Weinberg writes the AG to activate the smart gun law

[silverado427 10,726]

From the "Tree of Liberty"?

[NicePants 58]

This law definitely won't stand post MacDonald. Let them try to activate that garbage.

[djg0770 481]

The way the courts work in NJ we may as well bring suit now so that we can get this struck down before the 2 yr window can take effect...

[Silence Dogood 468]

IT got approved. Where can you buy one. 

 

Personally, I say go ahead and activate it. I welcome stupid indefensible laws. 

 

German-made gun ... UN Small Arms Treaty governing imports ... not too hard to put this one together in terms of INTENT.

[Jfoster99 80]

I was reading one of the articles on smart guns and someone is working on one that the owner can remotely deactivate.... To me this translated to the gun may be hacked and the bad guys or government will be able to remotely deactivate your gun... Imagine a world where only these types of guns are allowed and the police can deactivate under the guise of public safety.

 

[Underdog 1,593]

The story of an iPhone:  low battery warning...better find a charging station soon...oops too late...the operating system just shut down, sorry.

 

I wonder if the guns will come with a docking station to charge the batteries.....

 

They will probably have tracking  devices in them as well as a means to disable them remotely. 

[siderman 1,138]

I was reading one of the articles on smart guns and someone is working on one that the owner can remotely deactivate.... To me this translated to the gun may be hacked and the bad guys or government will be able to remotely deactivate your gun... Imagine a world where only these types of guns are allowed and the police can deactivate under the guise of public safety.

There was a satirical Youtube(?) video here a while back showing just that- a couple in bed middle of night hears an intruder . They have to call in to the authoritys to remotely unlock their bedside safe to access a gun but by the time they get thru the mumbo jumbo on the phone its too late. My google foo sux maybe it will get posted again.

[jtd771 18]

I'm surprised NJ.com didn't pickup on this.  They love to publish anything about guns for the page hits.

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot 358]

Don't worry, nj.com found this story to publish instead

[Silence Dogood 468]

I prefer strapping die-hards to their ankles and pitching 'em overboard about 2 miles out from the coast.

 

They might charge you with salt in battery ...

[mipafox 438]

They might charge you with salt in battery ...

Booo!!!

[ryan_j 0]

I'm surprised NJ.com didn't pickup on this.  They love to publish anything about guns for the page hits.

 

Yeah, right? IT was in the Washington Post though. 

[BCeagle 12]

How can it be a smart gun and satisfy the law, if you need a watch to use it?  

[HuntingCelt 1]

the tech will be near field and won't take much to defeat with a smartphone and a wee bit of clever code

[Cbrrmike 0]

Someone clear this up for me if I'm off base, but wouldn't this law create a "monopoly" type of environment in favor of this company? How is it legal to even legislate in a monopoly.

 

If so, This law doesn't just attack 2a it attacks the very foundation of our country

[Silence Dogood 468]

I have a feeling that the watch will say:   "NOW is the time"

[Underdog 1,593]

Weinberg is a progressive, statist menace who is supported in part by the Leftists on this forum, well, they will never stop their collective schumer from flying in our direction.   Instead of working on laws that would actually increase the safety of the citizens, control of law-abiding citizens (and putting them at greater risk) is the real agenda. 

 

Thanks, Bergen County, for putting Lautenberg's Mommy in power.

[diamondd817 827]

I want this activated. So that someone will fight it in court, and remove the law completely. You can't enact a law which essentially bans the sale of every pistol and revolver currently, commonly, and legally owned today by NJ residents. I can't believe legislators even passed this bill, but this is NJ. Looks like this one will have to go to the courts as well.

Remember this was from 2002. Heller was 2008. "Can't ban guns in common use", handguns was the example.

[n4p226r 105]

the drake case started at the end of 2010.  its now the beginning of 2014.  it'll be another year before we get a resolution IF the supreme court wants to hear it.  do you really want to have this as the only available handgun for 3-5 years while it gets fought in court to MAYBE win?  whose to say that we have the same 5-4 split at that time. 

[siderman 1,138]

Weinberg is a progressive, statist menace who is supported in part by the Leftists on this forum, well, they will never stop their collective schumer from flying in our direction.   Instead of working on laws that would actually increase the safety of the citizens, control of law-abiding citizens (and putting them at greater risk) is the real agenda. 

 

Thanks, Bergen County, for putting Lautenberg's Mommy in power.

No. you can thank district 37 in Bergen which has only about  12 of Bergens 70+ towns. I'm district 40 and aint taking the blame for that bitch.

[chris327 30]

No. you can thank district 37 in Bergen which has only about 12 of Bergens 70+ towns. I'm district 40 and aint taking the blame for that bitch.

Agreed. As I said elsewhere north jersey takes to much heat. North and west of paterson area is mainly republicans. Passaic, bergen, even parts of essex.

[galapoola 102]

These "hiding in wait" laws suck, there is one from the 80/90's that basically allows the state to confiscate and destroy your car if you failed the DMV inspection two or three times. I remember seeing a flyer about the legislation on the bulletin board at a dealership parts counter.

[wooly bugger 1]

I want this activated. So that someone will fight it in court, and remove the law completely. You can't enact a law which essentially bans the sale of every pistol and revolver currently, commonly, and legally owned today by NJ residents. I can't believe legislators even passed this bill, but this is NJ. Looks like this one will have to go to the courts as well.

This was passed pre-Heller, when it wasn't clear that individuals even had 2A rights. Post-Heller, I think this will get laughed out of court if they try to activate it.

[MrSurfboard 1]

I think the goal is to put gun shops out of business.

No, the goal is to effectively ban handguns in NJ.  First off, the gun is only .22LR, second it requires a dongle to work and third the gun plus the dongle cost $1500, that's out of the price range of most people.  

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

So the Armatix IP1, a smart gun that requires you to wear a goofy watch, is now for sale in California. 

 

Weinberg now writes the AG to activate NJ's smart gun law, because this gun is for sale.

 

Do you know for a fact that the AG has been notified, or are you just stating a theoretical supposition?

 

With regard to a monopoly, wouldn't this also be considered restraint of trade?

 

With NJ and now CA on the smart gun bandwagon, this is now gaining traction with the uber-libs in Congress and there is federal bill being introduced.

 

I want to know how they can see to write these stupid-ass bills, given this...

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[ben english 0]

Does anyone have the text of the law?

 

The text is here: P.L.2002, c.130 (S573 2R SCS)

 

I joined this forum to take in y'alls thoughts on the situation.  We're discussing it in a Texas-based forum and, believe me, our hearts go out to NJ gun owners.  Y'all go through a lot.

 

On that other forum, I posted this:

------------------------------------------------

The definition of a "personalized handgun" is:

 

"Personalized handgun" means a handgun which incorporates within its design, and as part of its original manufacture, technology which automatically limits its operational use and which cannot be readily deactivated, so that it may only be fired by an authorized or recognized user. The technology limiting the handgun's operational use may include, but not be limited to: radio frequency tagging, touch memory, remote control, fingerprint, magnetic encoding and other automatic user identification systems utilizing biometric, mechanical or electronic systems. No make or model of a handgun shall be deemed to be a "personalized handgun" unless the Attorney General has determined, through testing or other reasonable means, that the handgun meets any reliability standards that the manufacturer may require for its commercially available handguns that are not personalized or, if the manufacturer has no such reliability standards, the handgun meets the reliability standards generally used in the industry for commercially available handguns.

 

 

After reading that, I feel much better for our NJ brethren. This new handgun does not meet the NJ definition of "personalized handgun" and should not trigger the law.

 

Why? Let me count the ways -

 

The law requires

a handgun which incorporates within its design...technology...

 

 

This handgun does not incorporate the technology within its design. It incorporates the technology within the design of both the handgun and the watch, a combination not covered by simply "handgun". "A handgun and a watch" is NOT the same as "a handgun".

 

The law requires

...technology which ... cannot be readily deactivated...

 

This handgun does not meet that standard. Any RFID device can be remotely jammed, easily.

 

The law requires

a handgun ... that... may only be fired by an authorized ... user.

 

This handgun does not meet that standard. There's nothing about the presence of the rfid watch that means the user is actually authorized. If you steal the watch and gun combo, you can use it; however, you're definitely not an authorized user.

 

The law requires

a handgun ... that ... may only be fired by a... recognized user.

 

This handgun will not be called upon to meet this standard because there is no definition in the law for "recognized user". It seems clear from the context that the intent is for the handgun to recognize the legal owner. This handgun does not do that. It only recognizes the watch. A tortured definition of "recognized" could be employed to allow the coding inside the firearm to determine the standard of recognition but since that standard, by design, cannot be limited to any particular person, it clearly does not fulfill the intent of the law. Absent a clear definition of "recognized user", the entire concept of "personalized handgun" under NJ law simply collapses.

 

The law requires that personalized handguns meet mechanical reliability standards vetted by the AG. To wit:

No make or model of a handgun shall be deemed to be a "personalized handgun" unless the Attorney General has determined through testing or other reasonable means...

 

This simple-sounding requirement opens an avenue to block enforcement forever. If what is and isn't legal is determined by an AG determination about (see below) mechanical reliability, then the process of AG testing is subject to challenge. Absent testing, the complete lack of definition of "reasonable means" opens yet another avenue for legal action to challenge enforcement. An active community of shooters who take the state to court could use this partial sentence to tie the matter up for years.

 

The law requires that

No make or model of a handgun shall be deemed to be a "personalized handgun" unless the ... handgun meets any reliability standards that the manufacturer may require for its commercially available handguns that are not personalized ...

 

That standard is meaningless. It gives the manufacturer control over the legality of their product. They need simply lie and say "Yeah, it meets our standards. Sure." On the basis that no manufacturer should be given the authority to determine if their own product is legal in the state, I'm surprised this language made it into the statute. Even anti-gun legislators should be offended by the notion that their laws can be changed simply by what a manufacturer writes in their marketing materials. A successful court challenge to the triggering of this law via any personalized handgun approved via this avenue is highly likely to succeed. The wording is simply ridiculous.

 

The law requires

No make or model of a handgun shall be deemed to be a "personalized handgun" unless ... the handgun meets the reliability standards generally used in the industry for commercially available handguns.

 

This handgun does not meet that standard because current commercially available handguns do not require you to carry another device with you to make them work; they do not fail to work in the absence of that separate device. Thus, this new firearm does not rise to the level of reliability required by this wording. Therefore, it does not trigger the law to come into effect.

 

From a more practical approach, in another section the law requires that personalized handguns must be available at retail before the law goes into effect. Specifically,

personalized handguns shall be deemed to be available for retail sales purposes if at least one manufacturer has delivered at least one production model of a personalized handgun to a registered or licensed wholesale or retail dealer in New Jersey or any other state.

 

What dealer would attempt to screw over every other dealer in the state? What dealer would so completely alienate every current and potential handgun owner in the state? What dealer in another state would be so oblivious to their actions that they'd be willing to terribly (perhaps mortally) damage all the dealers in NJ?

 

The first dealer to accept delivery of a pistol that triggers the activation of this law would instantly become a pariah in the gun community. They would surely go out of business. Can anybody point me to more info about the dealer in California who was thinking about taking delivery? I'd like to know the full story there. Just how crazy was/is that FFL holder?

 

-------------------------------------

 

To my reckoning, this gun won't activate the NJ law. At least, that's the way I read it. However, y'all have to deal with the lawmakers and enforcers in your state.  I don't.  So, I'm just spitballing this thing.  I'd be interested in your perspectives on the way I read the statute.  Do any of you who are so much closer to the situation than I am have a different take on it?

[Mr.Stu 1,922]

To Ben English,

 

Wow, I am truely impressed that you have taken the time to analyse this BS law to the degree you have, especially for a state that is known to be completely screwed up but it's own elected numbnut politicians. I cannot fault your analysis one jot except for one aspect. The NJ legislature and judiciary have repeatedly demonstrated their disdain for the common man and the rule of law to distort logical argument to such a degree that even George Orwell would be spinning in his grave.

 

I, for one, and I'm sure there are many of us, really appreciate the recent attention and support we have been given by the other States in the Union with respect to this and the Drake case which is before SCOTUS. The 9th Circuit decision is a rallying cry and we all need to press to and win this fight.

 

Thank you for your help and support.

[Respect2A 0]

Ben English,

 

That was one of the best posts I've seen on here. I agree with pretty much everything you said. The problem is that it all boils down to the fact that none of that matters to the politicians in power here in NJ. They will jam it down our throats anyway. They simply don't care.

[gunguy1960 2]

Millions of nj tax money went to try and develop this technology, which was a failure, of course the laws mean nothing without people willing to ignore the constitution and enforce such laws on us. Of course if you can get a software upgrade to make it a machine pistol then maybe it might be interesting.

[djg0770 481]

Ben English,

 

That was one of the best posts I've seen on here. I agree with pretty much everything you said. The problem is that it all boils down to the fact that none of that matters to the politicians in power here in NJ. They will jam it down our throats anyway. They simply don't care.

 

Ben,

 

Our friend Respect2A has hit the nail on the head.  This is NJ where a 17 round tube fed semi auto 22 rifle is banned as an assault weapon.  This is NJ where a law about blackjacks and brass knuckles had a reference to a "slungshot" which some genius in the legislature changed to "slingshot" thinking it was a typo now making 10 yr old boys felons.  This is NJ where we EXPECT our politicians to be corrupt, where running away with money is no big deal but clogging traffic to a bridge for 2 days is enough to get a full Senate investigation.

 

This is NJ, if you're old enough, you'll understand my reference to Bizzaro World where everything is backwards.  Here, the criminals are not prosecuted for gun violations, only the law abiding citizens.  That CT thing where hundreds of thousands refused to register weapons?  Here in NJ, they'd crack open the registration forms at the State Police and start breaking down doors.  But it's perfectly fine to let the gangs and criminals run wild in Camden, Newark, Paterson, and many other "inner cities" in this cesspool of civilization.

 

While you've opened the window and seen a glimpse of what goes on in NJ, you have (no offense) NO CONCEPT of the utter disdain NJ's politicians have for the tax payer.  This situation, in fact, stretches across ALL political parties in NJ.

 

Logic died long ago in NJ.  Highest taxes, nearly the highest car insurance, most densely populated state, worst gun laws...