MANDATORY 'SMARTGUN' WOULD MAKE EVERY GUN ILLEGAL'
Greg Corombos
Advancements in gun technology could soon increase safety by weapons responding only to authorized users, but Attorney General Eric Holder is embracing the innovation only as a means of declaring every other firearm illegal.
That’s the contention of Frank Miniter, author of “The Future of the Gun.” Miniter also shared how the media bias surrounding gun issues is perpetuated and why liberals and the media almost always lose the big national debates over guns.
In the book, Miniter explains how Americans may soon be able to purchase firearms that recognize their owners and only function in their hands.
However, he said it’s about to become the latest flash point in the battle over the Second Amendment.
“We’re starting to see electronics embedded into guns. The smart gun controversy is out there, where a gun can actually recognize a user and then not work for someone who’s not authorized through that gun to use it,” Miniter said. “The anti-gun movement wants to make that mandatory. By making it mandatory, it would make every gun available now illegal.”
He added, “Attorney General Eric Holder had a conversation with one of the makers of one of the smart guns, Bill Gentry of Kodiak Arms. Holder was going on about possibly using the government to authorize it and have that sort of control. Bill Gentry said, ‘Wait a minute, Mr. Holder. If you try to mandate my technology, I will burn it down.’
“This is the level that this is separating between gun owners and those who understand this topic and some on the government side who see this as an effort to control it.”
What do YOU think? Would you favor making ‘smartguns’ mandatory? Sound off in today’s WND poll.
When this debate erupts, Miniter said he fully expects the mainstream media to dutifully align themselves with the gun-control movement. In the book, Miniter interviews longtime Washington Post movie critic Stephen Hunter and CNN co-founder Jim Shepherd. Both men discuss how they changed from endorsing gun control to embracing gun rights.
Miniter said Hunter in particular gave him valuable insight into why there is so little balance in coverage of gun issues.
“I asked why they think this way and what we should do. He said, ‘There’s a groupthink, especially with young reporters. They believe in consensus. They believe in conformity. Stepping outside that conformity puts an individual by themself. That would take them out of that pack, and they wouldn’t get the promotions in the newsroom,’” he explained.
Watch the WND/Radio America interview with Frank Miniter:
Miniter said stories of Americans using guns to defend themselves from burglars and would-be attackers as they wait for police to arrive would seem to be a compelling case for gun rights, but not in the media.
“That sort of individualism is hard for a consensus reporter who is used to conformity and going along with a group’s values to stomach. [Hunter] said only the most brave can actually look at that and understand it,” he said.
While Democrats have successfully passed gun-control legislation in states where they control the legislature and the governors’ offices, gun-rights groups prevail the vast majority of the time at the national level. Gun-control advocates accuse the lawmakers of being servants of the National Rifle Association, or NRA.
Miniter tagged along with an NRA lobbyist working on Capitol Hill. He said the secret of the NRA’s success is not complicated at all.
“Over and over, what I found out is they only have sway because they have about five million NRA members, and there’s about a hundred million people in the United States of America that own a firearm and understand it is a practical right,” he said. “Many of them vote that issue on those means. Congressmen listen when you walk in with that size of a constituency.
“That’s the power of the NRA. It’s the American people. It’s not some other dark, mysterious thing.”
Another frequent argument from gun-control supporters is that only law enforcement should be armed. Miniter said the biggest opponents of that approach are law enforcement officials themselves, noting that many sheriffs in New York, Colorado and Maryland are refusing to enforce new laws they consider an infringement of the people’s right to bear arms.
According to Miniter, police cannot be everywhere, and responsible citizens deterring crime through the possession of firearms helps to keep a well-ordered society. He also relayed a conversation with Sheriff Mike Lewis of Wicomico County, Maryland, who long ago started the Baltimore Police Department’s drug interdiction movement.
“I asked him, ‘In all those years and all the bad guys you’ve arrested, have you ever arrested a good guy with a gun who used that gun illegally?’ He thought about it a minute and said, ‘Actually, I haven’t. Every single time I’ve arrested somebody that’s been prosecuted and found guilty, they always had that gun illegally,’” Miniter said.
In addition, he said the scant data that exists on gun owners authorized for concealed carry suggests those people are virtually never a problem.
“It’s rare to find someone who has a concealed carry permit using that gun in an illegal way,” he said. “In fact, there are some studies that show they actually use them less in crimes than police officers do. Those are small samples, so it’s hard to say that exactly. But that’s how really safe they are.”
Besides defending the track record of lawful gun owners, Miniter said gun restrictions never have the intended effect.
“Those gun bans won’t stop crimes. Rifles are used in less than three percent of murders as it is. An armed citizen just isn’t using those guns that way,” he explained. “It’s the unlawful person, the criminal, who is getting those through very different means. The only way to really fight the crime is to go after the bad guys, not the guns.”
Ultimately, Miniter contends that gun rights spawn more freedom, innovation and ensure that the military and police forces have top-of-the-line weapons. He said that can be seen as early as the American Revolution. Because of high civilian demand for guns, the quality of firearms in the colonies, and eventually in the hands of colonial soldiers, was vastly superior to those used by the British.
In fact, the minutemen could be as accurate from 300 yards as the British were from 75.
“Right there, they started off on the right foot, and that connection between freedom and American citizens and our private arms makers and the military and our police has always been a real connection,” Miniter said. “In fact, most of the firearms used over time and today were first used and made for civilians before it went to the military.
He concluded, “This has always been a connection between civilians and the military. Breaking that connection, a lot of special forces and other people have told me, would harm our ability to fight for freedom around the world.”
Article printed from WND: http://www.wnd.com
VIEW VIDEO: http://www.wnd.com/2014/09/mandatory-smartgun-would-make-every-gun-illegal/