# New Jersey to mandate "smart" guns. Hear the eyes roll in my head? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 24, 2002, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719 "2002-12-24T14:30:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Tripler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripler/32/21807_2.png) [@Tripler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tripler)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/1 "2002-12-24T14:30:49Z")
[I direct you to this article in my hometown’s paper.](http://www.bergen.com/page.php?level_3_id=1&page=6095248) Today, New Jersey enacted preemptive kneejerk legislation that once: > [@](#): > > (a) manufacturer has made a handgun with such technology available for sale in New Jersey, other makers would have three years to equip their weapons with such technology or be banned from selling in the state. So, what I’m reading is that there currently is no proven technology, but there is a requirement to implement it within three year, which would eliminate competition on legitimate, legal products thus creating an unofficial state-sanctioned monopoly. As soon as I dig it up, I’ll cite a better program in Washington state where sales tax on gun locks and gun safes/vaults is now exempted at the time of purchase. Apparently, gun lock and safe sales are up 35%. Again, let me find the cite. . . I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: A gun doesn’t kill people, the intent behind the trigger does. Educate your damn kids, and lock up your weapons and ammunition securely. Topic: Am I off base? Discuss. Tripler I’m feeling faklempt at this. :mad: ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/2 "2002-12-24T14:38:14Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tripler \* > \*\* I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: A gun doesn’t kill people, the intent behind the trigger does. \*\* Well if someone was intent on blaming an inanimate object, wouldn’t the **bullets** be at more fault than the gun? Afterall an empty gun held by someone with the intent to kill is utterly useless. I agree with you though, I think this “unproven” technology should not be implemented. What’s more is it’s dangerous; I mean only one person can fire the gun, right? Well what if I’m away on business and someone tries to rape my fiance, how is she going to shoot the guy? I think this “safe” technology is a bad idea, aimed at people with no control over their kids, and limited knowledge of things we call “safes” that are meant to protect criminals from stealing things, such as weapons. ---
**Author:** ![Tripler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripler/32/21807_2.png) [@Tripler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tripler)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/3 "2002-12-24T15:43:41Z")
Some cites I promised: [An online version of Washington’s tax exemption for gun safes/locks bill.](http://www.leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/1997-98/house/2950-2974/2969_sbr_030398.txt) I’m still working on the article that cited this 1998 bill. **Meatros** , yeah if you wanna get technical, you are right. But you kinda need the gun to _launch_ the bullets in a certain direction. 😃 As far as “unproven”, I don’t think it could be called that yet. I think it’s more “unfeasable” at best, for the same reason you elucidated earlier. What about my roommate, who may need a sidearm or shotgun to separate our dog from a brown bear? Oh, sorry Bill, I locked up my wristlet in my desk. Too bad, so sad. . . Personally, I applaud the Million Mom March for taking up an issue and a cause, but I fault them for inventing a stigma that a firearm is an inherently evil object, capable of killing indescriminately (like saying a certain religious item is capable of miraculously curing cancer). A firearm is an inanimate tool used to express the intent of the user. And the only way to prevent misuse and abuse of these tools is to take the intent out from behind the trigger. Again, I invite comments to get me thinking . . . Tripler I love a good, healthy debate to get me thinkin’. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/4 "2002-12-24T16:11:24Z")
Geesh… Mandating a technological _result_, but with the technology being implemented _when and if ever_ it becomes viable? Next: legislation to order car makers to invent a technology that makes it materially impossible to run over the paperboy; legislation to order cutlery makers to invent a technology that prevents fish knives from cutting anything but fish; legislation to order digital camera makers to insert a chip that recognizes when what is being focused on is obscene… _Think of the children!!!_ An immediate thought was: OK, who decides what technology _is_ “technologically and commercially viable”? Gunmaker? State Police? A lab at Rutgers? ATF? the NRA? Then once that is cleared, what happens if during that 3-year phase-in some OTHER manufacturer comes up with another, different but possibly _better_ “smartgun” technology? Does that satisfy the requirement? If so, does the timer reset for everyone else to adopt _that_ in a further 3 years? Does the standard go up with the technology or stay at LCD with whoever was first, with the NJ public being asked to settle for being “protected” by whatever half-arsed beta technology is rushed into production to be first in the market? Because evidently all makers w/o their own R&D labs will be under pressure to license the “leader”'s technology within 3 years in order to keep doing business in NJ. I live in a total license-and-registration jurisdiction and don’t feel particularly opressed by it; but I don’t think much of this “solution”. Heck, this sounds like more of the “look, look, we’re _doing something_” legislation that has been plaguing us in this insecure age. … I just had a thought – How’s the S&W boycott doing? Is it even still on? [briefly: Smith & Wesson back in the Clinton years started requiring dealers who carried their guns to observe more-stringent-than-the-Law rules about ALL sales, resulting in many dealers boycotting S&W products. I myself found no fault in S&W but that’s another story] 'Cause something like this could this possibly be a “privilege” statute for gunmakers willing to play ball with the state. ---
**Author:** ![BF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b5ac83/32.png) [@BF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BF)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/5 "2002-12-24T16:17:48Z")
> [@](#): > > … I just had a thought – How’s the S&W boycott doing? **JR** , nope, that’s all over now. S&W was bought out by (in case you didn’t know, S&W was owned by a Brit firm when they decided to cut their throat) a US firm Safe-T-Hammer. They’ve mea culpa’d and really have been cranking out the PR machine. They have now been officially welcomed back to the fold by the NRA (American Rifleman adverts and articles) and most gun owners. ---
**Author:** ![IndependentVoter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e9a140/32.png) [@IndependentVoter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IndependentVoter)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/6 "2002-12-24T16:19:20Z")
I only have one question…and I’m pretty sure I know the answer. Will this inlclude the guns that police departments purchase for police officers to carry? ---
**Author:** ![Berkut](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a88e57/32.png) [@Berkut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Berkut)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/7 "2002-12-24T16:54:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by IndependentVoter \* > \*\*Will this inlclude the guns that police departments purchase for police officers to carry? \*\* Probably not. After all, police are a higher class of citizen. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/8 "2002-12-24T18:40:14Z")
I dunno… I would think one of the earliest pitches for smart-gun technology has been _precisely_ for equipping police guns with the technology so they can’t be turned against the policeman if he loses control of the weapon. What would probably be sought in that case, however, would be that whatever “ID” technology was used in LE weapons would be _departmental_ rather than _personal_ i.e. would identify “holder = Podunk City PD” rather than “holder = Sgt. Mac Millan”. Of course, the black market on “law enforcement ID-ring chips” would move some serious cash… ---
**Author:** ![robertliguori](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/46a35a/32.png) [@robertliguori](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robertliguori)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/9 "2002-12-24T19:21:41Z")
Right. How does New Jersey plan to stop dumb guns from being smuggled in? The same way they stop drugs? Anyway, to paraphrase Neal Stephenson, the concept of trying to hold gun busts presents the police with several inherent contradictions. ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/10 "2002-12-24T19:29:28Z")
I know this is off-topic, but does this sound suspiciously like missile defense to anyone else? ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/11 "2002-12-24T20:01:18Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by IndependentVoter \* > Will this inlclude the guns that police departments purchase for police officers to carry? That’s exactly why such a device has already been proposed and, I’m pretty certain, designed, tested, and owing to recent events, probably already in use in certain places. Police are very sensitive about the idea of having their guns taken away and used against them. Since New Jersey apparently hasn’t heard of it, I’m not going to say much else beyond this post just in case I’m going somewhere I shouldn’t. Someone I know played around with various designs for such a system back in the early '70s. It worked then. It should work a lot better now. However, the particular design I know of would not likely stop children from shooting each other with stored guns. (Hint: there is a classic conundrum between home gun safety and home gun defense. That’s not likely to change with owner-specific guns for very similar reasons.) ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/12 "2002-12-24T20:08:20Z")
As someone is who has become very pro gun reg as a result of discussions had on these threads, I will go on the record and say that I think that such a regulation is just plain dumb. There won’t be much debate about that I think. Now as to whether or not wide handgun availabilty and casually stored handguns magnifies the consequences of bad intent … well that debate has been had enough in the past and we know our mutual positions. (Now a law mandating smart gun owners? That would be an idea!) ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/13 "2002-12-24T22:14:19Z")
My prediction: as long as it is just New Jersey (AFAIK for now), most firearms manufacturers won’t bother with “rushing” into smart-gun technology development; they’ll let it evolve and develop over time, taking the time to get it right. Even then, I think that “smart guns,” where they aren’t mandated by law, will be a “niche” firearm. I think your standard handgun will remain basically unchanged (minor safety innovations of a purely mechanical nature), with “smart guns” being offered to the few nervous nellies who want them. And hoo, Lordy! Are they gonna fork over the payola for 'em, too! I doubt that New Jersey, being a fairly gun-unfriendly state, comprises enough revenue from handgun sales to compel manufacturers to bow to this fairly asinine piece of legislation. If, however, this “legislation” catches on with enough additional states, all bets are off. I guess it’s a good thing that a well-maintained firearm is never truly “obsolete.” ---
**Author:** ![Gadarene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Gadarene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadarene)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/14 "2002-12-24T22:31:04Z")
> [@](#): > > Geesh… Mandating a technological result, but with the technology being implemented when and if ever it becomes viable? Actually…this sort of thing is done all the time in the context of environmental regulation. It’s called “technology-forcing” regulation, and it’s generally worked out quite well. Although in that context it’s usually not “when and if,” but rather telling the industries, “You have five years to develop technology that will take care of this emissions problem or else.” It’s not as silly as you make it sound. ---
**Author:** ![lucwarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@lucwarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lucwarm)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/15 "2002-12-24T23:05:29Z")
IMHO, there’s really no need to pass such a law now. Why not wait until the technology has been developed? In the meantime, New Jersey could allocate more money towards smart-gun technology research. Side-note: It really annoys me how so many anti-gun activists seem more interested spiteful, feel-good, ineffective legislative strategies than in working towards the goal of reducing crime. For example, its become pretty clear over the last 10 years that “shall-issue” concealed carry legislation doesn’t particularly increase in those jurisdictions that enact it. And yet anti-gun folks keep opposing these laws. For what reason, I don’t know. I just wish that certain liberals would use more critical thinking in their (laudable) quest to use government to improve peoples’ lives. ---
**Author:** ![Gadarene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Gadarene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadarene)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/16 "2002-12-24T23:11:49Z")
> [@](#): > > IMHO, there’s really no need to pass such a law now. Why not wait until the technology has been developed? I just answered that. Because such a law forces technology. It provides incentive to innovate. I’m not commenting on the merits of the law itself; I ain’t fer it or agin it. I’m just saying that this is something that’s done elsewhere, and it works. ---
**Author:** ![45\_70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/5f9b8f/32.png) [@45\_70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/45_70)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/17 "2002-12-24T23:33:34Z")
Will smart gun technology make up for stupid lawmaker technology? ---
**Author:** ![lucwarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@lucwarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lucwarm)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2002, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/18 "2002-12-25T00:50:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gadarene \* > \*\*I just answered that. Because such a law forces technology. It provides incentive to innovate. > > \*\* Based on the quote in the OP, I disagree. The law (apparently) does not require anyone to develop a new technology, just to implement it if and when it’s developed. I suppose one could argue that the law gives an incentive in that if the first gun-maker to develop smart-gun technology patents the technology, it will effectively have a monopoly on the New Jersey gun market. (Query whether New Jersey can constitutionally grant such a monopoly) In any event, I’d be interested in seeing an example of a “technology-forcing law.” It seems to me that such laws, to be effective, would have to be very modest in ambition. ---
**Author:** ![Gadarene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Gadarene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadarene)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2002, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/19 "2002-12-25T01:46:18Z")
My mistake if that’s not the case for the NJ law. > [@](#): > > In any event, I’d be interested in seeing an example of a “technology-forcing law.” It seems to me that such laws, to be effective, would have to be very modest in ambition. Not at all. If I had my Environmental Law textbook with me, I could go more in-depth, but the Clean Air Act’s provisions mandating that automobile manufacturers curtail emissions by 90 percent within five years eventually–after a couple of court-allowed extensions–proved to be extremely effective on a large scale. Ditto getting lead out of gasoline. That’s the way technology-forcing regulations work: they say, “You need to meet X standard by Y date. We don’t care how you get it done; just do it.” The Clean Water Act is [similarly technology-forcing](http://www.ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/BriefingBooks/Laws/e.cfm?&CFID=6213428&CFTOKEN=64314461): > [@](#): > > The Act has been termed a technology-forcing statute because of the rigorous demands placed on those who are regulated by it to achieve higher and higher levels of pollution abatement. Industries were given until July 1, 1977, to install “best practicable control technology” (BPT) to clean up waste discharges. Municipal wastewater treatment plants were required to meet an equivalent goal, termed “secondary treatment,” by that date. (Municipalities unable to achieve secondary treatment by that date were allowed to apply for case-by-case extensions up to July 1, 1988. According to EPA, 86% of all cities met the 1988 deadline; the remainder were put under judicial or administrative schedules requiring compliance as soon as possible. However, many cities, especially smaller ones, continue to make investments in building or upgrading facilities needed to achieve secondary treatment.) Cities that discharge wastes into marine waters were eligible for case-by-case waivers of the secondary treatment requirement, where sufficient showing could be made that natural factors provide significant elimination of traditional forms of pollution and that both balanced populations of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and water quality standards would be protected. As is [CERCLA](http://www.iet.msu.edu/Regs/superfundact.htm) now. Rather than being modest in ambition, these are big time environmental statutes with big time goals. ---
**Author:** ![Billy\_Rubin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/billy_rubin/32/3622_2.png) [@Billy\_Rubin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Billy_Rubin)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2002, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719/20 "2002-12-25T02:48:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Meatros \* > **Well if someone was intent on blaming an inanimate object, wouldn’t the bullets be at more fault than the gun? Afterall an empty gun held by someone with the intent to kill is utterly useless.** You’ve obviously never been whacked upside the head with a 1911A1. Utterly useless, it’s not. Lack of bullets stimply turns many handguns into hammers, and hammers hurt!!!Otherwise, yeah, I’m with you. As I read this, though, it seems that if it takes four hundred years for this to be developed, then the deadline for the other mfrs. is 403 years. Am I misreading this? And Tripler, no you do not need a firearm of any kind to “launch” a bullet. You can do it fairly effectively (though not accurately)with a piece of board with a hole in it, and an icepick. Done it, it can be done. The beginnings of the technology are there, by the way, have been for twenty years. I have an automatic with a slide-locking hammer-blocking safety which can only be deactivated if you’re wearing a special magnetic ring. I think it’s a good idea, but I still don’t think it should be mandatory. I can see that this tech will prevent owners from being fired upon with their own weapons,or prevent a child or unauthorized adult access, but there will never be a time when criminals won’t have ready access to “standard” weapons. Like wearing a helmet on a motorcycle- should be the option of the end user. b. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-jersey-to-mandate-smart-guns-hear-the-eyes-roll-in-my-head/144719.md?page=2)