Sunday, February 03, 2002
Copyright ? Las Vegas Review-Journal

COLUMN: Vin Suprynowicz

What ‘smart gun’ technology is really all about

Because I was on the media list for the Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trades
(SHOT) show, which returned to Las Vegas this weekend, I got lots of
postcards and e-mails during the month of January, urging me to stop by the
booth of one exhibitor or another.

Tonya Giudice of Blue Heron Communications, a PR outfit, sent me a routine
e-mail a week or so back offering me a personal tour of the Smith & Wesson
line at the show. Not thinking much about it, but curious, I replied:

“Hi — Have you formally abrogated and rescinded that deal with the
federals, or are we still boycotting you?

“p.s. — I love Smiths, own dozens, and buy no other revolver. (Well, I
bought one Taurus in .44 Special — I thought it was cute.) I just haven’t
been buying any NEW ones since the previous management sold us down the
river.”

(It was a gun-buyer boycott, after the previous management of Smith & Wesson
signed a sell-out deal with the Clinton administration equivalent to
Chamberlain’s deal with Hitler over Czechoslovakia, that forced the
bargain-basement sale of the 150-year old Massachusetts gun-maker last
year.)

This time, it was Gary Giudice, president of the outfit, who responded:

“Good afternoon Vin, We understand how you feel. As you know, the Clinton
administration is gone and Thompkins, the previous English owner, is gone.
Now we have an American-owned Smith and Wesson that makes quality handguns
right here in the USA. During the last couple of years a lot has changed at
S&W. But they still have many fourth generation employees, they still have a
mission to make safe and dependable firearms and they still promote
responsible gun ownership. Please take a moment to come by the booth at SHOT
to look at the products you’ve been missing. …”

Now, I’m a native New Englander, and would like nothing more than to see the
Connecticut Valley once again called the “Arsenal of Freedom.” But don’t try
to kid a kidder. I replied:

“Hi, Gary — Love it. You `understand how I feel.’ I’m sure you’re also
`hearing what I’m saying.’ I feel so much closer now, don’t you?

“I take it it’s no mistake that your polite message does not contain the
sentence, `and we’ve unilaterally rescinded and abrogated that “deal” in
which the previous owners agreed that no gun store would be allowed to stock
S&W products unless they installed “safety locks” on all the guns they sold,
etc. …’

“There’s nothing `responsible’ about allowing the federal government to
coerce us into manufacturing weapons of a type — or storing our weapons in
a way — which makes them less readily usable to defend our families (much
less weapons which are easily disabled by a cop with a remote `electronic
key’ — the final goal of any `smart gun’ technology).”

Well, Gary didn’t take that lying down:

“Good morning Vin,

“I too am a gun owner much concerned about trends in America relating to my
rights as a gun owner. Not speaking for Smith of course, I too was appalled
by that agreement and the fact that Thompkins signed it. I’ve been an NRA
member since 1964 and have kept as well informed as possible about all
issues relating to my rights. I do understand how you feel.

“That said, you don’t seem to have a good handle on the agreement, what it
said or even what it would’ve meant, much less the political realities of
today. Do you think for a minute the Bush administration would let anybody
out of such an agreement? He, and his party, do need to worry about getting
re-elected. … Cops turn off our guns? Yep, there are a few folks that
would like to see that I suppose but nowhere in any agreement has that been
proposed. Nor would anyone at Smith or any other reasonable American support
such stupidity. The stretch you make on this point is worse than some
anti-gunners would try.

“Most major gun companies that I’m aware of are working on `smart
technology.’ Are you boycotting them as well? We, as law abiding gun owners
in America, have a lot of problems; it’s just that Smith is no longer one of
them. Smith and Wesson is not the enemy. …”

Pretty much wrapping up our little dialogue, I replied:

“Nice try, Gary. I `don’t seem to have a good handle on the agreement’? Read
it recently, yourself? Not only did Smith agree to impose conditions on its
dealers (even when they sold non-Smith products) which would never have been
tolerated had not the fedgov been a party to the scheme, but Smith also
agreed to develop `smart gun’ technology.

” `Smart guns’ are designed to include chips which `turn off’ the gun when
it’s not in its owner’s hand. Take a look at the technology now available
for some new cars, which allows the `owner’ to throw a remote switch and
kill the car’s ignition system to `stop a car thief from escaping with the
car.’ You think police aren’t already experimenting with ways to use this
technology to `turn off’ the ignition system when owners try to drive away
in their own cars?

“Now, why exactly do you think the police (with federal aid, financing, and
encouragement) won’t quickly seek to develop technology which will allow an
officer knocking on the door … to use an `electronic master key’ to
`disable’ any `smart guns’ in the house — and then quickly ban the
manufacture of any gun that ISN’T a `smart gun’ … all for `the safety of
the children,’ of course?

“What on earth do you think they want this technology for?! The statistical
occurrence of the `problem’ it’s supposed to `solve’ — guns being grabbed
away and used against their owners — is infinitessimal. And even if it were
frequent, why would the gun grabbers care — that would only bolster their
otherwise pathetic case against private gun ownership. Do you really believe
they want to make guns `safer’ so more of us will buy and carry them? …

“Stop it, Gary. You’re killing me.”

Vin Suprynowicz, the Review-Journal’s assistant editorial page editor, is author of “Send in the Waco Killers.” His column appears Sunday.

This story is located at:
http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2002/Feb-03-Sun>
2002/opinion/18004463.html