Whoops, i forgot the charge the battery in my gun, guess i can't fire it now.
It could certainly be done, but there'd be problems:
1) the gps signal could be spoofed, allowing someone to fire anywhere
2) the gps signal could be jammed, preventing anyone from firing (or allowing anyone to fire, if it's setup that way).
3) needing to charge a battery for a gun is a bit silly.
Just to name a few.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/loc...ng-4123414.php
at least this guy had shitty aim lol
It's a mechanical device with very simple moving parts. No amount of "chipping" any sort of firearm will stop owners from modifying the gun to bypass the restriction.
I know I don't live in an urban area like 95% of the rest of BG, but I will not surrender my guns for any reason including legal mandates. That is also the attitude that you will meet from a vast majority of gun owners if they are ever banned. Are we going to start a war on guns now? who is going to go door-to-door and ask you to give up your guns? Any sort of gun ban in America in a large scale will create exactly the kind of anarchy we hope to avoid by banning the guns. It will precipitate the very need to overthrow the government (which is the primary argument against gun rights) that has taken away our liberty because Americans as a whole feel so strongly about their right to bear arms.
What
Dude, this isn't 1775. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but you and the united gun owners of america stand absolutely no chance against the technological might of the US military. You're not overthrowing shit. I doubt they'd ever flat out ban guns, but the aim will likely be toward something like limiting future sell of arms.
Civil War bros, start stockpiling the poptarts and peanut butter.
The need to overthrow the government is the primary reason against gun rights? Well there is an argument i don't hear every day.
Right...because I said that. I never said there would be a successful coup. It would pit law enforcement against civilians who have done nothing wrong except to own a firearm. It turns the public opinion against our government as soon as people start dying as a result of gun controls. Then violent protests and demonstrations start happening and more people die. Then the National Guard is called in and America begins using force against it's own citizens. That is where the problem lies.
It's the primary reason that rights activists cite as soon as they are met with reasonable rebuttals while debating. The good ole' "Point to the Constitution" argument. Sorry I didn't articulate my point very well.
Are gun owners in the majority? Can we not standardize guns, ban certain types?
Btw, my brother in law makes his own ammo. Not because he has too, but because he can. But would he forfeit his livelihood or family for his pewpew? Nope.
Its kind of amusing that talk of weakening the 2nd amendment conjures fantasies of militias fighting back against the gummint, guns clutched with young souls being cut to pieces by the National Guard but the erosion of the 4th amendment? Thats a matter of national security and keeping 'murica safe.
Priorities....
Ace is right, a 2nd amendment overturn on the right to pew pew when you want would elicit a violent response and thus it wont happen. The results would be disastrous and self defeating, finally assuring our knee jerk reaction is infact by design.
And that is another point. In Egypt, during the revolution, the military refused to engage the citizens and instead protected them from those that were willing to cause harm in their efforts to oppress. I know it's apples and oranges, but the parallel is that our military personnel are also our citizens and many of them covet their right to own guns. They would not take up arms against their neighbors. I do not believe any outright ban on guns would be enforceable. Instead, it would be a gradual, probably generational, control on the sales of guns as mentioned above.
Honestly, the threats of violent overthrow of the government sounds like a good reason to take their guns away.
I didn't read a lot of this thread, but I'm curious.
To those thinking anything seriously about bullet control,
What is the point in having a gun at all if you have no bullets for it? Is the idea just to help lower the amount of ammunition available so it makes people think more about "wasting money"? If they're serious enough to have a gun, I would think they're going to be willing to purchase bullets for it.
I'll go back to lurking.