Gun-Grabbers Switch Tactics

By Lee Bellinger / June 26, 2014

Gun control fanatics never give up or admit defeat – either at the ballot box or in the courts. They just switch tactics.

In the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a D.C. law banning most guns that lacked an approved trigger lock violated the Second Amendment. But that hasn’t deterred the Obama administration from pursuing other backdoor ways of restricting gun rights.

“Operation Choke Point”
Choking Off Legal Gun Sales

Recently, Attorney General Eric Holder’s politicized Justice Department launched a program called Operation Choke Point. Through it, the government pressures banks to close the accounts of legal businesses within “merchant categories that have been associated with high-risk activity.” Such categories include pornography, Bitcoin payment processors, payday lenders, and firearms and ammunition dealers and manufacturers.

Instead of outright prohibiting “high-risk,” politically incorrect categories of businesses from engaging in normal business banking transactions, the government is applying heavy pressure on banks to close their accounts. “Operation Choke Point is flooding payments companies that provide processing service to those industries with subpoenas, civil investigative demands, and other burdensome and costly legal demands,” according to Electronic Transactions Association CEO Jason Oxman, writing in The Hill (April 24, 2014).

Legal firearms-related enterprises that have broken no laws are being presumed guilty and effectively barred from having checking accounts and receiving credit card payments.

Obama Administration Mulls Requiring Legal Gun Owners to Wear “Smart” Bracelets

AG Holder testified in April about the government’s desire to increase the use of so-called safety devices on firearms. Specifically, Holder advocated wider adoption of biometric identifying/disabling instruments on guns. Such instruments include fingerprint scanners and wrist bracelets that can communicate wirelessly with a gun, enabling or disabling its use depending on who is handling the firearm and how it is programmed.

“Smart” guns of the sort the Obama administration favors would also make it easier to catalog and track guns and their owners in a central registry. Which begs the
question: Is this Team Obama’s real agenda on guns? In a letter to Attorney General Holder, Texas Senator John Cornyn (R) posed the following question: “Is the Obama
administration currently exploring the possibility of an executive order requiring all firearms to possess the technology capabilities you referenced in your testimony?”

It’s a possibility gun owners may need to brace for. Cornyn asked Holder for assurance that “…the Department of Justice will not issue regulations
requiring law-abiding citizens to equip their firearms with fingerprint-reading technology, or to link them to biometric bracelets.”
Regardless of whether the
administration denies plans to require biometric readers or remote control enabling devices on guns today, there can be no assurance about what the administration’s
future plans may be.

Remote Controls on Guns
Could Mean Remote Gun Control from D.C.

Attorney General Holder and Vice President Biden admit to meeting with a group of “technology people” about ways to disable guns. It’s not difficult to imagine why gun controllers would be giddy at the opportunity to require all firearms to be matched to an authorized radio frequency signal in order to work. At that point the potential exists for all firearms to be wirelessly tracked, with every individual user (identified through biometrics) of every firearm recorded.

Law enforcement might then be given the power to remotely disable any gun. Could a future gun-grabbing President simply issue an Executive Order that electronically
disables all privately held “smart” firearms? It may seem like a far-fetched scenario, but the dangerous precedents for presidential power-grabs being set by the Obama White House, along with the gun-disabling technology it is pursuing, are making the pipe dreams of anti-gun crusaders closer to becoming attainable.

On a more immediate, more practical level, smart guns could put your life at risk when you can’t get them to fire. Imagine buying a handgun for self-defense and having to try to put on a bracelet or watch in order to communicate with the gun and unlock it. Those extra seconds could cause you to become a victim.

This is a real and present risk, not a hypothetical future. Armatix iP, the first smart gun to hit the market, contains an electronic chip which syncs with the components inside a watch. The gun must be in close proximity to the watch in order to work. If it’s not, the gun won’t fire, even if the trigger is pulled.

Do Trigger Locks Actually Make Guns More Dangerous?

Installing either high-tech or conventional trigger locks to guns may actually make you less safe.

Self-defense experts caution against using gun locks on loaded guns or guns you might need to draw and fire for defensive purposes. Obviously, if you have children in your home, you need to make sure that no loaded guns are accessible to them.

But trigger locks may cause more accidents than they prevent. As journalist Justin Peters writes, “If you install or remove a trigger lock while your gun is loaded, you risk setting the gun off while you’re messing around near the trigger area. Just as worrisome is the fact that a loaded, trigger-locked gun could discharge if dropped or jostled.”

Tracy Lang of MasterLock states flatly, “If you put a trigger lock on any loaded gun, you are making the gun more dangerous.”


FREE Report. How to survive a major power outage

x