Second Gun Shop Reverses, Now Won’t Sell Smart Gun

Earlier this year a gun shop in California began to gear up to sell a “smart gun,” but gun enthusiasts raised such a stink about the sale that the store backed off and even claimed they never intended to sell the gun. Now a shop in Maryland has had the same experience with similar results.

The gun in question is the Armatrix iP1, a so-called “smart” pistol that cannot be made to fire unless the shooter is also wearing a wrist watch that emits an electronic signal unlocking the gun’s firing mechanism.

Pro-Second Amendment advocates are vociferously against this gun. The chief reason is that several state legislatures (California and New Jersey, for instance) have laws that once “smart gun” technology is on the market, all guns but smart guns will be banned.

So, when a California gun shop let slip it was looking to market the iP1, gun fans slammed the shop with attacks on the Internet and in person. The hate for the shop was so high that proprietors quickly claimed that they never intended to sell the smart gun and would not do so in the future.

Now a similar situation has happened at a gun shop in Maryland.

Andy Raymond, the co-owner of Engage Armament, had also announced that he’d sell the smart gun. He, too, faced a broadside of Internet and store boycotts as well as in-person protests in front of his shop.

Pretty quickly, Raymond reversed his decision and apologized to Maryland, to gun owners everywhere, and to New Jersey for raising fears that the smart gun law would kick in there because he was selling the smart gun in Maryland.

Still, Raymond thought is was a bit hypocritical of gun owners to oppose the sale of a gun.

“To me that is so fricking hypocritical,” Raymond said before the attacks hit his establishment. “That’s the antithesis of everything that we pro-gun, pro-Second Amendment people should be. You are not supposed to say a gun should be prohibited. Then you are being no different than the anti-gun people who say an AR-15 should be prohibited.”

The shop owner also felt that a smart gun may encourage new people to buy a gun that otherwise may not have. He felt that was a good thing, too.

Still, despite his misgivings on working against smart gun tech, Raymond apologized to everyone and decided not to sell the gun.

Raymond is wrong to dismiss the threat that smart gun tech is to our Second Amendment rights, though. If legislatures have their way and are able to pass laws that ban all guns but smart guns, this will ultimately result in criminalizing most Americans not to mention giving the state the power to launch confiscation drives.

There is no way this won’t happen. Smart gun tech is a threat to our rights, plain and simple.

Then add to that the simple matter of its likely unreliability. Bad battery in your unlocking watch? You’re dead because your gun won’t work. Someone breaking into your home and can’t find both your gun and your watch? You’re dead because now your gun isn’t the only thing you have to look for in order to defend yourself. And you just know that someone will invent some electronic jamming device that will block your unlock signal.

But, gun fans aren’t really against smart gun tech, They are against the avalanche of legislation banning all their other guns that will result from it.

The Reverend Al Sharpton Almost Chokes On His Own BS
Wiz Blab Open Thread, Benghazi, Obama Cover Ups And You
  • GarandFan

    You’d think those ‘gun shop’ owners would be able to figure out why folks are against this particular weapon.

    • If it weren’t for the fact that they turn into unusually shaped boomerangs (that don’t even return, for pity’s sake) outside the range of their ‘keys’, I MIGHT think this is a fair idea… but you know the battery’s always going to be dead when you need it, and the heirs of the first person that dies because the gun failed in a crisis will own the company making them when the lawyers get through.

  • It could even contain the functionality to “Black Box” and broadcast, where and when it was fired. That would certainly concern some over privacy issues.
    e.g. (Police Call) – “Excuse me Sir, but we have information your gun was fired at …. at the time …. where a dead body was found.”

  • jim_m

    It isn’t hypocritical to be against these guns. The issue is that once the guns are available commercially then laws banning all other guns go into effect. These guns are only manufactured by fringe companies that have little or not reputation for quality, reliability and cannot be expected to replace the tremendous demand for guns that is currently satisfied by dozens of manufacturers.

    What these guns represent is a potential bottleneck in the gun supply that will make it impossible for people to purchase guns. It would also make it very easy to put these small companies out of business (see my post in the open thread on the DOJ’s illegal practice of closing of bank accounts for businesses they oppose ideologically) and thereby create a situation where guns are banned altogether since I wager that there is no provision in either the CA or NJ laws that says that if these guns go off the market for any reason that non-smart guns will become legal again.

    I suspect that the last case is what the anti-gun crowd are aiming for. Create a bottleneck and then eliminate the manufacturers that are too small and too underfunded to be able to defend themselves. A similar method was used in Chicago to ban guns, First they required that all guns be registered, then they stopped registration, then ended renewals.

    So called “Smart-guns” are only a way to ban guns. The only thing necessary to make a gun safe is a civil society (something else that the left opposes).

  • Lawrence Westlake

    Bad demographics = Idiocracy.

  • jim_m

    this will ultimately result in criminalizing most Americans

    Fascism. It’s for the sake of the children!!!

    • warnertoddhuston


  • Commander_Chico

    Let the market decide, not rabblerousers.

    • jim_m

      Those you call rabblerousers are the market you dumbass. When people are organizing boycotts and protests in front of your store that is your customer base speaking to you.

      Instead what you are demanding is that the store owner ignore the angry customer base and listen to the left wing media and anti-gun politicians, who are all overjoyed to hear that the owner is giving them an entre to banning all guns. While these hypocrites are also BIG buyers of guns for their own use(there is hardly an anti-gun activist or politician that does not own guns or employ armed security), they are not the entire market. The owner has to listen to the whole market not just the parts you want him to.

    • Retired military

      Yet Chico fully supported the trash OWS crowd, their illegal rabblerousing protests and their illegal activities.

      • Commander_Chico

        You would be right if you could stop government from subsidizing and coddling the banksters by not banking.

        But you can’t, because it’s political not a market choice.

        Don’t like smart guns? Don’t buy one. Some people might want one, like if you have it on your nightstand for intruders and don’t want the intruder to shoot you with it.

        • SouthOhioGipper

          But if “some people who might want one” getting their way means my State can automatically ban my “non-smart” weapons.. then I have a personal self interest in stopping that particular free market activity until such time as the political climate changes.

          This isn’t about the smart gun itself. This is about preventing the existence of smart guns from being abused as a loophole.

          • Commander_Chico

            This seems to be about preventing the selling or buying of a weapon because it’s “politically incorrect” to the gun nuts.

          • jim_m

            As I point out it is not merely politically incorrect, it is a threat to 2nd amendment rights as it creates a situation where those rights are dependent upon the existence of one or two very small, unreliable and financially insecure companies.

            Given the fact that the DOJ has for over a year now been pressuring financial institutions to cease doing business with gun manufacturers, ammunition manufacturers and gun stores it would be the height of foolishness to allow the gun supply to be so restricted.

            But then again your mas slips when you refer to 2A rights people as gun nuts. We already know that your position on gun rights is that only the government and ex military should be allowed to have those rights. Similar to your views on voting or voicing opinion on political issues, which is why I continue to call you a fascist.

          • Retired military

            Where as if you were talking about nuts in genera than Chico would be the subject.

        • Retired military

          You idiot (but then since I am talking about you I repeat myself). I merely mentioned that you supported OWS and their criminal ways. The rest of your clattle trap wasnt even part of the conversation.

  • Anti-everything

    You yanky doodle dandies just love shooting and killing. What’s wrong with you people?

    • SouthOhioGipper

      Not all of us have succumbed to the grossly effeminate “feel good” culture that you have. Plain and simple. To me, certain principles and rights are important to maintain, no matter how many people die in the exercising of them.

      Maybe the “proxy guilt” you feel for victims of gun violence is actually the pathological element here, rather than my lack of it?

      • Anti-everything

        I think that your answer just proves you to be somewhat blood thirsty and psychologically unhinged!

        • Commander_Chico

          Die bitch die!

          • Anti-everything

            We’ll all die sometime or the other. Although it’s more likely that you’ll die of a gunshot wound to your retarded little head. Oh well..

        • jim_m

          I think you probably do a lot of projection on this and other issues.

          • Anti-everything

            It’s not good to do other people’s thinking, especially if you are incapable of doing your own.

          • jim_m

            Which is why I recommend that you stop.

          • Anti-everything

            Very clever. But you can keep your “recommendation” to yourself. Thank you.

          • Anti-everything

            If you people insist on having guns, then why are you so concerned that smart guns are going to infringe on your constitutional right to bear arms? Surely there is no way that government will be able to seize the millions of weapons in circulation within the US already?

          • Anti-everything

            Why do you feel that I am projecting on others? I’m taking the piss out of the clown who told me to “die bitch die”.. You yanks are thick!

          • jim_m

            Ahhhh! I see. You’re either a Brit or a Canadian. Save us the BS on how we are Barbarians since we hauled your empire’s chestnuts out of the fire in WWII. You’d be speaking German if it weren’t for our “bloodthirsty” thinking.

            And don’t presume to lecture us about rights. Coming from a place where the truth is not an absolute defense against libel and slander, you have no reference to understand what freedom is.

          • Anti-everything

            Yawn.. You got it right about the barbarian and bloodthirsty references though. Now that’s great thinking.

          • jim_m

            At least my culture isn’t dead like yours.

          • Anti-everything

            What culture? Coca cola? Let’s bomb the hell out of anyone we want because we’ve got superior fire power and we just feel like it? Let’s scare our population with propaganda and lies in order to strip them of their civil liberties? God, you guys have got it lucky!

          • jim_m

            Oh, You’re right. Your culture died a long time ago. Kind of like Lee Rigby, it was killed off by your desperate drive to appease everyone else.

            Have a nice time converting to islam.

          • Anti-everything

            That’s a nice analogy, very fitting of your barbarian reference. Like I said, what culture do you have?

          • jim_m

            Those in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones you dumbass. You’re having your soldiers slaughtered in the streets by religous zealots and there is precious little your society can do to muster up anything resembling a resistance, much less outrage.

            Don’t lecture us about violence and freedom. You know more than you admit about the former and nothing at all about the latter.

          • Anti-everything

            I’ve not lectured anyone on violence and freedom. You are clearly paranoid and defensive.

            I feel that the real religious zealots reside in the USA; it’s easy to manipulate a nation of people who have been brainwashed by US patriotism and dumb them down with an inferior education system. Your nations’ bully boy tactics serve a purpose, but to what ends? Your freedom and liberty are tightly controlled by corrupt government and you buy into this and follow like sheep. America is a nation that was built on violence and discrimination towards the indigenous people; a tradition you continue with today.

          • jim_m

            Your freedom and liberty are tightly controlled by corrupt government

            Not really. If what you say were the case the US would not be the one nation on earth that people flock to in order to find freedom and opportunity. Sure the US isn’t perfect, it is just better than anywhere else and people have voted with their feet on that issue for 238 years.

            If you want to read about violence to the indigenous people you should read about the history of Briton, esp in the 11th -14th centuries. Or do you consider the Normans indigenous? And lest we forget, much of the atrocities committed in North America against native americans was done by the British military prior to 1776. We could also point to the violence done in your empire, specifically in S Africa and India.

          • jim_m

            I’ve not lectured anyone on violence and freedom… Your freedom and liberty are tightly controlled by corrupt government

            OK, so either you are a really bad liar or you simply aren’t bright enough to even know what you are saying from one paragraph to the next.

          • Anti-everything

            I’ve given my opinion on violence and freedom within your nation. Since when does that constitute a lecture?

          • jim_m

            Oh, and while we are on the topic of a corrupt government it has taken over 25 years for the government to come clean on their malfeasance in the Hillsborough disaster. Justice for the 96 still has not happened. Don’t talk to me about a corrupt government when your government has colluded in the cover up in the wrongful deaths of 96 innocent people where the responsibility for those deaths lies squarely on the government and the police.

          • Anti-everything

            Excuse me, but I have not claimed that the British Government are as pure as the driven snow or that corruption does not exist in this country. Of course it does!

          • Commander_Chico

            We have a lot more freedom than any Brit, Aussie or Canadian.

          • Anti-everything

            Do you really? I suppose you’re spot on with that; especially as your country has proven that it is free to bomb most places with impunity for quite some time – all in the name of freedom, liberty and the american way. Tossers

          • Commander_Chico

            At least we don’t have ASBOs, censorship and prosecutions for dissident speech.

            In the end, your leaders follow our government’s orders. Where does that put you?

          • Anti-everything

            No, you guys just shoot first and ask questions later.

          • jim_m

            We’d love to have you stop by for a demonstration.

          • Anti-everything

            I’m sure you would. How about you demonstrate on yourself?

          • jim_m

            Sorry. I don’t shoot people.

          • Anti-everything

            So what were you alluding to in your remark above?

          • jim_m

            Just offering you the opportunity to see if what you claim is really true.

            Now ask me if I think you are a real person since your Disqus persona seems to have been invented solely for your visit here today.

            Jeez, they say that Brits have a good sense of humor but apparently this is not true because this guy is completely obtuse.

          • Anti-everything

            If you still believe that America is “free”, just consider some of the things that are illegal in America today…

            -It is illegal to make or import 75 watt incandescent light bulbs anywhere in the United States.

            -In Oregon, it is illegal to collect rainwater that falls on your own property.

            -In New Jersey, it is illegal to have an “unrestrained” cat or dog in your vehicle while you are driving.

            -If you milk your cow and sell some of the milk to your neighbor, you could end up having your home raided by federal agents.

            -In Miami Beach, Florida you must recycle your trash properly or face huge fines.

            -All over the United States, cops are shutting down lemonade stands run by children because they don’t have the proper “permits”.

            -Down in Tulsa, Oklahoma one unemployed woman had her survival garden brutally ripped out and carted away by government thugs because it did not conform to regulations.

            -Over in Massachusetts, all children in daycare centers are mandated by state law to brush their teeth after lunch. In fact, the state even provides the fluoride toothpaste for the children.

            -At one public school down in Texas, a 12-year-old girl named Sarah Bustamantes was arrested for spraying herself with perfume.

            -All over the United States cities have passed laws that actually make it illegal to feed the homeless.

          • jim_m

            citation needed. I would also point out that the majority of the items you claim are in democrat blue states. There is a reason why those states are all declining in population.

            And don’t talk to me about freedom when you live in a country that taxes your TV set.

          • Anti-everything

            Get a grip Jim, TV licences are a curtailment of freedom?

            What about the National Defense Authorization Act, which allows for the indefinite detention of citizens?

            How about the Patriot Act, whereby the president may order warrantless surveillance, including the capability to force companies and organizations to turn over information on citizens’ finances, communications and associations?

            Like the Bush administration, the Obama administration has successfully pushed for immunity for companies that assist in warrantless surveillance of citizens, blocking the ability of citizens to challenge the violation of privacy.

            The Obama administration has successfully defended its claim that it can use GPS devices to monitor every move of targeted citizens without securing any court order or review.

            Wow, you guys are living the good life out there in the land of the free. Cheers

          • jim_m

            The Patriot act can be renewed. Your government can do what ours does without any need for warrants or court authorization so don’t claim you are better.

            The government has always been able to surveil citizens that it has probable cause to do so and where it has received a warrant. What the obama admin is doing now and which has not been upheld in court is using unwarranted searches to sweep up large amounts of data on private citizens with no probable cause or national security reason. That has yet to be tried in a court.

          • Anti-everything

            Seriously? Are you really as dumb as you sound? Pushed through Congress without debate, the massive surveillance bill was hastily passed just 45 days after 9/11, and was the first of many surveillance laws over the past decade that made it easier for your government to spy on innocent Americans. What makes you think that this act can or will be renewed?

          • jim_m

            Yes, I know more about the issue than you do. I just explained what it authorized and how it was being abused.

          • jim_m

            And yes, TV licenses are a curtailment on freedom. You have to pay to get basic information on the world around you. In the US it is unconstitutional to tax any form of media. That is what we call freedom of the press. You don’t have it and never have.

            The power to tax is the power to control and coerce. You see? You don’t even know what freedom is so all your arguments are BS.

          • Anti-everything

            Of course my arguments are BS to a right wing American fanatic such as yourself.

            In the United States, 9/11 spawned a major conflict between the imperatives of national security and the principles of the constitution’s First Amendment. This amendment enshrines every person’s right to inform and be informed. But the heritage of the 1787 constitution was shaken to its foundations during George W. Bush’s two terms as president by the way journalists were harassed and even imprisoned for refusing to reveal their sources or surrender their files to federal judicial officials.

            There has been little improvement in practice under Obama. Rather than pursuing journalists, the emphasis has been on going after their sources, but often using the journalist to identify them. No fewer that eight individuals have been charged under the Espionage Act since Obama became president, compared with three during Bush’s two terms. While 2012 was in part the year of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, 2013 will be remember for the National Security Agency computer specialist Edward Snowden, who exposed the mass surveillance methods developed by the US intelligence agencies.

          • jim_m

            Journalists have always been harassed in the courts to divulge their sources. It has never been recognized by any court case that a journalist has the right to conceal his sources. Journalists have gone to jail for contempt on many occasions and been celebrated by their industry as heroes for doing so.

            Once again we see that you really know very little about the US.

          • Retired military

            “At least we don’t have ASBOs, censorship and prosecutions for dissident speech”

            Gee havent you heard of republicans not being allowed to speak at universities?
            Or how about conservatives getting audited by the IRS after speaking ill of Obama?
            Did Holder prosecute the black panther displaying his free speech (AKA a club) at the voting place?

            You totally divorce yourself from reality but I dont expect anything else who wants to cry racism, the oligarchy, the JOOS or the shiney at everything and despite dozens of examples of proof you “reject the premise”

          • ExNuke

            Piers Morgan? Is that really you hiding behind another alias? A lot of time on your hands after cratering on CNN?

  • ExNuke

    ” And you just know that someone will invent some electronic jamming device that will block your unlock signal.”

    Why do I suspect that was the real idea and they already have it ready to market, to Government Only Ones who would never under any circumstances misuse it.

  • patkelly03

    If you look a bit into the future, just a step or two beyond smart guns, you will find a whole host of non-lethal defensive weapons that are far superior in defense than their gunpowder based counterparts. Will the NRA and gun manufacturers be able to change quickly enough to adapt to a world where the idea of personal defense evolves beyond gunfights at high noon or beyond the necessity of taking someone else’s life? The fact is the NRA and its members do not like the idea of public access to the growing field of nonlethal defense weapons. In fact, they are scared to death of what’s coming because the changes may render them obsolete. You could compare this to the old floppy disks we used to use in our computers and how absurd it would have been for anyone to suggest we should not advance to DVDs. Though the idea of propelling pieces of metal down a barrel at high villosities into flesh and vital organs may appeal to the dark and twisted appetites of some, it will become increasingly difficult for them to justify their love of traditional guns without revealing the sick and twisted part of their psyche that lusts for blood. 75 adults and 8 children lose their lives to guns every day in America:

    • jim_m

      The reality is that until you can deliver a non-lethal weapon that has equivalent stopping power to a gun you will not replace guns. The reason to use a gun is to drive off an assailant and failing that to render them incapable of attacking you further. You need to produce a non-lethal weapon that can incapacitate a large, possibly drugged assailant. People high on drugs like meth or PCP do not feel pain like a normal person and most nonlethal weapons are useless.

      There are no nonlethal weapons on the horizon that can match the ability of a gun. Period. Your claims are pure fantasy which you believe because you are blinded by ideology and unwilling to look critically at the bogus assertions you just made.

      There are plenty of laws to prevent people who should not have guns from getting them. One of the major problems we have in applying those laws is irrational lunatics like you who want to apply them in a manner that takes rights away from people who the laws are not intended (such as the obama admins tactic of taking guns away from veterans).

      Guns are safe when there is a civil society. The main problem is that today’s left does not promote a civil society and as we have seen in democrat controlled cities like Chicago, where guns have been illegal for decades, the murder rate is far higher than in just about anywhere else where guns have been more readily available. What Chicago lacks is a civil society. But then, that is exactly what the democrats have prevented for many, many years.

  • Constitution First

    Think about this for one second:
    An electronic signal enables or disables this weapon.
    I know enough about RF to hack the electronics, so doesn’t the government. Meaning, if you had to defend yourself against the government, what is to stop them from disabling your weapon? Eh?
    If I were a crook, I could jam the weapon from being used against me.
    What if the electronics decide not to work the very time you need it, some electronic noise interferes with the connection…
    This is so fraught with failure, you would have to be an idiot to consider owning one.