Quote of the Day: Shove It, Mr. Attorney General Edition


“I stopped him right there. I looked right across the table at Eric Holder – yeah, the attorney general of the United States – and told him, ‘If you try to mandate my smart-gun technology, I’ll burn it down.’” – Kodiak Arms President W.P. Gentry in Epic: This Gun Manufacturer Just Stared Down Eric Holder And Told Him To Shove It [at westernjournalism.com]

(h/t Steve S.)


  1. avatar The Brotherhood of Steel says:

    Yeah!!!!! That’s awesome.

    1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      Indeed. I hope he has a good accountant ready to deal with an audit, and good lawyers ready to deal with all the other federal agencies that are about to attack him.

      1. avatar Tex300BLK says:

        yeah… countdown until they find terabytes of child porn on this guys PC. You know the saying, you want to fight with a pig get ready to be covered in mud and shit.

      2. avatar Tomyironmane says:

        Really? Good thing he pissed off the justice department and not the ATF, they just execute your whole family, Ruby Ridge style.

  2. avatar O2HeN2 says:

    Does the phrase “Who is John Galt?” immediately spring to mind for anyone else reading that?


    1. avatar Bob72 says:

      Yes. As soon as I read it. This guy is my hero for the day.

    2. avatar Kyle in CT says:

      Seems to be a lot of that going around these days.

      As a side note, I can understand why there’s a scholarship to people who write an essay on that book, and why so few people participate. Who the heck writes a 50+ page monologue?!

      1. avatar Gary Schulze says:

        I thought it was 150 pages if you’re talking about his radio speech. I skipped it.

    3. avatar JasonM says:

      I don’t remember the text exactly, but I believe Hank Reardon says something very similar when the moochers threaten to take his mills.

  3. avatar Gene says:

    Holder: “Blah… blah.. blah illegal guns… blah… for the children… blah… blah… only authorized users… blah… blah… remote turn off… blah… blah…”

    Gentry: “… And get that fsck’n finger outta my face”

    Lady: “Oh, SNAP!”

  4. avatar ST says:

    As far as I’m concerned, he’s not the AG since he’s got an outstanding warrant from Congress regarding his failure to release F&F documents.

    1. avatar RockOnHellChild says:


    2. avatar nathanredbeard says:

      Remind me again where in the Constitution it says Congress can arrest people? Oh yeah, that’s right, NOWHERE!!!!

      Do you really want politically elected indiviuduals with the power to arrest someone? If so, you’re an idiot. Only a judge can issue an arrest warrant, and as a general rule, judges try to stay out of the often political wranglings that have to do with Congressing holding someone in contempt.

      1. avatar Jeff says:

        Article 1, section 2
        Congress has the sole power of impeachment.

        1. avatar nathanredbeard says:

          Impeachment has nothing to do with arrest, it has to do with the determination of whether an official has committed a criminal act and whether the official should be removed from office.

        2. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

          Okay, so who would file criminal charges against the Atty. Gen.?

          Speaking on a federal level, isn’t that the Atty. Gen. job? Much in the same way the DA would file charges against somebody on a local level.

          Who watches the watchmen, so to speak.

        3. avatar JoshuaS says:

          Actually, impeachment is similar to an indictment. 2 presidents have been impeached, neither were convicted.

          Holder does not have an arrest warrant. In principle, his department should be obtaining on. He was found in contempt of congress, which does have the right, from the necessary and proper clause, to investigate the executive…how else can they decide whether to impeach, or exercise the power of the purse, etc. While “special prosecutors” are dubious (Scalia alone agrees with me on their unconstitutionality), Congress itself as an investigative body is fairly well established

      2. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

        You think politicians care about the Constitution… Aren’t you just adorable.

        1. avatar nathanredbeard says:

          Don’t worry, ROHC, I’m not that naive.

        1. avatar Toby in KS says:

          The Senate. There’s the key. “Senate,” spelled with a capital D.

      3. avatar JR_in_NC says:

        “Do you really want politically elected indiviuduals with the power to arrest someone? If so, you’re an idiot.”

        So, my county Sheriff does NOT have the power to arrest me? Wow. I better go tell him. He needs to know that.

        You might consider toning down the snark and name calling of others while you are in the process of sticking your own foot in your mouth.

        PS: Your statement is illogical, anyway. You say that judges are the only ones with and that should have that power, yet judges are either elected directly in some cases or appointed by elected officials.

      4. avatar Rich Grise says:

        Remind me again where in the Constitution it even authorizes such of a thing as “attorhey general?”

    3. avatar Accur81 says:


  5. avatar Jeremy in AL says:

    The lady is holding a pistol under that coat, aimed at his chest.

  6. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    He sounds crazy. I like crazy.

  7. avatar NYC2AZ says:

    How can anyone in the firearms business (new or old) not understand what certain individuals in government want to do with smart gun tech?

    1. avatar Jack in the Crack says:

      Eric Holder is Marxist progressive who is on record, on C-SPAN video no less, saying, “We really need to brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.”

      The video (link below) reveals clearly where he is on the issue of guns.


  8. avatar bobmcd says:

    “the handgun’s grip would be able to identify fingerprints and, within one second, recognize whether the holder was authorized to use the firearm or not.”

    Great. Adding a second to the time required to draw and fire. That’s not going to get the owner of the “smart gun” killed.

    1. avatar Accur81 says:

      Hmmm. That could be a “government” second. Like when your mechanic says it’ll to 30 minutes and the job isn’t finished two hours later. I’m thinking a smart gun “second” could mean maybe it’ll shoot and maybe it won’t. The only thing truly known is that it will be slower and less reliable than a conventional firearm. Hard pass.

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        Yup. Or this sequence of events:
        Threat presents itself
        Draw weapon
        “Authorized user”
        “Replace battery”
        Hit threat with useless gun.

    2. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      ““the handgun’s grip would be able to identify fingerprints”

      Biometrics based on fingerprints taken during stressful situations are doomed to failure.

      Anyone that has ever done fingerprinting or had their fingerprints taken knows how unreliable this is. Sweat, gripping too hard, movement, etc are examples of ways the correct person’s fingerprint are not read accurately enough to unlock the weapon.

      Sweat, gripping too hard and movement are all things that can, and likely will, occur during a life-and-death situation for which the gun is grabbed.

      Smart guns = red herring issue for the anti’s to show us as “uncooperative” and “unwilling to compromise on common sense solutions.”

      1. avatar Roscoe says:


      2. avatar DaveL says:

        Not only would fingerprint-based technology be potentially problematic during self-defense situations, it’s guaranteed to make the gun useless if you’re wearing gloves, something rather common in my neck of the woods when you’re sitting in a tree stand at first light in mid-November.

  9. avatar former water walker says:

    Spoken to an a##hat who should be in prison. Has an unnamed gubmint agency paid Mr. Gentry a visit?

  10. avatar Pantera Vazquez says:

    Mr Gentry Is the man. He told the AG off-and rightfully so. I for one shall attempt to contact him to thank him for standing up against the incessant push of the gov against our rights. Moleon Labe…..

  11. avatar Don says:

    Patent tons of ideas for smart gun technology, then sit on the patents.


  12. avatar Richard says:

    He was much too nice to the wonderful AG. How in the hell can the AG’s office mandate the production of anything anyhow? Holder is nothing but a thug. If he wasn’t the AG, he be pushing up daisies somewhere. He’d have tried to make a gun deal with a cartel or something, tired to ‘outsmart’ them and wound up with one of those ‘necktie’ thingies.

    And if the pos had stuck his finger in my face, I’d show him the other end of it. Just a damn thugee.

    1. avatar XDs 45 says:

      Richard, you had me at “Holder is a nothing but a thug”.

      Spot on.

  13. avatar Oxygenthief says:

    In unrelated news, Kodiak Arms President W.P. Gentry, is being audited by the IRS and his residence was mistakenly raided 5 times by the ATF, FBI, Homeland Security, Local and County police. Hard drives containing information regarding Mr. Gentry were damaged and subsequently destroyed before anyone could ask for details…

    1. avatar Calvin says:

      … but not before CSI “recovered” 13.37 GB of kiddie porn and a copy of the Anarchist Cookbook from said drives

  14. avatar pyratemime says:

    Naturally, I applaud Mr. Gentry for voicing his convictions and telling the AG no. It does leave me wondering how soon some aspect of the government may exercise eminent domain over his patents and then license the technology. If that were to happen I could see integration of the technology in civilian firearms for any company that wishes to make sales to the US Government.

  15. avatar DerryM says:

    Gentry’s Intelligun System is intriguing and seems to have been designed in deference to Gun Rights and gun user/owner safety (both in casual handling and combat use- one second for an authorizing ID could be pared-down to a nearly instant fraction of a second). That being said, I have more questions than comfort with the concept. Mainly, such a system is electronic, and electronics fail, usually in accordance with some corollary of “Murphy’s Law”. Expense is a factor and “retro-fitting older guns probably not feasible. So, AG Holder should suggest that a test bed for this system would be his personal security team and the Presidential Secret Service Team(s)…otherwise, as Gentry said, Holder should “Shove it!”

    I am wondering what market Gentry expects to introduce his product to and on what basis. Who is going to bet their safety and survivability on such a product? I am sure elaborate simulations can be created for 90th+ percentile assurance it is viable. You have to accept that with current firearms there is always a small factor of unreliability, which most of us have experienced at one time or another.

    Anyway, just thinking “out-loud” here, as I am sure we will keep hearing about such technologies for a long time to come.

  16. avatar Sammy says:

    How would an EMP event affect smart guns? I think I know, but am not sure.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      Paperweight. Just like moisture.

  17. avatar ToddG (not that one, another one) says:

    I’ll start considering these once they have been tested and proven with years of experience in local, state, and federal police use [and “police” forces like Secret Service and alphabet agency SWATabees].

    What? The police don’t want to use them? Not reliable enough to protect our government overlords? Hmmm…

  18. avatar KCK says:

    When my kids were little, I would keep critical components (bolt/cylinder) apart from the rest of the gun and locked up separately, ammo in a third. I traded one kind of security for another, my choice
    In that narrow application when secure access is critical as above, that is where I might have bought into Smart Gun tech.
    Kids grown? Sell the smart gun to a young family guy/gal where that extra safety layer would be welcome.
    Narrow, narrow, narrow scenario for me as with most potential users. Universally useful? Ridicules
    I guess in NJ, one size will fit all. Just like the 5Lb bag for 10Lb of crap.

  19. avatar Mark Whitley says:

    What a rude man Holder is getting in that man’s face & pointing his finger at him!
    It speaks volumes about his arrogance as AG thinking everyone has to kowtow to his will/words!
    Typical of most politicians!

  20. avatar Jonathan says:

    Those saying you’d attack him for pointing his finger in your face are lying or stupid. There’s a big difference in disrespect and actually harming or threatening somebody. Remember, there are consequences to all actions.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      He’s not a politician. He’s a political appointee. The lowest of the low in Government status.

  21. avatar IdahoPete says:

    “New Jersey, for instance, passed a law more than a decade ago requiring that, within three years of smart-gun technology having been introduced in a commercially approved firearm, all guns in the state must contain similar software.”

    Any gunmaker that does not see where this is going is an idiot. I will happily join a boycott of any company that introduces such a device – not because the machine is inherently bad, but because the anti-gun politicians will immediately use it to control gun owners, as an excuse to outlaw the transfer (and eventually possession) of any non-“smart” guns because “they are too dangerous”.

  22. avatar Col. Angus says:

    If you believe (as I do) that Holder’s a prick now, well, wait until he’s on SCOTUS, because that’s what’s coming.

    1. avatar Roscoe says:

      He’s too divisive, arrogant and stupid; wouldn’t get past the Senate if he were nominated, which I doubt would happen even with a most progressive liberal in the White House.

  23. avatar Frank Masotti says:

    Good for him. It’s about time someone put eric holder in his place. 🙂

  24. avatar james bond says:

    Stupid Yanks, keep arming those children do they can kill each other and the teachers..

    1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

      “Stupid Yanks, jeep arming those children do they can kill each other and the teachers..”

      One too many martinis Mr. Bond?

  25. avatar Glenn in USA says:

    Look I want to address all the commenters.

    I would not be so quick to applaud this gun manufacturer.
    The gun manufacture SAYS he want to create a gun “for safety’s sake”.
    Where have I heard that before?

    I am a tech guy. I know computers. I know software.
    This is a computer controlled gun run by software.
    I can’t tell you how many scenarios in which this thing can fail.
    The gun maker says it takes a “whole second for the gun to authenticate”.
    In a gun fight or self-defense situation, how many people are willing to give up a whole second?
    Is the authentication done by fingerprint? I’ve seen this circumvented easily.
    Is the authentication don by wearing a WIRELESS wrist bracelet?
    Who is going to wear a bracelet that identifies you as a person wearing a concealed gun?
    Who is going to wear a bracelet that could be easily torn off in a scuffle?
    If the authentication is wireless, who has not heard how hackers can break into a system?
    Or jam the wireless signal?
    What about the government? The first thing they would REQUIRE the manufacturer is a either a BACKDOOR to break in to the system or dictate the RF signaling so they could JAM IT.
    So if you guys were ever in the scenario where you might be shooting at local LEO’S, Federal Agents, or our own military (God forbid) who do you think would have those RF jammers?
    You surely would look funny when you heard only a click when you were expecting a bang.

    Here’s the thing and you all need to pay attention to this.
    If these guns can be remotely controlled or jammed or circumvented in any way, why would the government ever need to confiscate your nice little Star Trek weapon, when all they need to do is TURN IT OFF?
    I am suspicious of this so-called confrontation.
    I am highly suspicious of this so-called smart gun.
    I suspect that this is nothing but a backdoor to gun confiscation without having to actually confiscate your weapon. It’s ingenious.

    One other thing. As I said I know software.
    Most computers run on an operating system, including desktops, tablets, and smart phones.
    The applications run on top of the operating system.
    Operating systems are divided up in two categories.
    Those that are Open-source, where any body gets to see the source code and the other type is Proprietary.
    Where you do not get to see the source code.
    Most desktop computers run on either Microsoft or Apple proprietary operating systems.
    Linux is a desktop Open source operating sytem.
    Who would own the source code for the computers on these guns?
    Would you be able to see and examine it?

    I guarantee you the gun manufacture would keep his software closed source and no one would be able to see it, except maybe the government.

    So as soon as this gun is made and it proves to be workable (and hackable and circumventable by the government) what makes you think this technology won’t be mandated by the government for ALL gun manufacturers?
    Oops. Your battery just died and so did you.
    Where can you buy this specialized battery? Do you need to show ID?
    Do you need to have a gun license to buy this battery as some states require to buy ammunition?


  26. avatar JoshuaS says:

    I just spent 9 hours fingerprinting people. Not even to a very high standard, the computer program is set to a low strictness setting, and we accept from fairly bad prints (51% clarity, and two scans and sometimes such a poor threshold of matching that other people’s fingerprints were identified by the computer)

    Even with this very base level… the majority of people took at least 2-3 seconds per finger to be recognized. And a significant portion took much longer, multiple tries, angles, pressure…giving up and using the thumb only, cleaning their finger, the scanner …drying their finger, or wetting it (honest to God, young asian girls almost all had dry fingers, you could see cracking in the image and it was fainter…)

    So even at a level where it provides only fairly loose threshholds for matching, failures are rife.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email