MA Moving Towards Requiring Mandatory GPS Trackers In Firearms

[PocketProtector]

Welcome to Liberalism.

[tsafa]

Since the purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect the people from a potentially tyrannical government, putting GPS tracking devices in firearms so that they can be tracked would defeat the purpose of the Second Amendment. That makes it unconstitutional. The fact that the technology does not exist yet to allow for this is irrelevant... because it will exist in the near future.

WOW, Lexington and Concord must be relocated to another state, otherwise all that rolling in the graves will cause serious global impact.

+1 Rep

[Phillygunguy]

We should put GPS on all politicians with shock collars so when they push a dumb idea like this we know where they are and shock them

[Dosbomber]

We should put GPS on all politicians with shock collars so when they push a dumb idea like this we know where they are and shock them

That technology already exists too. Bark collars sometimes used for dogs. The minute the politician opens his or her mouth, ZAP!

Personally, I see no issues with this idea. I think it's a great idea. Especially in Philly, New York, Massachusetts, Chicago, and California, as a good start.

[TaePo]

To their credit, they are pretty good at wasting taxpayer dollars.


Hypothetical Scenario: GPS trackers on all guns.

Fact #1: EM waves do not propogate through conductive materials, e.g. gun safes and aluminum foil.

Fact #2: For GPS position fixes, the antenna must have a clear, unobstructed view of the sky.

Fact #3: To enable tracking, either the position must be logged in the unit continuously, or it must rebroadcast to a base-station located somewhere in the Motherland.

Fact #4: This all requires the guns be continuously plugged in, or run on batteries.

Fact #5: Batteries can run out of power.

Fact #6: Massachusetts politicians are morons.


Ok, now that we have the ground rules laid out, let's say that someone wanted to commit a crime and they needed a gun. We'll have to ignore Facts #4 and #5 because they are inconvenient, however, this won't be the first time politicians ignore facts when making laws.

Moving on, let's say the only guns the guy owned had GPS trackers. All he would have to do to remain untracked is wrap some commonly found Reynold's Wrap when it leaves the safe. The foil would block not only the transmitted GPS signals from the satellite and prevent a position fix, but it would also block transmission should the second part of Fact #3 be true. He would have the alibi that the guns were in his safe and nowhere near the crime scene.

The only logical outcome I can imagine here is to ban aluminum foil, which would work out well considering Fact #6.

Sorry, but it would be far better to keep the tracking device fully operational, separate it from the firearm. Use the firearm in a crime, reattach the GPS to the firearm, fix any tamperproof mechanisms. No time untracked but positive feedback it was stationary somewhere.

Alibi City.

[LTCcarrier]

Why do they choose guns. Why not implant GPS into convicted sex offender's penises.

[Yellowfin]

Why do they choose guns. Why not implant GPS into convicted sex offender's penises.

Because in their minds guns are worse than sex offenders, and it's more politically useful to them to chase after a non-existent problem because they can't be held accountable for the results. Blaming and hating guns and gun ownership is a kind of reinvention of racial hate and segregation, using a minority of the population as a convenient voodoo doll to attribute all the "evil" to and skewer with legislative and social persecution while reminding the voter base that they are "good" by not being gun owners and their support is them doing the "right" thing.

Also, currently we don't yet have courts recognizing our rights to the same extent that they would for someone having their body forcibly violated. We certainly should, and we'd have LOTS to take up, but they're dragging out the process as much as possible on the cases that we do have in place already which are only a basic beginning towards restoring our rights.

[cgbudde]

Why do they choose guns. Why not implant GPS into convicted sex offender's penises.

Too many politicians would have to have the implant.

[G19]

Why do they choose guns. Why not implant GPS into convicted sex offender's penises.

Because if you go after guns that’s good because you are “protecting the children”, if you try and stop pedophiles you …. ah ... well ... never mind.