# Gun nuts threaten gun store owner for selling gun they don't like **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 3, 2014, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584 "2014-05-03T15:31:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/301 "2014-05-06T15:29:04Z")
I think you’re calling me a gynecologist 😛 ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/302 "2014-05-06T16:26:50Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > There is a law that makes it so that if you’re able to buy a smart gun, then no one will be able to buy anything BUT smart guns. With such a law, no, I don’t want to allow you to buy a smart gun. If there was no such law, sure, knock yourself out. That “smart gun” is actually not a bad idea, for some people. So because of some law that he can’t control, through no fault of his own, you are trying to limit his rights on what he can do? Why are you limiting his 2nd Amendment rights? What business is it of his that some state somewhere else makes a stupid law? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/303 "2014-05-06T16:35:53Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > So because of some law that he can’t control, through no fault of his own, you are trying to limit his rights on what he can do? Why are you limiting his 2nd Amendment rights? Obviously, because his buying that gun will directly lead to violating the Second Amendment rights of all gun owners in that state. Hasn’t that been made clear in this thread? ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/304 "2014-05-06T16:47:09Z")
Now that I’ve read the thread, I have the following to contribute: Sapsuckers are classified as “aquatic waterfowl”? Having tasted kimchee\*, I’d have to say that allowing it to go stale could only improve the flavor. It appears that, as of 2012, communicating a threat is not against the law in Maryland. I have been unable to find information to suggest that this situation has been updated. - It was a dare.\*\* I know that kimchee isn’t actually made out of _food_.\*\*\* \*\* FTR, I don’t get that drunk any more, unless I am alone. No more “dares” for ME, nosiree! \*\*\* It’s made out of compost, which doesn’t count as being food, even if the source material did originate as a foodstuff. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/305 "2014-05-06T17:10:50Z")
> [@AtomicDog](#): > > It’s nice to know that my sister, who was killed as a child by another child family member playing with his father’s gun, is a neglible statistic. First, I’m sorry for your loss. You truly have my sympathy and condolences. Secondly, I apologize for the insensitive use of language. No loved one is a negligible statistic to their friends and family. I, and others, do need to remember that these stats aren’t _just_ numbers; that there’s names, faces, and families attached to them. Lastly, I do stand behind the overall concept I was attempting to convey, however insensitively. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/306 "2014-05-06T17:21:54Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Apropos of nothing, I went to the shooting range last week to celebrate the end of school. It was the first time I’d fired a rifle since I was about seven and the first time I’d fired a handgun ever. It was lots of fun. C’mon in; the water’s fine! 😃 > [@VinylTurnip](#): > > Careful. Your fellow militiamen get twitchy when they sense a GNINO in their midst. I’ve gone on the record here before, saying I have no problem with anything **Bone** suggested, at least in theory. I’m conservatively cautious about its actual implementation, but willing to give it a go. My problem is the “give an inch/take a mile” types in the gun control lobby who aren’t going to be satisfied with this compromise (the same way they aren’t satisfied with the last 80 years worth of compromises) and come back for more. And more. And yet more. It’s not a slippery slope fallacy if it’s recorded, documented history. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/307 "2014-05-06T17:22:19Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Obviously, because his buying that gun will directly lead to violating the Second Amendment rights of all gun owners in that state. Hasn’t that been made clear in this thread? Then someone gets to challenge the law in court. Hasn’t that been made clear in this thread? ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/308 "2014-05-06T17:54:33Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Obviously, because his buying that gun will directly lead to violating the Second Amendment rights of all gun owners in that state. Hasn’t that been made clear in this thread? So now you’re saying that because of what may happen to other people, this one guy should have his rights taken away? You people really like punishing everyone for what one person does, don’t you? 😛 ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/309 "2014-05-06T18:48:20Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > I don’t think the cost is the factor in the minds of potential consumers. I think some real gun enthusiasts are alarmed that the laws governing the sale and ownership of guns will become more draconian and authoritarian … and for good reason. Then, there are the staunch political conservatives, who may or may not be serious about gun sports or collecting, or even really think they’ll use their gun for protection, but consider the gun a symbol. Either way, there are millions upon millions of Americans, Republican, Libertarian, and Democrat, who can read (the Constitution), can understand how guns are useful and often necessary for protecting oneself and family, and aren’t deluded by unethical politicians from both sides of the aisle. > Since I don’t bear arms, and am as Liberal a Liberal as they come, I can see that people on both sides of the issue are victims of manipulation by the ones who really stand to benefit from the disarming of the masses, and also profit by dividing citizens into groups that are at odds with each other (religious vs Gay, Black vs White, Progressive vs Traditional, etc.) > People are clannish, tribal … they easily band into groups with actual or perceived similar values and goals. And, they naturally tend to clash with other groups that are rivals, or are made out to be rivals. That’s why I wish we could get rid of the NRA on the one side, and the loonier Mothers Against Everything on the other side. There is a large center who are okay with guns, but our current guns for everyone with no accountability has got to go. I understand the fear of “give an inch, take a mile,” but I also understand the pretend compromises like ineffectual background checks system that encourages straw buying by destroying the records after 24 hours and the people who verify the BG checks are deliberately understaffed and states don’t even bother updating the system with the information it needs to work. Then gun advocates say “see, it doesn’t work! No regulations!” Both sides have reasons for not wanting to give an inch. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/310 "2014-05-06T18:50:50Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > So now you’re saying that because of what may happen to other people, this one guy should have his rights taken away? You people really like punishing everyone for what one person does, don’t you? 😛 You kinda have it reversed. Everyone will get punished for what that one person does. And it’s “you people” that passed that law. ---
**Author:** ![AtomicDog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ac91a4/32.png) [@AtomicDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AtomicDog)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/311 "2014-05-06T19:03:25Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > First, I’m sorry for your loss. You truly have my sympathy and condolences. > > Secondly, I apologize for the insensitive use of language. No loved one is a negligible statistic to their friends and family. I, and others, do need to remember that these stats aren’t _just_ numbers; that there’s names, faces, and families attached to them. > > Lastly, I do stand behind the overall concept I was attempting to convey, however insensitively. I accept your apology. The incident I mentioned happened 52 years ago and it still hurts like hell. I idolized my older sister, and have long since forgiven my brother for what happened. It was my father’s negligence that caused this tragedy, and I cannot help but wonder if this technology, has it existed then, could have prevented it. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/312 "2014-05-06T19:09:55Z")
> [@AtomicDog](#): > > I accept your apology. The incident I mentioned happened 52 years ago and it still hurts like hell. I idolized my older sister, and have long since forgiven my brother for what happened. It was my father’s negligence that caused this tragedy, and I cannot help but wonder if this technology, has it existed then, could have prevented it. It’s helpful for us to be reminded that 30k deaths from this, and 30k deaths from that aren’t just numbers. We are talking about real people and their loved ones. It’s too easy to say it’s a reasonable price to pay for liberty. We can work together and put men on the moon, we can work together and work out reasonable gun regs. And I’m also very sorry for your loss. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/313 "2014-05-06T19:11:42Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Obviously, because his buying that gun will directly lead to violating the Second Amendment rights of all gun owners in that state. Hasn’t that been made clear in this thread? No, because you haven’t provided any evidence of a Second Amendment violation other than your repeated assertions that it is. Where is the precedent? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/314 "2014-05-06T20:13:06Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Hey, California would probably like to mandate all new cars being electric or hybrid or hydrogen or something, and sometimes they pass laws mandating x% of cars being x, by the year x. Sometimes they have to back off. Ooh, democracy. Small “d” democracy does not trump the constitution. > [@levdrakon](#): > > And that’s why gun nutters will continue to shoot up schools and Timothy McVeighs will continue to blow up day care centers and why the rest of us will act like grownups and make smart guns and if you don’t want to buy them, by all means move to Somalia. In waht way would smart gun technology have prevented newtown? In what way would it have stopped a fertilizer bomb? Or are you just calling gun owners names again? > [@Czarcasm](#): > > What is it with you gun-grabbers and your “Democracy” and your “Logic”? You mean like the logic of referencing a bombing in a conversation about smart guns? > [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > And if you want to buy a car, you have to buy one with a seat belt, completely infringing on your rights yet again. There is no constitutional right to own and operate a car. Besides, a seatbelt does not increase the cost of a car 900%; or make them less reliable; or limit their utility in any way. The smart gun technology increases the cost of a gun by 900%; makes them less reliable; and the smart gun technology in this case is currently limited to low caliber guns because the electronic components become even more unreliable with too much recoil. > [@levdrakon](#): > > Sounds cool! I can’t wait. We could have designated raceways where people can drive like maniacs and kill themselves when they feel like it. Win win. I also look forward to the day when driving is a hobby like horseback riding. Something that you can have a passion for and that might help you get into college if you’re good at it. > [@levdrakon](#): > > I’m curious how those laws got passed. Was the NRA sleeping at the time? Was there an epic battle over it? Did the voters approve it? Well, voters lected the politicans that passed the unconstitutional (IMO) law. Just like voters in other states elected politicians that passed unconstitutional anti-abortion rights. > [@Guinastasia](#): > > I stated that said merchant should be allowed to sell a product IF there was a demand for it, and that people who disagreed with that should not be permitted to react by harassing the guy. But for the law, noone would be harassing the guy. Frankly, before these sort of laws started popping up, gun control folks opposed smart guns because they thought it would icnrease gun ownership and create a false sense of security. > [@bengangmo](#): > > Here’s a thought - what if the “key” also had a built in communication aspect, so that it could be disabled remotely? > > Wouldn’t that be really cool IN SOME INSTANCES? > > Stolen gun - disable the key > Person “goes crazy” - disable the key > > I would see plenty of good uses for such technology You can almost always disable the smart part of the gun by something as simple as dropping it into a bucket of water. Sometimes you need to disassemble the gun and remove the smart component. > [@levdrakon](#): > > Well, on the face of it, it sounds like a law passed while gun rights people were chanting “no, no, no” and it passed anyway. Will of the people I guess. Would you say the same about laws restricting access to abortions? > [@](#): > > Give it time; I’m sure the price of the new guns will come down, and the variety will go up. Cost will never go down enough to make them comparable to costs today but cost is not the only obstacle. Smart gun technology frequently cannot be used in small guns becasue the mechanism is too big or cannot be used in large guns because the mechanism is too fragile. There is not a smart gun technology out there that does not compromise reliability. > [@](#): > > Really, the constitution doesn’t say you have to have cheap guns does it? Does it say we have to have cheap mortgages and food, too? Sounds socialist. Mortgages and food are not constitutional rigts. Why do you keep comparing guns to things taht are not constitutionally protected. Lets compare them to abortions. The cosntitution doesn’t say a goddam thing about abortions but we protect them under the constitution. Would it be ok for Texas to require abortions to be performed by ultrasonic lasers, which would reduce medical complications but increase the cost of abortions by 900% and occassionally fail to perform the abortion? > [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > Hey, I’ve had to drop my claim that the NRA is an industry lobby posturing as a human rights organization _though it rolls off the tongue really well._ So what makes some of the members gulls? > [@Club\_33](#): > > Where exactly does the Constitution say that all guns must be affordable? > > Helpful hint: It doesn’t. See ultrasonic laser abortions above. > [@Askthepizzaguy](#): > > It’s heartening to see people who are for gun-owners rights distance themselves from the crazy. I feel better about people having guns when I know the grand majority of them are sane. Just FYI, Terr doesn’t own a gun. > [@andros](#): > > Government can impose, however: minimum wage laws, payroll taxes, OSHA safety regulations, ADA accessibility restrictions, building code requirements… Which of those infringe of a constitutional right? > [@Bone](#): > > …I would never support this in the current environment though because I don’t trust anyone who advocates for gun control. … THIS!!! I support some types of gun regulation but the one argument from my more pro-gun friends that I cannot get around is this one. The gun grabbers do not show any interest in good faith dealings and theirn ultimate objective is to ban guns entirely. I keep telling them that a federal level gun ban is impossible and they keep telling me that I am underestimatig the human will. > [@](#): > > It’s made me almost a single issue voter. If you only vote for pro-gun candidates, I suspect you don’t vote a whole lot 😛 > [@AtomicDog](#): > > I accept your apology. The incident I mentioned happened 52 years ago and it still hurts like hell. I idolized my older sister, and have long since forgiven my brother for what happened. It was my father’s negligence that caused this tragedy, and I cannot help but wonder if this technology, has it existed then, could have prevented it. Just FYI but until these “smart gun only” laws started popping up, it was gun control groups that opposed smart guns because they would "only’ prevent a small number of deaths and would encourage more widespread gun ownership. > **[Can 'Smart Gun' Technology Help Prevent Violence?](https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2013/03/18/174629446/can-smart-gun-technology-help-prevent-violence)** > > What if a gun could only be fired by its rightful owner? What if it recognized a grip or fingerprint, or communicated with a special ring? It's been a fantasy for years, and in the wake of the Sandy Hook tragedy, so-called smart gun technology is... > [@](#): > > Yet for all the attention personalized guns are getting now, few experts think this technology could have prevented a tragedy like Newtown. > “The majority of mass shootings in this country are committed with legal weapons, and the person firing the gun is the owner of the gun,” says Josh Sugarmann, executive director of the Violence Policy Center, a group that pushes for gun control. > He says few of the more than 30,000 annual gun deaths could be prevented by smart guns. There were just 606 unintentional firearm deaths in 2010. > “The numbers are relatively small. They’re tragic, but relatively small,” Sugarmann says. > He worries that if these high-tech weapons became available, more people would choose to own guns. It used to be that gun manufacturer’s tried to market smart guns in the 1990’s and it just never took because of glaring reliability issues. Imagine a gun that malfunctioned as frequently as the scanner at your supermarket checkout counter. Now imagine that in its normal operation you threw that scanner at the wall before each scan. one day I hope they come up with reliable smart gun technology but right now its an expensive gimmick that soesn’t work very well. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/315 "2014-05-06T20:14:16Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > You kinda have it reversed. Everyone will get punished for what that one person does. And it’s “you people” that passed that law. Not everyone will be punished. Like some others said, what if they want to buy a smart gun? What if that’s the only gun they want to buy? You’re punishing him by attacking people that will sell to him. What you should be dealing with are those who made the law you disagree with, but you people take the easy way out and just threaten some innocent storeowner. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/316 "2014-05-06T20:19:04Z")
Gun owning, NRA member checking in… I disagree with the store owner selling these guns. I think people should protest or picket or boycott him as much as they like. Smart guns are a bad idea for many reasons and most attempts at them are thinly veiled registration or banning schemes. He should have expected to get negative attention from gun owners since him selling these guns is a betrayal of sorts to his very customer base. However, I condemn any threats of violence or arson that have been made. This is not helpful or necessary. Even if it’s just a couple of wackos that aren’t serious, this hurts the gun right cause more than anything the anti gun rights groups can do. Playing into the angry redneck stereotype just fans the flames of ignorance and fear that leads people to want to take away our second amendment rights. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/317 "2014-05-06T20:41:46Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Small “d” democracy does not trump the constitution. > > In waht way would smart gun technology have prevented newtown? > > In what way would it have stopped a fertilizer bomb? > > Or are you just calling gun owners names again? > > You mean like the logic of referencing a bombing in a conversation about smart guns? Our domestic bomber terrorists are deep into the gun rights militia movement I think we can all agree is loony paranoid and dangerous. While guns rights advocates chant, “no, no, no” the crazies will continue to be crazy and society will react with gun laws that will probably overstep. Domestic terrorism will continue and that will fuel anti-gun hysteria and while you’re sitting there chanting “no to everything!” laws will get passed around you. > [@](#): > > There is no constitutional right to own and operate a car. And yet cars are so much more important to people. So are smart phones and internet. It’s entirely possible the founding fathers weren’t omniscient gods who wisely set forth laws and guarantees that would eventually become irrelevant, or at least need updating. > [@](#): > > Imagine a gun that malfunctioned as frequently as the scanner at your supermarket checkout counter. Now imagine that in its normal operation you threw that scanner at the wall before each scan. > > one day I hope they come up with reliable smart gun technology but right now its an expensive gimmick that soesn’t work very well. Don’t dumb guns malfunction? When I was learning to use an M16 in the military one of the first things they teach you is how to clear a jam. They also emphasize cleaning and maintenance. It’s silly to expect a gun to work 100% reliably with no maintenance & care. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/318 "2014-05-06T21:20:50Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Don’t dumb guns malfunction? When I was learning to use an M16 in the military one of the first things they teach you is how to clear a jam. They also emphasize cleaning and maintenance. It’s silly to expect a gun to work 100% reliably with no maintenance & care. It’s a heckuva lot easier to pull a charging handle (M-16) or rack the slide of a pistol to clear a “jam” and get a gun back into action than it is to run diagnostics on an embedded chip built into the frame of the firearm, or to free up a stuck “magnet” or somesuch that’s blocking a smart gun from firing. Which is why you don’t see LE or Military flocking to smart guns. And which is why smart guns (as is; future developments may change this) are not useful for home/self defense. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/319 "2014-05-07T01:09:09Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > But for the law, noone would be harassing the guy. And that justifies their actions? :dubious: Note: I’m not a “gun grabber”. I’m for the type of measures that **Bone** suggested. (Too bad there’s not a way to prevent stupid people from buying guns, but what can you do?) It’s a damned shame neither side seems to be willing to sit down and actually find a fucking middle ground. ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584/320 "2014-05-07T01:28:08Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > It’s a heckuva lot easier to pull a charging handle (M-16) or rack the slide of a pistol to clear a “jam” and get a gun back into action than it is to run diagnostics on an embedded chip built into the frame of the firearm, or to free up a stuck “magnet” or somesuch that’s blocking a smart gun from firing. > > Which is why you don’t see LE or Military flocking to smart guns. And which is why smart guns (as is; future developments may change this) are not useful for home/self defense. Yep. I must be one of the few that has never had to do that. I’ve been shooting since 1970. But compared to many active shooters, I’ve probably only shot 20-40,000 rounds. Mostly rifle and shotgun though. I would guess that I’ve only run 3000 through pistols and revolvers. I hate the terms anti or pro gun. I’m neither. I happen to own 9 guns. All handed down to me by family members. Could ‘smart’ guns get accepted, and usefull? Sure. Many (not all) hunters already depend on GPS and rangefinders. So does the military. But when push comes to shove, for the military, LEO’s and a homeowner that want’s a gun to function like they have for the last 100 years, untested technology on a simple machine that prevents it from firing is just not acceptable. As it is, guns are tested to not fire when they should not. One test is a drop when in level one condition onto concrete. Ready to fire, safety off, cocked with a round in the chamber. I doupt that will dispel anyone that has a fear of guns, but do know, that guns are very, very safe from a mechanical standpoint. With that said, the real safety for guns, SCUBA divers or dog owners or anything is the people that use them. Education is the key. The NJ legislation that prevents any but smart guns to be sold when ONE unproven design gets available is very short sighted and speaks volumes about how little the people that drafted it know about guns, their legitimate uses and gun owners. To force that on the millions of very, very safe gun owners is going to get backlash. I don’t agree with that backlash, and think that those that did should be proscecuted. I also think that those that make laws should learn a little bit about what they are trying to legislate. See the AWB ban. I have no desire to buy another gun. But as a computer programmer, I am interested in the tech. NJ shot everyone in the foot with that legislation because they don’t know anything about guns or gun owners. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-nuts-threaten-gun-store-owner-for-selling-gun-they-dont-like/687584.md?page=17)