New legislation introduced by a congresswoman from New York would mandate non-existent “smart” gun technology on all new handguns, wrecking the firearm industry and outlawing guns currently owned by law-abiding Americans.
We’ve told you before about U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., one of the most anti-gun members of Congress. Her years-long assault on American gun owners and the Second Amendment is a shameful one, indeed.
Now Maloney has introduced an outlandish measure in the U.S. Congress—H.R. 2380—requiring that within five years, all newly manufactured handguns sold in the country include technology enabling only authorized users to fire the gun. That’s quite startling when you consider that proven technology of that kind doesn’t even exist.
H.R. 2380 would also require that existing handguns be retrofitted with similar technology within 10 years of the measure's passage. With the wide variety of handguns made and sold over the past many decades, such an undertaking would, of course, be impossible. The result of such legislation would simply be outlawing all of those currently owned handguns.
As a little background, an early version of a “smart” gun by Armatix, the iP1, was a complete failure. I was one of the people who got to shoot the gun a few years back in California, and the $1,800 monstrosity had far too many flaws to make it a worthy self-defense firearm.
That company’s promised newer version is said to operate using a fingerprint reader on the grip. Of course, such technology has its obvious limits, which typically include the same kind of problems we commonly experience with smartphone technology—inability to recognize fingerprints when hands are wet, dirty or wearing gloves.
H.R. 2380 would also require that existing handguns be retrofitted with similar technology within 10 years of the measure's passage.Interestingly, even Armatix’s CEO doesn’t believe such technology should be made mandatory by government—as Maloney’s bill would do.
“There's always going to be pushback with new items. With the right education and explanation—that we're not here to replace conventional guns—I expect much less to none this time,” CEO and president Wolfgang Tweraser told computerworld.com. “Even if you look at the latest statements from the NRA, they say, 'We have nothing against smart guns, we just don't want the government making the decision for us.’ I agree with them.”
Obviously, Maloney doesn’t agree with such sentiment. Adding insult to injury, her bill even contains a provision that would force taxpayers to cover the cost of grants to “smart” gun developers. Yep, more of your tax dollars at work.
Fortunately, the measure—more of a thumb in the eye to gun owners than a serious legislative effort—is expected to die in committee. But the fact that it was even introduced is a good reminder to us all of exactly how far some gun-ban advocates are willing to go to curtail the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans.
In the past, when discussing “smart” guns, some anti-gun politicians have promoted such technology while saying they’re not actually calling for laws mandating it. Now, Maloney has shown that many on the gun-ban side of the equation stand firmly for mandating a technology that doesn’t even exist in a reliable form.
Mark Chesnut has been the editor of America’s 1st Freedom magazine for nearly 17 years and is an avid hunter, shooter and political observer.
