ExRx.net

You know I was thinking the other day...have they ever tried a pin code safety that enables the trigger or something on a gun so it won't be able to be shot unless the correct pin is in? Just curious...I honestly don't know and that's why I am asking. Let's say for hypothetical reasons, cause perhaps stolen guns (like in some of these mass shootings) would be rendered useless if it could be done right, or if a kid in the house somehow gets ahold of the gun, it might prevent an accidental death. Do you think something like that would be an unreasonable precaution?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/1 ... d%3D256252

Another double-standard.

"You know I was thinking the other day...have they ever tried a pin code safety that enables the trigger or something on a gun so it won't be able to be shot unless the correct pin is in? Just curious...I honestly don't know and that's why I am asking. Let's say for hypothetical reasons, cause perhaps stolen guns (like in some of these mass shootings) would be rendered useless if it could be done right, or if a kid in the house somehow gets ahold of the gun, it might prevent an accidental death. Do you think something like that would be an unreasonable precaution?" - Rucifer

There have been a number of attempts to create "smart guns", but none have been very successful. Reliability seems to be the biggest problem. For example, if the battery goes dead then the weapon can't be fired even with the correct pin code. Meanwhile, with enough time, a thief could probably disable the security features. To me it makes a lot more sense to just invest in a good gun safe.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/1 ... d%3D256833

This just plain stinks.

I'm not sure if the seven-round rule is in intended to apply to fixed/tube magazines as well as detachable magazines. If so, it would ban many slide-action shotguns and lever-action rifles as "assault weapons."

PS) If most of the guns used in crimes in NY are smuggled in from out of state (as is claimed here), I don't see how any state law is going to solve to problem.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... r-assault/

More bad news from NY.

It's an erosion of freedoms that we 'collectively' are freely giving up to the government.

_________________
Thanks TimD.

The vauge recent mensions of action by executive order are especially troubling.

It's official ... the NY ban passed.

http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/news- ... px?s&st&ps

Over and over again I've heard it claimed that no one needs "high capacity" magazines and semi-auto rifles for self defense. However, no one ever seems to question their use by police. Doesn't that seem a little contradictory? How is it possible that the police need all the firepower they can get to deal with dangerous, armed criminals, while civilians are expected to defend themselves and their families against the same criminals with far less?

It is a little contradictory, but the reason the police have them is because the "bad guys" already have them and if they used more basic firearms they would potentially be at a disadvantage. Of course, after reading how many "assault rifles" are actually used in crimes, I would even question that. It would stand to reason that if they somehow pass these assault rifle bans, and somehow get the "bad guys" guns, that they should have to give them up too, but I doubt that would happen. I just watched the Obama speech today about the executive orders he signed (which I am unaware exactly what he signed). But under this administration and the previous one, we do seem to be surrendering too many rights for the sake of safety. I am still kind of on the fence about this whole "assault rifle" thing in general, as I was arguing with you about it, but I definitely agree to tread lightly before drastic measures are taken, otherwise the response will always seem to be "drastic measures" to ensure safety, which as history would prove, is not the way to go about things. "They are wrong, for the right reasons". I guess that's how I view the ban at the moment.

Obama and the other Democrats need to pick their battles. This isn't a good idea. They should just really pass the thing about background checks and stop there. That at least has the support of 85% of Americans, including a majority of Republicans. The last thing we need is to drive gun-owning moderates to vote Republican.

One of Obama's executive orders is for the CDC to use tax money to conduct "research" on gun violence. I'm pretty sure congress voted to end this practice years ago after the CDC funded a number of heavily-biased garbage "studies" by gun-ban groups (really just propaganda).

"It is a little contradictory, but the reason the police have them is because the "bad guys" already have them and if they used more basic firearms they would potentially be at a disadvantage. Of course, after reading how many "assault rifles" are actually used in crimes, I would even question that. It would stand to reason that if they somehow pass these assault rifle bans, and somehow get the "bad guys" guns, that they should have to give them up too, but I doubt that would happen." - Rucifer

"High-capacity" magazines are standard on most semi-auto pistols, so it's not just a rifle issue. Meanwhile, no one seems to agree on what "high-capacity" means. The expired federal "Assault Weapon" ban defined "high-capacity" as anything over 10-rounds, however the newly passed NY gun ban defines "high-capacity" as 8-or-more.

One of the Obama/Biden recommendations is to ban armor-piercing ammunition. I'm a little puzzled by this one, since I'm pretty sure armor-piercing ammo is already illegal. ... However, there was a very misleading "armor-piercing" ammo ban proposed a few years back that dealt with conventional centerfire rifle rounds. The idea was to classify ordinary rifle ammo as "armor-piercing" on the premiss that it can penetrate the kevlar vests worn by most police officers (which are only intended to stop standard handgun rounds). If I remember correctly, Ted Kenedy was even involved. Anyway, the proposed ban didn't get very far and soon disappeared. I wonder if we might see it again (or something similar) in the near future.

I guess it depends on what you consider armor and therefore, armor-piercing. The way I understand armor-piercing is that bullet has a hardened core instead of a lead center. Anything less shouldn't be included and that's probably most conventional ammo. Even slugs and solid bullets shouldn't be grouped in with armor-piercing since they have a purpose in big game hunting.

_________________
Let thy food be thy medicine, and thy medicine be thy food.~Hippocrates
Strength is the adaptation that leads to all other adaptations that you really care about - Charles Staley
_________________
Thanks TimD