‘Smart’ Firearm Draws Wrath of the Gun Lobby

[mota bhai 2,675]

BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. — Belinda Padilla does not pick up unknown calls anymore, not since someone posted her cellphone number on an online forum for gun enthusiasts. A few fuming-mad voice mail messages and heavy breathers were all it took.

Then someone snapped pictures of the address where she has a P.O. box and put those online, too. In a crude, cartoonish scrawl, this person drew an arrow to the blurred image of a woman passing through the photo frame. “Belinda?” the person wrote. “Is that you?”

Her offense? Trying to market and sell a new .22-caliber handgun that uses a radio frequency-enabled stopwatch to identify the authorized user so no one else can fire it. Ms. Padilla and the manufacturer she works for, Armatix, intended to make the weapon the first “smart gun” for sale in the United States.

But shortly after Armatix went public with its plans to start selling in Southern California, Ms. Padilla, a fast-talking, hard-charging Beverly Hills businesswoman who leads the company’s fledgling American division, encountered the same uproar that has stopped gun control advocates, Congress, President Obama and lawmakers across the country as they seek to pass tougher laws and promote new technologies they contend will lead to fewer firearms deaths.

...

“Right now, unfortunately, these organizations that are scaring everybody have the power,” Ms. Padilla said. “All we’re doing is providing extra levels of safety to your individual right to bear arms. And if you don’t want our gun, don’t buy it. It’s not for everyone.”

...

Second Amendment defenders argue that once guns with high-tech safety features go on sale, government mandates will follow.

...

“Are we concerned?” asked Lawrence G. Keane, general counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for gun manufacturers. “Yes.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/28/us/politics/smart-firearm-draws-wrath-of-the-gun-lobby.html?_r=1

[lostinblue 1,989]

Let all leo's use this gun and we can see how it will work out. They can be the test market. say for 5 years.

[Sousuke 1,214]

Let all leo's use this gun and we can see how it will work out. They can be the test market. say for 5 years.

There is too much of a chance at failure. No officer is going to carry a firearm that has a chance of not firing.

[lostinblue 1,989]

There is too much of a chance at failure. No officer is going to carry a firearm that has a chance of not firing.

I am hearing 10% fail rate. But lawmakers think that is acceptable for my own use in a defensive situation.If it is not acceptable for every leo to use then it is not acceptable for me

[one...two...tree 2,762]

There is too much of a chance at failure. No officer is going to carry a firearm that has a chance of not firing.

All firearms have a chance of failure, yes? If so, then what is the acceptable fail rate of conventional guns?

This argument is similar to the one against smart (driverless) cars.

[eieio 1,594]

I am hearing 10% fail rate.

You have any info to back that up? Thats seems way to high.

Like buying a a brand new car that starts 9 days out of 10. Pretty much worthless.

If so, then what is the acceptable fail rate of conventional guns?

It is very low. I out of 10,000 maybe. Sure all guns can jam,poor ammo etc.....but these smart guns would should be no different.

[Boiler 45,658]

All firearms have a chance of failure, yes? If so, then what is the acceptable fail rate of conventional guns?

This argument is similar to the one against smart (driverless) cars.

Revolvers rarely do not go bang and worst case you just pull the trigger again.

Semi automatics can be more troublesome, but a good CCW, say a Glock with decent ammo, it is VERY rare. Obviously a bit more involved in clearing the action.

10% fail rate is terrible, how long does it take to clear if it happens?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Revolvers rarely do not go bang and worst case you just pull the trigger again.

Semi automatics can be more troublesome, but a good CCW, say a Glock with decent ammo, it is VERY rare. Obviously a bit more involved in clearing the action.

10% fail rate is terrible, how long does it take to clear if it happens?

No one here has provided a verifiable source as to what its failure rate actually is, and just going by standard manufacturing parameters for products in general, a 10% failure rate would probably trigger a product recall, so I'm skeptical. Secondly, preliminary tests of a new product are difficult to rely on until there's enough data from real world application. But really, there's another issue going on as indicated in the OP - that the gun lobby is fearful of laws requiring all guns have this safety feature. Another factor to consider when determining failure rate in conventional guns is what is the percentage of accidental injury and death from posessing a gun? If that percentage is acceptable by the gun lobby (which apparently it is), then why hold smart gun technology to a higher standard?

[lostinblue 1,989]

No one here has provided a verifiable source as to what its failure rate actually is, and just going by standard manufacturing parameters for products in general, a 10% failure rate would probably trigger a product recall, so I'm skeptical. Secondly, preliminary tests of a new product are difficult to rely on until there's enough data from real world application. But really, there's another issue going on as indicated in the OP - that the gun lobby is fearful of laws requiring all guns have this safety feature. Another factor to consider when determining failure rate in conventional guns is what is the percentage of accidental injury and death from posessing a gun? If that percentage is acceptable by the gun lobby (which apparently it is), then why hold smart gun technology to a higher standard?

Let all Leos including the FBI and the kenyans secret service test this out for 5 years and then get back to us. Maybe even Schumer the great gun hater from NY can replace his own gun with this new technology...

[lostinblue 1,989]

Revolvers rarely do not go bang and worst case you just pull the trigger again.

Semi automatics can be more troublesome, but a good CCW, say a Glock with decent ammo, it is VERY rare. Obviously a bit more involved in clearing the action.

10% fail rate is terrible, how long does it take to clear if it happens?

There is no clear .....you wear a wrist strap and that sends a signal to the gun in order to fire.No wrist strap no fire.... Think on star device. Cars can be disabled at the push of a button. So will it be with guns . All guns everywhere with this technology could be disabled at Schumers or Feinstein's push of a button. Backdoor gun control at its finest.....

[lostinblue 1,989]

New Jersey has a 2002 law in place which makes it clear that once a viable smart gun is available for retail sale then smart guns are all that will be legal in New Jersey.

Maryland Gun Store Backtracks on Smart Gun Sales After Public Outcry

19

0

19

1

Email Article Print article Send a Tip

by AWR Hawkins 2 May 2014 57 post a comment

A Maryland gun store owner who was standing by his decision to sell the Armatix iP1 smart gun on May 1st has done an about-face and announced on May 2nd that the gun will not be for sale.

The pushback from customers and gun rights advocates was simply overwhelming.

Oak Tree Gun Club in California tried to sell the smart gun and faced a similar backlash from law-abiding gun owners.

The Maryland gun store is Engage Armament, and Maryland's most recent gun control laws have put the business under such strain that store owner Andy Raymond was willing to try to anything to stay afloat. However, according to The Washington Post, after enduring a day "of protests and death threats" on May 1st, Raymond threw in the towel. He will not be selling the Armatix smart gun.

The catch with the smart gun is that New Jersey has a 2002 law in place which makes it clear that once a viable smart gun is available for retail sale then smart guns are all that will be legal in New Jersey.

GunsSaveLives.net published the law on their site:

It it within the public interest, and vital to the safety of our families and children, for New Jersey to take a bold and innovative step of fostering the development of personalized handguns by firearm manufacturers. To accomplish this objective, the Legislature determines that it should enact legislation designed to further enhance firearm safety by that, within a specified period of time after the date on which these new personalized handguns are deemed to be available for retail sales purposes, no other type of handgun shall be sold or offered for sale by any registered or licensed firearms dealer in this State.

There were many who feared an even partially successful debut of the smart gun in Maryland would lead to a non-smart-gun ban in New Jersey.

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The NRA needs firearms that can easily be spread and distributed to criminals. They need blood and mayhem. That's how they keep gun nutters scared and in need of more guns and ammo.

[Boiler 45,658]

It is a gun ban under a different guise.

I am sure for example I could dream up regulations that would make a car much safer at 4 x current costs.

In fact pretty much anything could be made safer if cost is no issue.

I wonder if LEO have an exception.

If you are in NJ might be a good time to stock up, in fact anywhere might be a good time to stock up.

[Sousuke 1,214]

All firearms have a chance of failure, yes? If so, then what is the acceptable fail rate of conventional guns?

This argument is similar to the one against smart (driverless) cars.

Yes all guns have a chance of failure but they can be cleared and used in the case of a semiauto. In the case of a revolver, they rarely if ever fail - part of the reason the British military used the antiquated Webley through the 1950s. And if they fail, another pull of trigger or hammer will rotate a fresh round in front of the firing pin. When this thing fails it becomes a plastic toy. In their promotional video (since taken down I might add....guess what... it failed. It relies on a watch being 15" away from the gun so I can see many many ways it can fail.

The argument is NOT similar to smart cars. No one is trying to take regular cars off the road after the first commercial sale of a smart car within 3 years. Thats what governments are trying to do with this.

A similar situation revolves around microstamping, which is having numbers etched on the firing pin so that spent cases will have their primers ID'd to the gun. Studies are mixed around its effectiveness and its currently too expensive for manufacturers to retool. Therefore California decided they would try and force the manufacturers to include the technology last year or create a handgun ban.

As a result within about 2 years no new handguns will be legal to sell in the state - a defacto ban.

[Sousuke 1,214]

No one here has provided a verifiable source as to what its failure rate actually is, and just going by standard manufacturing parameters for products in general, a 10% failure rate would probably trigger a product recall, so I'm skeptical. Secondly, preliminary tests of a new product are difficult to rely on until there's enough data from real world application. But really, there's another issue going on as indicated in the OP - that the gun lobby is fearful of laws requiring all guns have this safety feature. Another factor to consider when determining failure rate in conventional guns is what is the percentage of accidental injury and death from posessing a gun? If that percentage is acceptable by the gun lobby (which apparently it is), then why hold smart gun technology to a higher standard?

The 10% failure rate is derived from a company statement release that said the gun will ID the user with 90% accuracy. Therefore one assumes it will fail in its purpose 10% of the time (either not shooting for its owner, or shooting for someone that is not the owner).

http://americanbeau.com/tag/armatrix/ (just one source mentioning their statement....there are many more)