When USA Today asks a writer for an editorial they want it USA Yesterday. That’s one reason they tap RF for pro-gun pieces; the boss can blog in his sleep. He cranked out ‘Smart’ guns, dumb idea for usatoday.com in twenty-minutes. The result isn’t really pro-gun as much it’s anti-smart gun. “New Jersey gun owners don’t want to lose access to, trade or face the confiscation of tried-and-true non-electronic firearms. They view electronic firearms as inherently unreliable. What if your finger’s covered with dirt or blood? What if the electronic ‘smart gun’ runs out of power? What if you need to use someone else’s ‘smart gun’ in an emergency? American gun owners’ basic attitude to smart gun technology is distinctly Missourian. Show me. In fact, we’ll consider using smart guns after the police use them to provide proof of concept. And maybe not even then.” If only the New York Times would open its editorial page to RF’s pro-gun polemics . . .
I’m very surprised at the prosecutors choices.
Isn’t that lacking in due diligence? Or a total lack of acting in the best interest of ones client? In this case the county/state?
Smells bad from my perspective.
Strong words. Do they give a rabbit’s butt?
By “Do they give a rabbit’s butt” I assume you mean “do they care”?
Wahoo! That’s awesome. Farago is a machine.
A REAL PIECE OF WORK. No honor, no integrity, serve themselves and protect their pensions.
Be alert.
The world needs more lerts.
The worst part is that this guy has the audacity to ask for his job back after what happened! I can’t even imagine how his wife feels about this.
“From their FAQ: Is it true that a camera that runs this fast must be powered by either dilithium or silithium crystals? No. We’ve been able to achieve these rates of speed without the use of such technology.”
“Rate of speed” is the math-and-science equivalent of calling a magazine a clip. Or maybe, as mattv2099 likes to say, “clipazine”.
I don’t need and don’t care what he says about my constitutionally protected second amendment right or any other amendment right.
My rights, my Natural, Inalienable Rights are Pre-Constitutional.
Even if the Government fails to protect my Rights, I still get to protect them.
I still get to choose.
And if that senile old man says otherwise, he should be turned in to Soylent Green.
For the people below claiming to own a dependable high point c-9, I’ve owned mine for 3 years, and I promise, it’s nothing more than a, “one pump chump.” From the day I received it as a gift, or clever prank, it has never cleared more than one clip(and it RARELY does) without one or multiple problems. I’m generally impressed if I can get more than 4 rounds off. I’ve tried several different clips, and even went so far as to try and modify the gun to function properly. Please do not ever trust your life to this weapon, and if you do, make the first shot count.
P.S. One problem I’ve encountered that you haven’t listed is after firing, I’ve had the stock magazine fall out.
Why in the hell do you ban a classic rifle like a M1a they use them in competitions all the time and it is a great rifle just as is the garand but it’s ok to buy them still. But worst of all is the stupid ass law that we can only buy 10 round mags or less in maryland now, but you allow us to go out of state and buy a 100 round mag and bring it home. Talk about a worthless law that just got passed so a worthless gov. o’malley can say he did something to stop the gun violence and school shooting in maryland. Last I was aware of we the legal gun owning people of maryland have not had any were near the problems that other states have had. WE THE LEGAL GUN OWNERS IN MARYLAND ARE NOT ONLY BEING PUNISHED BY OUR GOVERNMENT BUT BEING USED TO SET AN EXAMPLE OF, IF THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH DOING IT HERE IN THIS STATE IT WILL SOON START IN OTHERS UNTILL WE HAVE ALL OUR GUNS TAKEN AWAY. I USE MY AR-15 TO HUNT SMALL GAME AND I USE MY AR-10 TO HUNT LARGE GAME AND I BET THEY ARE JUST AS ACCURATE OR MORE THEN MANY BOLT GUNS AND I NEED ONLY 1 SHOT TO KILL MY GAME. Forst Gump said it best “stupid is as stupid does” We need laws to hurt the illegal gun owners and people using guns in a crime not the legal owner that has done his 7 day, wait. I will be there to voice my disapproval of o’malley and his laws at every meeting I can
ATF should work with “non-experts” on dismantling the eforms process.
ATF doesn’t care about crime or safety anyways. They care about additional taxation of alcohol, tobacco, and firearms. As long as they are getting their cut of the profits they are usually pretty happy. Yup… that is what it is about… money.
I think the focus of this article drifted… The point shouldn’t be that he got away with it and can now bear arms again, but that (as part of the article pointed out) that a regular citizen would have been hounded. He should be prosecuted for reckless endangerment or neglect (or even child abuse)… But this has nothing to do with guns, and everything to do with parenting.
Let’s have a lot more Former Mayors Against Illegal Guns.
Let me see if I can logically follow the comments to this article. Each of you is FOR illegal guns. Isn’t that an absurd position to take. Where does this bologna end and common sense take over?
Judging by the previous post, I can think of one police officer who should be required to use a smart gun.
CNN refers to it as an “assault rifle”, flawed, but at least the flawed term was used in a positive light… still flawed though.
Vid includes camera footage of these scumbags kicking in her door. Good for her. And her husband, who trained her how to use it. Also includes the police chiefs nod of approval. Good for him.
http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/crime/2014/02/20/dnt-michigan-mom-pulls-gun-on-intruders.wxyz.html
Reminds me of the waterboy . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfHOQAT0-Mk
Love the WTF is that factor.