On Wednesday, President Obama spoke boldly about his recent unconstitutional efforts to circumvent Congress and crack-down on Second Amendment protections unilaterally. The dictatorial president joined a televised town hall where he spoke with proponents and opponents of the Second Amendment and he repeatedly assured that his recent gun control edicts were constitutionally permissible.
One item that the president prominently discussed was the need for advancements in firearm technology and a further reliance upon “smart guns.”
“Smart guns” is an emerging field that serves as a frightening concept for Second Amendment advocates. Through the use of technology (such as RFID bracelets and biometric fingerprint readers), these guns are supposed to be able to determine who has control of the firearm and will “lock-down” if the person to whom the gun is linked does not have control of it.
It’s a good idea in theory, but not only should one worry about the reliability of an emerging technology that literally asks customers to put their lives in the hands of sensors, but adorning wristwatches and bracelets to handle a gun can take precious time when seconds count.
Most-scary of all, however, is the continued eerie promises from anti-Second Amendment zealots who assure Americans that they can trust the government to not track or lock-down firearms electronically.
While many leftists are intrigued by the technology and view this as an acceptable compromise, imagine the roar of outrage that would ensue if the government advocated for a V-chip that could technologically restrict “unlawful” speech- even if such a government promised that they would never do such a thing.
“Smart guns” are anything but what the title would suggest. Still, Obama pushed them on Thursday night and in his unconstitutional executive orders.
Obama ordered the Department of Defense, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Homeland Security to enhance research into “smart gun” technologies that include the aforementioned technological innovations and include microstamping, a costly feature that imprints a unique feature upon the bullet so that each bullet can be traced to the gun that fired it.
Obama ordered the government to produce a report “outlining a research and development strategy designed to expedite the real-world deployment of such technology for use in practice.” He also asked that they review the availability of “smart gun” technology in the private sector and “explore potential ways to further its use and development to more broadly improve gun safety.” He also instructed to “consult with other agencies that acquire firearms and take appropriate steps to consider whether including such technology in specifications for acquisition of firearms would be consistent with operational needs.”
But Obama is doing this out of the kindness of his heart, right? He cares so deeply about slain children that though his hometown of Chicago is awash in rampant gun violence thanks to out-of-control gun control laws, that he sheds tears on national television thinking of the children.
Or, a simpler explanation is that he and his fellow Democrats will reap massive funds from the success of “smart gun” technologies- especially if such companies can secure government contracts for police and military.
Obama is the single largest recipient of “smart gun” donations in 2008 and 2012.
The Washington Free Beacon reports on the corruption:
The National Institute of Justice, a research, development, and evaluation agency of the Department of Justice, released a report in 2013 consisting of a review of the smart gun industry. The report identified ten companies that focus exclusively on smart gun technology.
Of the smart gun companies that made political contributions, Obama was the top recipient of campaign funds in 2008 and 2012, according to campaign finance data…
Sandia National Laboratories, a company that acts as a contractor to the United States Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration, has given tens of thousands to Obama’s coffers, donating $19,900 to his 2008 campaign. Sandia pushed an additional $17,090 in contributions to Obama’s campaign during the 2012 presidential election.
The laboratories fall under the umbrella of the Sandia Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of the national defense company Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin, who also donated to Republican candidates, gave a total of $262,376 to Obama’s 2008 and 2012 campaigns.
The New Jersey Institute of Technology, a Newark-based public research university also mentioned within the report, has additionally given more to Obama in 2008 and 2012 than any other candidate.
The institute gave $8,050 of its $9,100 in political donations to Obama. In 2012, the institute gave an overwhelming majority of its donated money to Obama, this time consisting of donations totaling$9,625.
If President Obama and his fellow liberals can convince the American public that there is a “safer” gun out there, it’s a win-win. They would get to demonize the NRA and gun owners and the liberal playbook has already established how to pull off the scam; just look at “climate change” and the tremendous infusion of cash pumped to “green” technology industries that, somehow, find its way back to lawmakers’ pockets.