Remember about this time last year, when I told you about MA State Senator Andrew Petruccelli and his bill to make GPS in guns mandatory? It's been going on a lot longer than a year, though - Bruce had this covered five years ago.
Well, several folks have e-mailed me to tell me he's at it again. Because, you know, in the past year we've magically developed GPS capabilities that can overcome the myriad significant shortcomings of this plan, like where to put the additional bulk, what to do about batteries, etc. Not to mention the hundreds of millions of guns already in circulation that completely negate the purpose, i.e. tracking guns. Sure, in a magic world where you could snap your fingers and add a complicated device to a firearm without having to factor in power, or bulk, or repeated exposure to significant recoil, it might make sense.
Heck, it'd be nice to know I could track any stolen guns with the push of a button.
But real life ain't Hollywood. There are no machine gun sniper rifles. Or Glock revolvers. Physics will not be denied, and the same forces that will render inferior optics unusable on a pistol or rifle are going to take effect on fragile electronics precariously placed in a firearm. It's all part of the balance between force, mass, and power - and sensitive electronics are not immune to physics, not matter how good the intentions behind them might be.
Passing a law without knowing a damn thing about the science behind what you're proposing should be grounds for ejection from office. It's irresponsible, exposing the legislator as a grandstanding intellectual lightweight who can't be bothered to do their homework on what they're proposing. In other words, exactly what you'd expect from the gun control movement in Massachusetts - witness the latest "ballistic fingerprinting" bill that would most likely result in S&W, Kahr, and Savage having to leave MA. Oh, sure, ballistic fingerprinting has failed every single place it's been implemented, but MA is different!
Sometimes the stupid is so thick all you can do is sit back and laugh at the mental midgets...
That is all.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
He's all wet and stupid. I'm part of a design team trying to make a tracking system for other uses and no way can we put that in a rifle never mind a hand gun. The problem areas is batteries and antennas both take space, one needs to see the sky. Obviously a GPS is defeated by a metal gun case and the battery is finite. Assuming it's near a cell phone network to report in over, which is not usable in way to many areas!
Stupid, stupid idea. Another gun-banner trying to create utopia and creating dystopia.
Eck!
My guess? He doesn't care if it's feasible or not, as long as it can work as a de facto gun ban.
In which case, he understands the limitations of the technology just fine, and is taking advantage of it to further his goals.
... grandstanding intellectual lightweight ...
Err, pretty much covers anyone who says the words "common sense gun control", but this is an especially tasty morsel for a Sunday brunch. JayG FTW!
"Nothing is impossible for the man who does not need to do it himself."
--Engineering aphorism
The tort reform I'd like to see, these days, is allowing malpractice suits against all people paid with taxpayer funds. Cops, representatives, executives, judges, DMV paper pushers, the lot.
And that malpractice insurance could not be paid for with taxpayer funds. Out of pocket only.
Stupid should hurt more.
I'm all in favor of S&W, Kahr, and Savage,and JayG leaving MA.
I get tired of uninformed idiots trying to solve everything by passing laws concerning things they know nothing about.
"It's so much easier to suggest solutions when you don't know too much about the problem."
- Malcolm Forbes
Jake is correct. He knows it won't work and that is not the point. The point is to trowel on more and more regulations until the state is lawful gun-free. Then it will be the liberal utopia that the Democrats want.
Of course, if he was smart and wanted to put an.....Ooops! Never mind. I'll tell you in Pittsburgh face to face ; ).
This is scary. I think Jake and Andrew are correct: this is just another attempt to chip away (no pun intended) at Second Amendment rights.
Post a Comment