« List

« Previous | Next »

Name: 20160310_SpecialReport-11_Alex
Air Date: March 10, 2016
99 lines.
| Copy link to current segment Download episode

At the Consumer Electronics Show, which just ended in Las Vegas, a vendor wanted to demonstrate his smart gun law, saying it answers President Obama's call for a smart gun.
But the Consumer Electronics Show wouldn't allow him to bring an unloaded gun into the show.
Not even an imitation gun.
Not even for Obama.
And there's an important lesson in that.
They really don't want better tech.
They just want to get rid of guns out of fear and ignorance.
We're going to look at why smart guns are a dumb idea.
But first, consider the gun expert the Obama administration has enlisted as a smart gun salesman.
You know the single most consequential thing you can do and have no impact on the Second Amendment?
Buy a smart gun.
Remember the last time Biden gave us gun advice?
She's asking if a ban goes into effect on certain kinds of weapons and high-capacity magazines.
And what's your name?
Kate, if you want to protect yourself, get a double-barrel shotgun.
I have the shells of a 12-gauge shotgun, and I promise you, as I told my wife, we live in an area that's wooded and somewhat secluded.
I said, Jill, if there's ever a problem, just walk out on the balcony here, or walk out, put that double-barrel shotgun, and fire two blasts.
You don't need an AR-15.
It's harder to aim.
It's harder to use.
And in fact, you don't need 30 rounds to protect yourself.
Buy a shotgun.
Buy a shotgun.
Buy a smart gun.
Now he's back, with more idiotic advice.
How does that make sense?
What possible sense does that make?
To help push the idea of smart guns, mainstream media, from Fox News to CNN, turns to James Bond as an example.
What's a PPKS 9mm short?
There's a microdermal sensor in the grip.
It's been coded to your palm print so only you can fire it.
While having a gun that only authorized users can fire might sound like a great idea, Bond has lots of gadgets that, in the real world, would be impractical and prohibitively expensive to build.
But Obama says the tech hurdles can be overcome.
If you are a gun owner, I would think that you would at least want a choice.
They don't want to be in a situation where, oh no, someone's coming through my front door, I've got to reboot my gun.
It's the reliability, stupid.
Adding biometric or RFID sensors to a gun means adding multiple layers of new complicated technology that can go wrong.
The blinking red LED light means that you have 33% battery life left and you must change the batteries.
There weren't batteries that were small enough, there weren't chips that were reliable enough, there wasn't biometric technology that was good enough to recognize fingerprint IDs.
Guns are finely honed mechanical devices.
They're rugged.
They can withstand rough use.
Smart guns will add electronics that can fail, can break, that will need a charged power source.
And most importantly, they can be disabled by criminals or governments.
This vulnerability and others will come from the software, which will also have bugs that will get worse with software updates, just like your phone.
And there are other concerns.
Any wireless coupling can decouple, it can have interference, or it can be hacked.
And will you grip a biometric handle in the same way when you're under stress or under combat?
So far there's only been one attempt at a smart gun.
The IP-1 from the German manufacturer Armitix.
The gun is implanted with an electronic chip that allows it to be fired only if the shooter is wearing a companion watch into which a PIN number has been entered.
It was only offered in a .22 caliber, but it cost $1,800, five times the cost of other .22s, and not offered in a self-defense caliber.
But it had other problems.
It took 7 push-button commands and 12 seconds before it could be fired.
And it had 3 or 4 misfires per 11-round magazine, repeatedly.
So, it's not good, it's not fast, it's not cheap, and it's laughably unreliable.
Not even the gun grabbers in New Jersey could call it smart with a straight face.
And that's important, because New Jersey has passed a law that once a smart gun exists in the market, only smart guns will be allowed to be sold in New Jersey.
This is why gun users threatened a boycott of manufacturers like Smith & Wesson when they announced plans to work on a smart gun.
I don't exactly understand this and maybe there will be somebody in the audience who explains it to me.
Back in 1997, the CEO of Colt said, you know, we can design or starting to develop guns where you can only use it if you've got a chip.
A boycott was called against them and they had to back off of developing that technology.
The same with Smith & Wesson.
Smith & Wesson responded to the boycott by cancelling smart gun research and firing the CEO that proposed it.
So users are not asking for smart guns.
As a matter of fact, they strongly don't want them.
So what does Obama do?
He will use his unlimited Federal Reserves to build one and shove it down our throats.
Obama likes to compare smart guns to cell phones.
I didn't bring my cell phone with me, but my cell phone like yours, I just put my thumb print on.
Well, why can't you do that for a gun?
The cell phone analogy goes beyond biometric locks.
The government has the capability to shut down all cell phones in an area, or selectively turn off their cameras, although they haven't used that capability yet.
And they want the ability to track and disable your gun, even if it still works with all the added technology bells and whistles.
If there's an app that can help us find a missing tablet, if we can do it for your iPad, there's no reason we can't do it with a stolen gun.
Here's the bottom line.
If you let someone get close enough to take your gun away, you're not doing it right.
If you let children get access to your guns, you're not doing it right.
We need smart people who control their guns, not smart guns controlled by government.
We need better training and education, not unaffordable, unreliable weapons that can be disabled by the government.
For InfoWars.com, I'm David Knight.
Again, ladies and gentlemen, you can get six months free at PrisonPlanet.TV, but only for one more week.
Next Monday, the special that only comes around once the year ends.
In fact, we've never offered six months free before, but I really want to get more people to join and be able to watch the nightly news, to see the live reports we do, the special reports, all my films, e-books, and so much more.
One person can share their membership with 20 people.
And you are funding the absolute, very leading edge, the vanguard of the resistance to the globalist operation on every front.
We have to have our own platform that is harder for them to censor, harder for the system to shut down.
We put out the daily radio show free with the video and audio feeds at Infowars.com forward slash show.
But it is the members that get the nightly news exclusively and first and the commercial free video podcasts and audio podcasts that are
Paying it forward and financing and helping so many other people see the truth when we put the videos on Facebook, YouTube, and it's PrisonPlanet.tv that finances so much of the cameras, the equipment, the crew.
The Reporters.
You are becoming a PrisonPlanet.TV member.
You get exclusive HD, higher quality, get it first.
And then you can download it, share it with friends and family, share your passcode with them, your username.
It's a win-win.
And then you're helping finance to put it out for free to everybody.