http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-11/how-new-jersey-s-smart-gun-law-backfired


"Gun control advocates have pushed smart guns since the mid-1990s as a way to reduce accidental shootings and suicides. One version of the innovative weapons will work only if activated by a radio frequency emitted by a device—bracelet, watch, or ring—worn by the authorized user. In 1997, gun control proponents encouraged New Jersey lawmaker Loretta Weinberg to introduce the Childproof Handgun Act, which said that three years after a "personalized" gun was offered for sale anywhere in the U.S., New Jersey firearm retailers would be required to sell only smart guns. Stephen Teret, director of the Center for Law & the Public's Health at Johns Hopkins University, helped draft the state law. He intended to create a financial incentive for development of a broader market in safer guns."




Weinberg, now the majority leader of the New Jersey Senate, disputes allegations of a plot to disarm gun owners. She does, however, acknowledge regrets about how her legislation played out. "The thinking behind the law was that we would encourage the development of the technology," Weinberg says—and she concedes that the opposite occurred. Recognizing that the statute has become a tool used by gun-rights advocates to block smart gun development, Weinberg says she's inclined to lead an effort to repeal the law. Her condition for doing so is that gun-rights proponents pledge to cease opposing smart-gun research—a commitment they have yet to make and are unlikely to in the future.

Funny how that happens.

How was that law worded?  Dones the three-year clock continue to tick since someone, somewhere, offered a "smart gun" for sale?  Or is it reset since you can't buy one anywhere?

She is such an idiot.

I hate to admit it, but Loretta "Confiscate Confiscate Confiscate" Weinberg is spot-on in her assessment of opposition to this technology.  If it were not for the laws in NJ and CA mandating the exclusivity of this technology, I wouldn't have the slightest problem with it.  Things are not good or bad.  Technology is not good or bad.  If this technology were robust and reliable, it might offer a reasonable option for certain situations for certain individuals.  The problem with the technology arises from the fact that there is a law that makes it mandatory for everyone.  

I would not dismiss her argument about her intent for the law if the effective date was "... 3 years after general adoption of the technology by the Superintendent as the standard for all side arms by the New Jersey State Police."  If she really wanted to provide an incentive for the industry to develop the technology, she would have included (not exempted) organizations that buy thousands of pistols every year.  The law is written, it basically translates to: "proven reliable sidearm technology for the State, unreliable new technology that can be deactivated by an EMP for the subjects of the State."  And, THAT is its clear intent.

Does it really matter?   They will just ban everything by features likes they've been doing for decades.  

NJ gun owners don't fight to preserve their right so we get whatever they feel like passing