The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - Mass. Senator proposes ridiculous gun control legislation.

**44 AMP** · February 28, 2014, 02:09 AM

I don't know how eloquent I can be, but I will try to be logical...

Under the heading of ridiculous gun control legislation, we have the both microstamping, and the smart gun tech, as it exists, and as proposed by certain lawmakers.

other than the essential fact of making guns more expensive to make (and all the consequences of that) they are quite different in intended purpose.

The stated intent of microstamping is to provide police with a way of tracing crime evidence (fired cases) to a specific gun, and its owner (assumed to be the shooter).

Smart gun tech is all about "authorized users" being the only ones who can fire the gun.

Both are different situations than the S&W/Clinton deal.
That deal was a betrayal.
Complying with the LAW while it may be distasteful, isn't a betrayal in my book. I heard people saying "boycott Remington" because they didn't move out of NY after the passage of the SAFE Act. I didn't agree with that, either.

You're free to spend your money any way you want, but a boycott on gun makers that "betray" us by complying with the law doesn't help us, doesn't help the people who are having their rights infringed upon, and doesn't get the law changed!

Also, for a boycott to be effective, the company has to know why you aren't buying their product. You have to tell them. Otherwise, all they know is that sales are "off".

I see "jumping into bed.." as something done because you want to, not because you have to.

Thoughts?

February 28, 2014, 02:09 AM	#31
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,818	I don't know how eloquent I can be, but I will try to be logical... Under the heading of ridiculous gun control legislation, we have the both microstamping, and the smart gun tech, as it exists, and as proposed by certain lawmakers. other than the essential fact of making guns more expensive to make (and all the consequences of that) they are quite different in intended purpose. The stated intent of microstamping is to provide police with a way of tracing crime evidence (fired cases) to a specific gun, and its owner (assumed to be the shooter). Smart gun tech is all about "authorized users" being the only ones who can fire the gun. Both are different situations than the S&W/Clinton deal. That deal was a betrayal. Complying with the LAW while it may be distasteful, isn't a betrayal in my book. I heard people saying "boycott Remington" because they didn't move out of NY after the passage of the SAFE Act. I didn't agree with that, either. You're free to spend your money any way you want, but a boycott on gun makers that "betray" us by complying with the law doesn't help us, doesn't help the people who are having their rights infringed upon, and doesn't get the law changed! Also, for a boycott to be effective, the company has to know why you aren't buying their product. You have to tell them. Otherwise, all they know is that sales are "off". I see "jumping into bed.." as something done because you want to, not because you have to. Thoughts? __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.