Keep and Bear Arms - Gun Owners Home Page

NOTE! This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or any other living person besides the one who posted them. Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion Policy, but there's a bad apple in every bunch, and we have no control over bigots and other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com

The Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:

NJ: How New Jersey's Smart Gun Law Backfired
Submitted by: Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com

There are 2 comments on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments

Many Second Amendment advocates view smart guns as a step toward draconian restrictions on firearm ownership. Raymond, a passionate gun advocate, wasn't willing to risk his life for a few sales and decided to strip his shelves of smart guns. Fearing similar pushback, if not necessarily death threats, other retailers have likewise steered clear of smart guns. No major U.S. arms manufacturers are offering the weapons.

The current smart-gun scarcity can be traced, in part, to the enactment 13 years ago of a New Jersey statute intended to promote high-tech handguns.

Comment by: teebonicus (5/12/2015)

They still don't get it.

Leaving the reliability issue aside, the main objection is twofold, both prongs of which are constitutionally based.

1) The technology can be defeated by electronic disabling.

2) If they are mandated and standard firearms are made illegal, the government can simply turn them off whenever it desires effectively disarming the people in direct violation of the constitutional guarantee.

Those two facts are insurmountable, rendering any further discussion moot.

Comment by: Millwright66 (5/12/2015)

There is a worthwhile application for this technology, particularly in hoplophobic states like NJ. Equip all LEOs with them as their weapons are always in public and the loss of control of their weapon poses the greatest immediate threat to the officer. Everywhere it would remove the threat to the general public from weapons left unattended by officers.