with this specific tech here]
This sure is an unusually flea-ridden mongrel camel, but even so, we need to be careful not to let its nose into our tent. Not even a whisker.
I’m a bit worried by the wishy-washy reactions. “This won’t work” is nice, but it misses the point. The reply needs to be “HELL NO, not now, not ever”.
Typically, the very, very best that Americans can come up with in opposition to any Progressive/communist/authoritarian assertion is, “it won’t work”, and that will often be supported with statistics. In so doing we’ve missed the point.
“Hell no; not ever!” is probably better, but that too misses the point. It is on equal moral footing with the predictable counter response; “Yeah? Watch me” or “Who’s gonna stop us?” and thus push comes to shove, as in any conflict involving criminal gangs.
All that’s needed is the original, moral basis for keeping personal arms, and other basic human rights, out of the reach of government. Since it is beyond their jurisdiction, the question of whether it will “work” or not is irrelevant. You don’t discuss recipes for human liver, nor its various nutritional attributes, or its potential in commerce, etc., unless you’ve already accepted the idea of canibalism.
It’s not the government’s business to tell us what kind of arms we may use. It’s simply outside of their jurisdiction and that’s that. Why discuss the recipes then? It’s no different than you deciding it’s your business to tell your neighbors what kind of carpet they’re going to get for their own homes (based on your thorough research and expertise of course) and threatening them with penalties if they don’t obey you.
In that case of course it doesn’t matter how much you know about carpeting. There is in fact no amount of knowledge or expertise, intelligence or superior taste, etc., that will ever make it your business to tell others what they may or may not do with their own floors.
You’ll never have any such authority because no such authority exists. The moment you attempt to pretend that you have such authority is the moment you become a criminal. At that moment you are committing fraud and abuse (no matter your technical expertise, knowledge or intelligence).
So it is with government and our unalienable rights. Furthermore, the moment we begin to engage the fuckers in a conversation on what might or might not “work” is the moment we’ve conceded to their fraudulent claim of authority.
If they have no authority, there’s no room for discussion. If we’re discussing it, that can only be because we’ve granted to them an authority that does not exist.
We are participating in, and thereby promulgating, a lie, an outrage, allowing ourselves to be taken into the weeds with the enemy, as if they have the authority to discuss it at all. They don’t. Stop pretending they do.
In that sense, we are insane. We’ve forgotten our principles (assuming we ever had any). We deserve what’s coming, because we helped it all along the way.
The non-smart portion of the specs were quite interesting too. Based on my observations the interaction of how safeties should work and reliability standards, they would appear to exclude any pistols besides Glocks and S&W. Maybe SA and some SiGs.
Reading the actual specs leaves me with the impression that someone in DOJ actually attempted to introduce requirements that sabotage the specification’s utility as a stalking horse for a mandate.