Slashdot Mirror
Gun Rights Groups Say They Don't Oppose Smart Guns, Just Mandates
Lucas123 (935744) writes "When two gun stores attempted to sell the nation's first integrated smart gun, the iP1, gun advocacy groups were charged in media reports with organizing protests that lead to the stores pulling the guns from their shelves or reneging on their promise to sell them in the first place. But, the National Rifle Association and the National Shooting Sports Foundation say they do not oppose smart gun technology, which they call "authorized user recognition" firearms. "We do oppose any government mandate of this technology, however. The marketplace should decide," Mike Bazinet, a spokesman for the NSSF, wrote in an email reply to Computerworld. However, the argument for others goes that if stores begin selling smart guns, then legislators will draft laws requiring the technology."
If you could point and click a car at random people and start maiming or killing them with no risk to the user, aside from someone retaliating, then sure.
Until then...
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
They want the right to carry stupid guns, and they are gracious enough to not oppose other people's right to carry smart guns. That's really nice.
However, they do oppose people's right not to be shot by a stupid gun that someone takes away from the stupid owner of said stupid gun.
That was horribly stupid and simplistic.
Conservative poster
Conservatives have deep feelings and shallow thoughts.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+