Obama Top Recipient of ‘Smart Gun’ Cash

**middlefinger** · January 8th, 2016, 09:02 PM

.

Executive order could drive millions to donors, including major defense contractor

President Obama is the top recipient in campaign cash from the “smart gun” manufacturing industry, which stands to benefit from his executive action calling for more research into the technology.

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.

The president ordered the Department of Defense, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Homeland Security to undertake new research programs into smart gun technology on Tuesday. He told them to produce a joint report “outlining a research and development strategy designed to expedite the real-world deployment of such technology for use in practice” within the next three months.

Obama also directed the agencies to review the availability of smart gun technology and “explore potential ways to further its use and development to more broadly improve gun safety.” He also instructed them 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.”

The results of the order may create an influx of millions of dollars into the smart gun industry.

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.

“NJIT is a public university and does not make political donations,” institute spokesperson Lauren D. Ugorji said. She said that the donations were not given directly by the university but came from its employees.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/obama...mart-gun-cash/

**vinnyg101** · January 8th, 2016, 09:32 PM

Originally Posted by middlefinger

.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/obama...mart-gun-cash/

"Fuck That!" (James Yeager, circa 2013)

...I will never use a smart gun (if I can avoid them).

Unless it is this one:

Smart Gun from "Aliens"

**pennlineman** · January 8th, 2016, 09:38 PM

Well, he is the top gun salesman 7 years running now. Should have the decade tied up unless cankles gets a chance for the title. Would not be surprised to learn he has stock in gun companies too.

**stainless** · January 8th, 2016, 11:59 PM

Solyndra now has a trigger...

**Rosco the Iroc** · January 9th, 2016, 07:54 AM

Originally Posted by vinnyg101;3209618Unless it is this one: [img

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/4b/5b/da/4b5bda372038ba732bad358c2133bbe7.gif[/img]
Smart Gun from "Aliens"

Even then I'd rather have something for those close encounters.

**Wilderness 1864** · January 9th, 2016, 12:11 PM

Thanks for posting this information. It is not surprising. The whole thing is a political piggy bank for Democrats. I was most interested in the NJIT contribution and their denial that NJIT made contributions (they are a taxpayer-owned institution, which means in NJ that they are an arm of the Democrat party). Instead "nod nod wink wink", their employees made the contributions. The next question for them is whether those contributions were made from the coffers of the professor's and employee unions, extracted via dues from employee paychecks without individual consent. I wonder if the battery manufacturers are big contributors too.

I read some of the blogs after the Obama/CNN propaganda fest and it is hilarious as to just how enthusiastically the regressives are pushing this now. As if the technology already exists and all that is needed is a law to mandate it. At least one anti - gunner I read about was honest enough to insist that they be the only guns allowed for both armed citizens and law enforcement. That demonstrates how deluded they are about the safety and reliability of these weapons. Even if it worked (I doubt it ever will because the concept is flawed, and a lot of dead bodies will accumulate before the technology is either perfected or abandoned), I guess that means that everyone will have to have a smart gun. The idea of that any family member could pick up a firearm and use it in a self defense situation would be gone. Everyone in the family would have to have their own personal weapon. The logical result of that is a regressive nightmare: more guns. Of course, the criminals would just keep using the presumably banned simple, proven effective and proven reliable dumb guns to commit crimes. No one will be safer.

Ironically, Bloomie and friends want to be able to sue manufacturers, ammo makers and retailers any time a anyone is hurt if a gun is used in a crime or a homicide, even though the products performed flawlessly. What the laws mandating these smart guns will do is give manufacturers immunity from suit when people die or are injured when their flawed products fail to perform. In other words, smart gun manufacturers would never be held accountable for their own negligence. If smart firearms manufacturers or retailers could be sued when the products failed to work, or prove unreliable or impractical, resulting in injury or death, they would abandon this enterprise. They probably will anyhow when the $$ gravy train runs out.

**c45man** · January 10th, 2016, 01:54 PM

Originally Posted by Wilderness 1864

Thanks for posting this information. It is not surprising. The whole thing is a political piggy bank for Democrats. I was most interested in the NJIT contribution and their denial that NJIT made contributions (they are a taxpayer-owned institution, which means in NJ that they are an arm of the Democrat party). Instead "nod nod wink wink", their employees made the contributions. The next question for them is whether those contributions were made from the coffers of the professor's and employee unions, extracted via dues from employee paychecks without individual consent. I wonder if the battery manufacturers are big contributors too.

I read some of the blogs after the Obama/CNN propaganda fest and it is hilarious as to just how enthusiastically the regressives are pushing this now. As if the technology already exists and all that is needed is a law to mandate it. At least one anti - gunner I read about was honest enough to insist that they be the only guns allowed for both armed citizens and law enforcement. That demonstrates how deluded they are about the safety and reliability of these weapons. Even if it worked (I doubt it ever will because the concept is flawed, and a lot of dead bodies will accumulate before the technology is either perfected or abandoned), I guess that means that everyone will have to have a smart gun. The idea of that any family member could pick up a firearm and use it in a self defense situation would be gone. Everyone in the family would have to have their own personal weapon. The logical result of that is a regressive nightmare: more guns. Of course, the criminals would just keep using the presumably banned simple, proven effective and proven reliable dumb guns to commit crimes. No one will be safer.

Ironically, Bloomie and friends want to be able to sue manufacturers, ammo makers and retailers any time a anyone is hurt if a gun is used in a crime or a homicide, even though the products performed flawlessly. What the laws mandating these smart guns will do is give manufacturers immunity from suit when people die or are injured when their flawed products fail to perform. In other words, smart gun manufacturers would never be held accountable for their own negligence. If smart firearms manufacturers or retailers could be sued when the products failed to work, or prove unreliable or impractical, resulting in injury or death, they would abandon this enterprise. They probably will anyhow when the $$ gravy train runs out.

There is already a law in place which was passed under the George W. administration that protects firearm manufacturers from law suits brought forth from victims of violent crime where a gun was utilized. Not that such plaintiffs were successful in lawsuits of that nature prior to the law being passed. What the legislation did not protect were accidents and unintended discharges caused by faulty workmanship within the firearm. The smart gun technology will be civilly liable for faulty products that do not operate per expectation. The firearm industry pays a healthy percentage of their operating costs in liability insurance and the smart gun industry will also be paying out great sums of cash for that purpose.

By the way, Law Enforcement agencies, despite the hollow claims by politicians to the contrary, will not be included in any mandate requiring the use of firearms with the "smart" technology.

Elections have consequences and I would trust that firearm owners become one issue voters for the preservation of the future ability to own firearms.

**RockIsland** · January 10th, 2016, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by Rosco the Iroc

Even then I'd rather have something for those close encounters.

Ithaca M37 riot gun. Good choice!

**Pocketsand Operator** · January 10th, 2016, 09:55 PM

I think what I find most disturbing is Obama's own words "If we can do it for an iPad, there’s no way we can’t do it with a stolen gun." How quickly are cell phones jailbroken these days? This will be just one more thing that only affects law abiding citizens. There will be gun unlock apps within a week of any major release. If you have physical access to a device consider its security worthless. Hell even computrace/lojack can be bypassed with freely downloadable tools on the internet.