New Jersey's War on Handguns
 

A thread named "Smart Guns" has stimulated a lively discussion which encompassed several issues, principal among them are questions about the Second Amendment, and the questionable reliability of the gun technology in extreme conditions.

The discussions included a link to an existing New Jersey law that specified: "...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."

P.L.2002, c.130 (S573 2R SCS)

In the smart gun thread it did not occur to anyone to point out the disastrous result of this law would have on the sales and profits of New Jersey gun stores.

Quite simply, as soon as one so-called smart gun goes on the retail market anywhere all handguns in a storeowner's inventory is unsellable contraband. In a large operation this could involve hundreds of thousands of dollars.

In effect, the retailer handgun trade in New Jersey will be wiped out. It is possible that within a few months there will be additional "smart guns" on the market but even then a "one size fits all" solution to gun safety will not stimulate gun sales. Retailers will experience a lower volume of sales.

A perhaps unintended consequence of this law might be that handguns already held in private hands in the state will have dramatic increases in value as a secondary market of private handgun sales develops.

Even when additional "smart guns" come on the market, most will be of a size that is not easily concealable. There is no way that any of the "smart gun" technology presently contemplated will fit into some of the palm-sized pocket handguns currently on the market.

See, for example the North American Arms revolver in .22 RFM caliber.

I grew up in NJ and still visit there quite often. The whole idea of smart guns is just as you said. They want to put gun shops out of business and further restrict the ownership of guns in NJ. NY is not far behind.

This law has been on the books since 2003. There have been heavyweight changes in the administration in New Jersey. Why has it not been repealed?

Carl, even when the smart guns can be downsized it won't take long for some high tech individuals to figure out how to add a wire or two to by pass it.

Once again, if it is such a bad law, and with the NRA having so much power, why has the current heavyweight administration in NJ not repealed it?

Politics........ Votes..........the ONLY priority of a politician.

Right or wrong or good or bad has nothing to do with ant issue!

It's tough to carry on a conversation when emotion gets in the way. It takes informed participants on each side of the controversy.

Please answer your questions for us so we know the right answer.

How many laws do you know that have been legislated and passed, but in reality don't work, nor provide the intended consequences? I can't count that high!

You hit the nail squarely on the head.

Bring on the Smart Guns! I don't even own a handgun now, but I sure would own a Smart Gun if it was available. I believe that it's law enforcement who really wants this to happen. Many officers are wounded or killed with their own firearm. Think of how many innocent children would be saved from accidental firings. Power down the testosterone and think of the good of the whole population.

Xavier

Here is a simple test I believe will always answer the question of is it a good idea or a bad idea. When something makes sense whether a law or a piece of technology and it really works, there are no exemptions! Smart Gun technology is about as worth while as the Ford Edsel.

Here is a link to the FBI page on officers killed in the line of duty. Its from 2011 but puts some facts to the subject of how many are killed with their own weapon:

FBI — Officers Feloniously Killed

Smart guns = smart phones. How many people put their entire lives on their smart phones.

That's like comparing an orange to a banana.

Here is another link to the FBI statistics on homicides for 2011. You will notice that the trend is downward. I wish I could find something a bit more recent.
FBI — Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

Just saying there has been some technology that has worked since the ill-fated Edsel was designed 50 years ago.

Perhaps because the Gov of NJ has lost approx 100 lbs and is no longer the 'heavyweight' your post seems to mock?

From Wikipedia
A banana is an edible fruit
The orange (specifically, the sweet orange) is the fruit of the citrus species

It seems to be that this is a valid comparison.

That's very true. But how many times have you had a problem with your cell phone, how many dropped calls, how many wrong numbers, no bars showing. There are some very good uses for technology and there is technology that works very well. But there is no technology that works 100% of the time, none.

Critical system analysis or sometimes what we called Management of Change or a Hazard System Analysis are done to try and determine what are the out comes if this piece fails or that piece fails. You then make design changes to the device or add or remove equipment based on the analysis. The more pieces in a critical system the more chance of failure. So there are systems that need to be as simple as possible, the fewer the parts the better chance the device will perform as designed. If that is not possible then you build in redundancy of systems. Two or maybe three different identical systems with automatic fail over. Economics then become more of a part of the equation.

The cell phone is not a critical system. If it fails to do as it was designed the out come is, you or I are not happy with the performance. No one dies in the process. It was never designed in the first place as a critical device. It is a device for convenience.

A firearm is a critical system. If a firearm is needed in a high stress situation and fails to perform then there is a possibility that a person will be harmed or killed. Firearms need to be designed as simply as possible. Firearms are critical systems and should not be politically design driven which in this case of what is called the smart gun is what is happening. Firearms are a very emotional topic. One that politicians have been exploiting for years. One that people need to look at the facts and not the emotional out cry. Firearms were designed to inflict bodily harm, disable or kill your attacker. Protect you or someone else's life. They were never designed to be totally safe. They are designed to be effective. Systems like these require the user to understand that fact and to be cautious when using or owning them. If you research the accidental shootings you will find that they all go back to one thing, negligence. You can never design out negligence. your wasting your efforts.

Only from the fact that they are two pieces of technology, which is a correct comparison. You are very astute for catching that comparison. Glad to see your very sharp today.

You may very well be right in what you say. However, shouldn't a legal gun store owner be allowed to sell a legal product (smart guns) without being threated with arson and death?

Sure, any merchant should be able to sell legal products. And they should be able to do it safely. However, this merchant saw the "error" of his thinking. He thought Smart Guns were a good thing for the public. But once he became an "informed, knowledgeable" merchant, he decided it was in the best interest of the majority of people, to not sell them. I would say he is a very wise man, to look at the situation and have the integrity to correct his thinking once he knew the real story behind the reliability and implications of Smart Guns.

Of course, this is just my opinion, but indeed a wise one.

Ask us another tough question, we like the challenge.

I'll just add NJ to the list of states that I will not visit again.

I find it interesting that people feel unsafe about other people owning guns but perfectly content with states selling marijuana. I certainly don't want to be around people smoking marijuana infecting my lungs and brain

Why is it that the gun control isn't settled like Benghazi IRS scandal, etc I am so sick of the hypocrisy

[QUOTE=rubicon;875281]I find it interesting that people feel unsafe about other people owning guns but perfectly content with states selling marijuana. I certainly don't want to be around people smoking marijuana infecting my lungs and brain."

Just think, though, that Florida may soon legalize "medical usage" marijuana. We can then see people with concealed carry pistols who are walking around The Villages eating their marijuana cupcakes. According to an article in USAToday, eating mj is more potent than smoking it. Stoned plus armed!

I am sure it will not take much "chronic pain" for a lot of local doctors to write scrips for marijuana to their patients.

:pepper2::pepper2:

Yes I agree. My comment in an earlier threat on the subject was that I find the people that go way left or way right on this subject equally disturbing and possibly criminal. Freedom means you have the right to do what is legal and it may just turn my stomach, but I'll defend your right to do so.

[quote=buggyone;875292]Enhances your aim!

[quote=Steve9930;875313]Steve9930: If you recall in Bill Cosby's famous monologue he had a response to the guy that said taking drugs "enhanced"his personality.

I don't swear but Bill Cosby's response was "Well would if your a jerk"? the actual word he used was a compound word beginning with "A"

[quote=rubicon;875328]I remember that quote: The word started with and a and ended with a hole.....
Did it not seem that life was far simpler then? :beer3:

Somehow I think I'd feel a lot more comfortable with a cloud of marijuana smoke coming my way that a bullet from a handgun.:doh: