HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Mark Glaze compares Arma... » Reply #8

Response to gejohnston (Original post)

Fri May 23, 2014, 09:15 AM

8. I notice that all "smart gun" proposals exempt LE, VIP protective details, and corporate security.

If they wanted "smart guns" to be accepted, then there should be no mandates at all...and any mandates anywhere should mandate them for law enforcement (the mostly likely of any group to be shot with their own guns), VIP details, and corporate security too---no exceptions.

Of course, the reason they aren't is that biometrics are dangerously unreliable, and RFID is trivially easy to remotely jam. Of course, those traits are features, not bugs, in the minds of those pushing them. Built-in mechanical locks give the same safety advantages for anyone who wants them and are already on the market, without the disadvantages, but...

In any case, a quick-access safe is better than any of the above, IMO.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 9 replies Author Time Post
gejohnston May 2014 OP
friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #1
Jenoch May 2014 #2
blueridge3210 May 2014 #3
Jenoch May 2014 #4
blueridge3210 May 2014 #5
Jenoch May 2014 #6
Eleanors38 May 2014 #7
LineNew Reply I notice that all "smart gun" proposals exempt LE, VIP protective details, and corporate security.
benEzra May 2014 #8
friendly_iconoclast May 2014 #9
Please login to view edit histories.