Two items bobbed to the surface today, one relatively benign, the other fraught with ominousness:
Barack Obama announced new steps Friday to help curb gun violence, including by identifying the requirements that "smart guns" would have to meet for law enforcement agencies to buy and use them as well as sharing mental health records with the federal background check system. [emphasis added]
You see the dichotomy.
Smart guns use various technologies to prevent an accidental shooting or help track down a missing gun....
As Obama unveiled a[n illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional] plan last January to expand federal background checks for gun purchases, he directed the [Commissaria]ts of Defense, Homeland [Ins]ecurity and [Inj]ustice[, Revenge & Coverup] to conduct or sponsor research into smart-gun technology. Obama also instructed the agencies to regularly review the availability of such technology and to promote its use.
In a report released Friday, the [Inj]ustice[, Revenge & Coverup] and Homeland [Ins]ecurity [commissaria]ts said they expect to complete the work of identifying the smart-gun requirements by October.
The Defense [Commissaria]t will continue to help manufacturers test smart firearms under real-world conditions at the U.S. Army Aberdeen Test Center in Maryland.
Aside from the question of whether these are congressionally-created and -funded programs, the "smart gun" angle seems relatively harmless, as long as its use is "researched" and "tested" and "promoted" as opposed to "required" or "mandated". For Barack Obama, this is an almost stunning level of imperial restraint and might actually border on "common sense". If technology can contribute to gun safety in the same way that gun safety courses and training do, that sounds like something the NRA is probably already promoting itself.
But the mental health record "sharing" is back to despotic business as usual:
The president also called for more attention to be paid to the mentally ill. The Social Security Administration will publish a proposed rule to help ensure that mental health records about people who are prohibited from buying a gun are reported to the background check system. The public will have sixty days to comment after the proposed rule is published in the Federal Register. [emphasis added]
And those comments will have absolutely no effect on whether or not the rule is illegally implemented, so what's the point another than to get further on the Regime's punitive radar screen?
Again we have to ask the question: How expansive and coonveniently Agenda-serving is the White House's definition of "mental illness"? We know that they favor including PTSD in that category, which would forcibly disamr many veterans, for example. Taken to its ultimate (i.e. Soviet) extreme, "mental illness" could be stretched to include Second Amendment support and the "wrong" ideological and political leanings. It could be made to take any form and encompass any number of demographics to maximally achieve The One's policy and partisan objectives. In short, "justifiable, 'common sense'" gun confiscation. And the low-information voter herd would probably slurp it right down like a doggie treat.
There's a big difference between "promotion" and "encouragement" of technologies to actually make firearms safer and bureaucratic character assassination to justify Second Amendment contraction.
Consider that my "public comment" (or "shooting" off my mouth), Barry, in lieu of blowing my nose in a Federal Register that would require a months-long sinus infection to fully accomplish. And I had one of those once, and wouldn't care to repeat it.
No comments:
Post a Comment