Maloney’s Stupid ‘Smart Gun’ Bill an Unintended Gift to Gun Owners

Get a load of the latest “gun sense” baloney from Maloney. (Carolyn Maloney: Facebook)

“In an effort to improve gun safety, Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) has reintroduced The Handgun Trigger Safety Act, forward-thinking legislation to use new and emerging technology to prevent gun deaths,” a press release from the congressthing proclaims. “The bill would promote the development of new ‘smart gun’ technology that only allows an authorized user to fire a gun. It would also mandate that all newly manufactured handguns use this technology within five years, and that existing handguns be retrofitted with this technology within ten years.”

Gun owners who value their rights are well aware of all the absurdities and potentials for failure by adding complexity to a mechanism designed to prevent it from functioning as intended. There’s no need to repeat them here (I first took the subject on back in the 90s and have revisited it many times over the years). Suffice it to say the requirements are always directed at We the People and never at police, the alphabet agencies, the Secret Service and the military, and for obvious reasons. After all, how many people have ever pointed and clicked a garage door opener or TV remote controller … and had nothing happen?

Fortunately, we know Maloney is posturing, trolling for press ink to keep her name out there lest she be forgotten for her singular lack of accomplishments. The treasonous bill isn’t going anywhere, and neither will its Senate counterpart, despite her blathering about cars and baby cribs.

It didn’t go anywhere last time, attracting only 10 Democrat cosponsors, and it’ll go nowhere in committee this time out. And while the text of the 2017 version hasn’t been posted yet, it’s a pretty safe bet that it will closely track with last year’s text, from which we can make a few deductions:

  • It will force taxpayers to cover the cost of grants to developers. Kind of like bullet fees.
  • It will exempt guns not so manufactured or retrofitted from the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, opening the door to company-destroying lawsuits. In true Opposite Day “progressive” fashion, the guns that will be protected from product liability repercussions are the ones with designed and after-market inhibitors.

But most insidious will be the “retrofitting” requirement, and I’m not just talking about voiding existing warranties. What it in effect means is all handguns must be turned in to a government-sanctioned retrofitter. The work will be done at your expense, and if you can’t afford to ransom it back, tough. And if it’s the only gun you have, tough.

You’d better believe you’ll need to run a NICS check through an FFL and pay a fee to get your gun “transferred” back. That assumes your name isn’t kicked out due to some no-due-process disqualifier, where you could then find yourself in crushing legal jeopardy. And the guns that are returned will have all been effectively registered.

What about criminals?  Yeah, what about them?

Defy Maloney’s edict and you’ll be one. You’ll become a felon and a “prohibited person.” Your freedom will be taken away and your life will be destroyed. And if you resist, guess what?

So why do I call this abomination an unintended gift?

Because it shows Maloney for the sick tyrranophile that she is. It takes away the arguments that gun owner rights advocates are “paranoid” and that “No one wants to take your guns.”

Of course they do. Every action on the part of these subversives under the guise of “common sense gun safety laws” is just another incremental nip toward that goal, and by going for this big a bite, Maloney shows her insatiable hunger and undeniable lust.

But don’t take my word for it. Listen instead to Nelson “Pete” Shields, founder of Handgun Control, Inc., renamed to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence in order to not only mask what they’re really after, but also to accommodate the other types of guns they want to ban:

We’re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest. . . . [W]e’ll have to start working again to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen the next law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we’d be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time. . . . The first problem is to slow down the number of handguns being produced and sold in this country. The second problem is to get handguns registered. The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition-except for the military, police, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors-totally illegal.

So thanks Maloney, you wretched oath-breaker, for taking off the mask and showing your full ugliness –and your true intent — to the world.

So then I said “”I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” (Carolyn Maloney: Facebook)

—–

If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please consider making a donation to support our work.  You can donate HERE.

Categories: 2nd_amendment, All

About Author

David Codrea

David Codrea blogs at The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance (WarOnGuns.com), and is a field editor/columnist for GUNS Magazine. Named “Journalist of the Year” in 2011 by the Second Amendment Foundation for his groundbreaking work on the “Fast and Furious” ATF “gunwalking” scandal, he is a frequent event speaker and guest on national radio and television programs.

Comments

  1. Woody W Woodward 11 May, 2017, 14:25

    “Gun Sense in America” – Translation: “Total Citizen Disarmament”
    [W3]

    Reply this comment
    • rgeebee 12 May, 2017, 10:11

      Woody they tired it in here in NY State. In 2013 the despot governor and his senate leader and assembly leader (state legislature) stuffed a “law” down our throats called the NY Safe Act. It is NOT a “safe act”. It was an attempt to force owners of semi auto rifles deemed “assault” rifles by the definition of the bill, to be registered by gun owners. It was a dismal failure with 96% NON COMPLIANCE by New Yorkers. In his fact civil disobedience! That’s how an unconstitutional law is defied and left powerless. Hell even the Rochester city police won’t enforce it unless some idiot is toting a rifle in a threatening way. Yes you are right – they want to confiscate. Make no mistake. They will have a battle on their hands if they do.

      Reply this comment
    • Mona 12 May, 2017, 10:22

      All I’ll say is BUY GUNS NOW! As many as you can afford screw this stupid bill and these stupid people I think a bill ought to be passed to eliminate all stupid people that think they know about the 2nd amendment

      Reply this comment
    • Vinny 12 May, 2017, 13:58

      Woody Woodward…..you can come at it from a hundred angles, however, you nailed it dead center bulls eye with one comment……..”Total Citizen Disarmament”……..The UN Globalist Communist agenda and goals are quite clear. I can only add…..MOLON LABE !

      Reply this comment
  2. Jay 11 May, 2017, 14:33

    ‘Smart’ technology is not so smart. Just ask anyone using facial recognition or a fingerprint reader on their device if it works all the time every time on the 1st try. It’s fine for a computer or smart phone to try 2,3,4 times but not for something you need immediately to save your life. Not to mention if your spouse or others need to defend you ir your family it will not be a useful tool, so many issues with adding electronic technology to a mechanical tool for defense.

    Reply this comment
  3. Doug 11 May, 2017, 16:34

    As always David, you’re on point and razor sharp. Thank you.

    Reply this comment
  4. Mack 11 May, 2017, 16:58

    It seems worse, considering the Congressional Oath is:

    “I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

    Reply this comment
  5. bill 11 May, 2017, 20:05

    Libtards love abortion and hate guns. Which has killed more?

    Reply this comment
  6. Ty 11 May, 2017, 21:23

    The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed! What’s so hard to understand?

    Reply this comment
  7. 175gr 11 May, 2017, 23:01

    Unconstitutional, unenforceable and it is physically impossible to take any of my guns to mess with their triggers.

    Reply this comment
  8. Artie Johnson 12 May, 2017, 01:19

    Verry intersting, but stupid. no.

    Reply this comment
  9. Retired Navy Spook 12 May, 2017, 06:57

    There’s a simple way to protect ourselves from nitwits like Carolyn Maloney: stop electing them to Congress.

    Reply this comment
  10. Dave 12 May, 2017, 10:27

    YOU CAN’T FIX STUPID!!!!!!

    Reply this comment
  11. Scottishwarrior 12 May, 2017, 10:28

    perhaps i am naiive. Perhaps my thinking has been clouded by the reverence I felt after first reading the US Constitution as an immigrant (legal) in 1959. I cannot believe the Billions of dollars spent in what appear to me to be illegal, unconstitutional changes to the 2nd Amendment. Is it wrong to read the “shall not infringe” and think that it means “shall not infringe”? If you tell me I cannot “bear arms” without first applying for and getting approval from someone, and pay a ransom for that approval, IF it is chosen to be given — how is that not infringing? If you tell me that part of my arms is the magazine and you will still prohibit me for having a magazine that holds more than a certain number of bullets— how is that not infringing? If you tell me that my rifle is considered a “military style” and therefore is considered an “assault rifle” and I am no longer allowed to have it– where do you get that authority to mislabel and then violate my constitutional right the bear arms? Where in the Constitution does it allow ANY government the right to tell me what arms are permissible? When I entered the US Air Force I took an oath to defend the Constitution and this marvelous country. When I became a US Citizen, one of the most emotional and rewarding opportunities I have ever had, I took an oath to obey and defend the US Constitution. It amazes me that anyone who looks at world history and has the ability to read and comprehend, could possibly misunderstand the wording and the reason for the right to bear arms and the government’s admonition “shall not infringe”.

    Reply this comment
  12. gabe 12 May, 2017, 11:10

    “Don’t enter or I’ll shoot” said the home owner protecting his home from invasion, then says to his wife “honey my battery just died in my firearm”. Just love the mental midgets~!

    Reply this comment
  13. Borderlegion 12 May, 2017, 11:38

    If this is what New York is sending to congress, perhaps they show secede from the nation. This women has the reality grasp of a garden gnome. There are more guns in Texas than there are people…and our crimes reflect that, we have less crime per capita than shitcago, baltiwhore, and Detroit.

    Reply this comment
  14. rev_dave 12 May, 2017, 15:13

    They don’t need to worry about my pistol, unless they plan to attack me on the street somewhere. What they need to worry about is my rifle. With that, I can ‘reach out and touch someone’. Or, any minion who wants to try to take it.

    Reply this comment
  15. Firehawk 12 May, 2017, 15:46

    One of you said the New Yorkers didn’t comply, neither did the gun owners of CT when they tried the same thing. MA pushed the cost for a ccw up to $100.00 and out of about 125,000 that had that license, only 25,00 have it now, and you don’t think the others handed theirs in do you? Australia is trying for another buy back and grace period cause most of the guns weren’t handed in there either. Free citizens own guns. If they keep poking the bear they will be in for a surprise.

    Reply this comment
  16. Green Giant 12 May, 2017, 18:26

    Clinton and Maloney are laughing at a joke. The joke? That they would keep their vow to uphold the constitution.
    God will not be amused. And neither will the American patriots who they are working to disarm and then massacre.

    Reply this comment
  17. NDEon20 14 May, 2017, 21:26

    Demand sense huh, they need to get some!

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Your e-mail address will not be published.
Required fields are marked*