Armatix Smart Gun

[Byron Carter]

You are the guy who said an SKS uses .22 ammo. STFU about other ppls gun knowledge bc you obviously have none.

The article stated .22 ammunition was found, and that he had planned to murder his parents with "the .22 rifle".

Clearly, a mistake was made. I admitted to making a mistake, in part due to the article, and in part due to my lack of knowledge pertaining to the SKS rifle.

But you see how that works? I admit I made a mistake (not nearly as egregious as the one you and your friends repeatedly make) and moved on after admitting it. You can't seem to admit your mistakes, which is perhaps why you can't accept the fact you are wrong on this entire issue.

 

[UpaLoompa]

But you've been show, time and time again, it is a relevant distinction in ANY discussion. Your lack of self-criticism and a refusal of any self-examination of your thinking is the only reason you refuse to accept the idea that your thinking in this matter is 100% wrong.

I know what the difference is. I readily admitted that I misused the term out of laziness and apathy. You have yet to demonstrate how using the colloquially understood term leads to issues in discussing policy.
Please provide an argument as to how misusing clip vs. magazine misinforms policy discussion given that people that know what a clip actually is are going to be well aware that someone misusing the term actually means magazine. Otherwise this is, as mentioned, silly pedantry.

By analogy, someone misusing assault rifle when they mean assault weapon is very pertinent because the former is different from a technical difference (e.g. selective fire versus solely semi-automatic) and much different from a policy standpoint (e.g. the former is already highly regulated and the later is a mere aesthetic description).

Cliffs: For the umpteenth time, yes I misused the term. No, I don't really care. If you're interested in pursuing this technical point further please make a cogent argument as to how the difference is relevant to a policy discussion.

 

[UpaLoompa]

98% of anti-gun people I know have never owned or operated a firearm and yet they think they can distinct and know the differnece between permissible regulations and regulation that will hinder law abiding citizens rights to self-defense against criminals.

This issue is very apparent in regards to the "assault weapon" designation. It is a meaningless aesthetic designation with policy implications (e.g. banning a subset of semi-automatic rifles due to having a pistol grip). In a recent thread there was a poster who kept talking about how assault weapons should be banned because who needs that sort of military weapon. Fortunately, that sort of ignorance can be easily overcome. Farmer Brown and Bryon went off the deep end with that poster but when I explained to him that assault weapon didn't mean anything and that if anything he was thinking of assault rifles--which are already highly regulated and prohibitively expensive--he softened his position.

Clips versus magazine is a lot less relevant and doesn't have any sort of policy implications that I can see. Sure, there's a technical difference but it isn't one that informs the policy discussion because everyone knows what's actually meant.

 

[Hurricane Brad]

I support owning guns and I think this is an awesome idea.
Are gun owners afraid the government has a kill switch to shut off your gun so you can't use it or something?

this means that if you get in a fight and someone takes your gun they can't use it.

It's not something that I would personally want, although I have no objection to others making use of this technology. I prefer my firearms to be simple and reliable.

 

[UpaLoompa]

No one should be threatening to kill anyone. As I said before there are a couple reasons pro gun people don't like this. One is the laws like NJ which forces the sale only of this type of gun within 3 years once the first one is sold any where any place. The second is with the history of the anti 2nd people will push this as a law. Third is no one that knows guns will want a gun like this as it serves no real use. I have no problem if this type of modification is offered for sale but in the US no company could survive making this unless it was required by law.

I have no problem giving the agenda of the anti 2 nd with pro gun people letting firearms dealers know that if they sell this weapon they will boycott them.

I certainly oppose anything of this sort being required generally but I still don't see why this might not be a good thing for law enforcement.
Frankly a kill switch on the guns of cops is probably a good thing too.

 

[DoomAndDarkness**]

I really wonder how many lives have been saved by a safety(not saying it hasn't). It is pathetic gun handling that a safety would have saved you from accidentally shooting a person. You have to pull the trigger for the gun to fire. You always treat a gun as if it were loaded. General gun safety would help greatly.

Right...