Skip to main content

View Diary: Gun Dealer Won't Sell Smart Guns Over Death Threats (63 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  14 % of Americans would consider buying this gun (6+ / 0-)

    The NSSF is speaking Orwellian English.

    From your link:
    Maryland dealer, under pressure from gun-rights activists, drops plan to sell smart gun

    Not long ago smart guns, personalized weapons that only fired for authorized users, were seen only in the movies. Today, after millions of dollars and more than 10 years of research, there are finally smart guns for the public. But there are only two viable systems available for the public to purchase.

    […]

    The demand for smart guns is subject to debate. Gun rights advocates, including the National Shooting Sports Foundation, say there seems to be little desire for such weapons at the moment. They point to a survey the group commissioned last year showing that 14 percent of Americans would consider buying a smart gun.

    “We think the market should decide,” Lawrence G. Keane, general counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, told The Post this year.[my bold]

    14% of American adults is a huge potential market, about 50 million potential customers. So what these anti-smart gun protesters are doing is trying to punish the 2 manufacturers to make sure they have no chance to sell some first generation product, so that innovative efforts get killed.

    How do these bozos think that a more reliable gun can be developed? The innovative companies have to generate some revenue so they can continue R&D. If the predicted product flaws are real the market for that gun will collapse. If one design is better than the other, that innovative company will go on to develop the second generation.

    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

    by LilithGardener on Fri May 02, 2014 at 08:48:38 AM PDT

    •  I think you answered your question... (7+ / 0-)
      How do these bozos think that a more reliable gun can be developed? The innovative companies have to generate some revenue so they can continue R&D. If the predicted product flaws are real the market for that gun will collapse. If one design is better than the other, that innovative company will go on to develop the second generation.
      If these bozos are protesting innovation, then the simplest explanation is they don't want innovation - it would interfere with rent-seeking.

      Can't have any market-disrupting technology when a good chunk of the "market" is actually a hedge fund - wouldn't be good Cerberus' investors.

      •  Exactly (5+ / 0-)

        Revolvers were good enough, even for police, for decades.

        Then pistols with high-capacity magazines were marketed so effectively that everybody and their brother had to have one, or two, or more.

        I'm convinced there is a glut of guns that will lose resale value if/when an innovative smart gun takes off. Hedge funds and other investors don't want anyone, especially gun owners, to realize the market is mature and approaching saturation.

        "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

        by LilithGardener on Fri May 02, 2014 at 09:06:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  no current lock system adds value and in fact (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          radarlady

          Pre Lock S&W Revolvers are worth more than their post lock counterparts....

          A pre-lock gun carries a 1-2 hundred dollar premium because they work every time while lock guns can and occasionally do fail and lock under recoil....

          That and the New Jersey and California laws on smart guns are enough to keep a dealer from selling them...

          If I owned a gun store, why would I sell a pistol that is going to force every other gun off my shelves in a few years by fiat...not due to performance....

          This might work in a .22 but unfortunately the law doesn't do caliber exceptions so once this thing hits the market, the countdown to the end of sales of normal guns begins in Jersey....And it probably won't work and last in a heavy recoil caliber like 357 or 44 or heck even 40....

          Vaya con Dios Don Alejo
          I want to die a slave to principles. Not to men.
          Emiliano Zapata

          by buddabelly on Fri May 02, 2014 at 09:40:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thanks (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            buddabelly

            The value of pre-lock revolvers, is that because they are rare? Or because they are reliable.

            And no, no business owner should take actions they think will tank their own business plan. The smarter companies will eventually develop a better business plan, recognizing how to expand the market and offer what new customers want, instead of working as the gun lobby's backstop against innovation and reform.

            "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

            by LilithGardener on Fri May 02, 2014 at 09:54:56 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Reliability...It's a very rare occurance but (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Achillios0311

              in high recoiling rounds like 357 magnum and 44 magnum, they can lock themselves and won't fire after the first shot locks it up.....Obviously this might be a problem if you need that pistol like say handgun hunting for Black Bear where you want to be able to follow the first shot fast if needed....Similar feelings for most people on self defense use of a lockable pistol....

              I do think the technology will eventually get there but banning any sales of non smart guns is kinda crazy imo....We're talking a lot of people who can no longer cash out their collection if needed.  That's why I don't think many states will see laws similar to NJ's ....plus, lots of us collect the old ones because that is what we enjoy..My last 2 were 95 and 102yo respectively.

              I wouldn't want one of these if it was given to me honestly....though kind of like the GyroJet, it might become a valuable collectors item eventually.

              Vaya con Dios Don Alejo
              I want to die a slave to principles. Not to men.
              Emiliano Zapata

              by buddabelly on Fri May 02, 2014 at 10:16:54 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I think the NJ and CA laws are intending to (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                LeftCoastTom

                stimulate innovation in an industry that is known to eat their own when anyone dares to support gun regulations.

                Something will unlock the industry stonewall and then there will be consolidation. Some companies won't survive.

                I believe there is a right to self defense, and under the US and many state constitution that there is a right to armed self defense. But sorry, I have zero sympathy for the argument that gun owners won't be able to cash out their collection if needed. Guns last a long time. Gun owners self defense needs don't require buying multiple guns, or new guns every year or even every couple of years. So you need a rifle, a shotgun, and a pistol or a revolver. Fine. Even multiples of each.

                Bottom line: Your ability to cash out when you feel like it, is not covered by the 2A.

                "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                by LilithGardener on Fri May 02, 2014 at 11:05:15 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  no it isn't, but it is kinda covered by the 5th (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  LilithGardener

                  and the takings clause....

                  Seems to me if through government act, they take a valuable piece of machinery and make it worthless, they would need to compensate at fair market value and no one will go for that...Same reason classic cars can still be registered even though they will not pass modern safety or emission standards.  Same reason they payed people with the "Cash for Clunkers" which really took a lot of good used cars out of the market raising costs for the poor but that's beyond this point.....

                  No more than someone like myself who intentionally collects 100+yo pieces is going to want to stop because of an honestly ridiculous law...Another reason I love Arizona and my blue little corner of the border......This isn't something I will have to worry about because something like this would never pass here, not in my lifetime anyway and who knows, by then it might be completely reliable technology that is adaptable to any firearm without having to adapt and destroy the value of the firearm.

                  If the law wasn't there to ban the sale of all but "smart" guns once 3 years pass with this 22 on the market, no one would care.

                  Honestly it's a technology that we all would love to see advance and become reliable and useable by everyone....Just lets not ban all other sales of any type because you know that a .22 pistol is not even close to capable for many situations a pistol is used for.  It's a great little range plinker, ask a cop when he plans to trade his .40 for a .22.....

                  Something as simple as refinishing, unless factory done and even then it's a hit, can kill the value of a rare collector piece. Just like with all antiques, condition is everything and any modification to the piece to install a new safety will kill the value of the piece.  Though honestly using the Heller prescription, I don't see how banning sale of all but one unusual model would pass muster....It just hasn't "ripened" yet once it does come into effect, it will be challenged in court and I would guess this one goes down as it's just too much infringement, esp considering the state of the technology.

                  A few years back a buddy was out hiking with a friend of his right near the border and they came across a sweet old LeMat Revolver that had been laying in the desert for decades...Possibly since the Civil War as the furthest west battle was at Picacho Peak and that is west of where these guys were...Plus it could have been picked up by a local after the war, whatever, they had a neat piece of history....unfortunately they brought it to show me one day too late.....

                  After the experience with the wire wheel to "get the rust off"  in reality they completely ruined the pistol that had they brought to me first, I could have guided them along the correct path with the correct process and they would have had a valuable and neat piece of history....instead they have an ugly worthless hunk of steel.....

                  Vaya con Dios Don Alejo
                  I want to die a slave to principles. Not to men.
                  Emiliano Zapata

                  by buddabelly on Fri May 02, 2014 at 03:24:05 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  There is no risk that (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    buddabelly, Susan from 29

                    old masterpiece collectibles will go out of style, IMO. There will remain a market for good design that's been well cared for as it ages.

                    And there is no risk that all residents of any state will be restricted to only a single type of handgun. No matter how many times I've seen such fears articulated, the laws in CA and NJ are not going to effect an immediate confiscation of all other kinds of pistols.

                    Sorry, but that premise is so far out there, that it's hard to take seriously complaints based on that premise.

                    Besides, if the smart guns as unreliable as anti-smart gun folks think, that law will be stayed with an injunction in Federal Court. Like I said, guns last a long time. Long after smart guns hit the market NJ residents will still be passing their old valuable guns to their heirs.

                    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                    by LilithGardener on Fri May 02, 2014 at 04:26:00 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  unfortunately the law does exist in New Jersey (0+ / 0-)

                      what it does is mandate that all guns sold by dealers must be smart guns 3 years after the introduction of the first one....

                      Just an hour ago this popped up

                      http://www.msnbc.com/...

                      NJ Senate Dem Leader says she will reverse that mandate if the NRA would back or at least get out of the way of personalized handguns.....

                      In my opinion, if there is no mandate, the tech will flourish because a lot of gun people are also gadget people and first adopters so would be all over these....but the way the law is written now, to start to sell these means that in a short time, that's all that can be sold.   Obviously death threats and other assorted stupidity is beyond sanity.  

                      As a gun dealer, with the law as it's written or at least as even MSNBC is interpreting it,

                      The New Jersey law mandates that once guns that are personalized to the user – commonly known as “smart guns” – go on the market anywhere in the country, New Jersey gun sellers have to stop selling traditional guns within three years and shift exclusively to smart guns.
                      I would never sell one smart gun as it's the death knell for the biz because the tech isn't there yet.....but without the ability to sell it's hard for the tech to advance.  Plus it's just bad law as I see it.  The whole issue could have been averted and gun enthusiasts eagerly championing smart guns if it wasn't for this dumb law.  Why would I want to destroy a good portion of my business by selling these?  The problem is Jersy residents get screwed if I try to sell a smart gun here in Tucson....that just.....

                      ......I think that's ridiculous and would personally lobby for the study and advancement of the technology and its use, esp in situations where there may be small children in the house if there was no such mandates.....

                      I do worry a little that something like this might make someone complacent and then if it fails after good gun handling habits have been broken......

                      Vaya con Dios Don Alejo
                      I want to die a slave to principles. Not to men.
                      Emiliano Zapata

                      by buddabelly on Fri May 02, 2014 at 07:23:28 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  The NJ law sounds like it is bad law (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        buddabelly

                        It's almost 15 years old already, and according to what I read, it was passed first by the GOP-controlled state Senate, and only a year or so later by the Assembly.

                        Were those NJ GOP Senators punished by the voters?

                        I can think of a number of reasons why a law passed more than a decade in advance can be knocked down with a feather. No legislature has any right to tie the hands of a future government.

                        Hell, in the 19th and 20th centuries, many states modified their constitutional RKBA many times, according to what memes came into fashion or fell out of fashion. And here we are and the individual right has survived, even in places like NY and NJ.

                        "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                        by LilithGardener on Fri May 02, 2014 at 07:40:42 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  PS (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    buddabelly

                    I can't tell you how much I admire people who are mechanically inclined and who can take an old masterpieces and restore it's function and beauty.

                    But here's where I can't accept dismissal of smart guns based on "not reliable enough" and "too easily defeated."

                    The simple fact of consumers is that some people will buy the first generation no matter what, for sport shooting, for keeping at the vacation house, for the lower risk that little Johnny or teenage Lisa will use it....

                    ...because they are gear heads and jump on the new technology. There are those who love to have bragging rights of being the first to have some new thing.

                    For those protesting the gun shops and the distributor, they are just a loyalty club protecting their tribe. Us v them anti-marketing won't work forever.

                    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                    by LilithGardener on Fri May 02, 2014 at 04:36:37 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  We actually agree, in honesty without the (0+ / 0-)

                      law  in question you're right.  There are a certain group of gearheads for lack of a better term who would find this attractive and would jump on it....

                      It isn't my kind of choice but that's why choice is great.  Some like polymer, some like blue steel and walnut...I fall in the second group of gearheads myself but completely understand the other.......

                      I think the law was written to restrict not to protect and that's why it gets the response it does.

                      Had These just been allowed to develop with no stupid laws requiring this technology, there would be no issue now and probably a whole bunch of small companies trying to become the next Smith and Wesson or Colt.......and maybe a few lives saved if it does work.  Let the tech develop and it might become like dropping a competition trigger in the gun, only hopefully a little cheaper.......Or we let a punitive law stifle the possibilities inherent in smart gun technology.

                      Vaya con Dios Don Alejo
                      I want to die a slave to principles. Not to men.
                      Emiliano Zapata

                      by buddabelly on Fri May 02, 2014 at 07:43:08 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  Takings clause? (0+ / 0-)

                    Bosh. My guitar collection is not Federally guaranteed to have value. Your 1955 antique restored car is not guaranteed to have value. Muskets are no different, nor swords, nor Hepplewhite furniture.

                    Thump! Bang. Whack-boing. It's dub!

                    by dadadata on Sun May 04, 2014 at 04:15:55 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site