search
top

Brady Center Sues to Implement NJ Smart Gun Law

ANJRPC is reporting:

This afternoon, the Brady Campaign and the Million Mom March (Mercer County Chapter) announced that they are filing a lawsuit to force the New Jersey Attorney General to formally report on the public availability of so-called “smart guns.”  The lawsuit is intended to trigger New Jersey’s 2002 smart gun law, which could eventually outlaw the transfer of handguns that do not incorporate the technology.

 “New Jersey’s smart-gun law is a dumb as it gets,” said ANJRPC Executive Director Scott Bach. “It forces you to use an unproven technology to defend your life, and then exempts the state from liability when the gun goes ‘click’ instead of ‘bang.’ If it’s such a great idea, then law enforcement shouldn’t be exempt, and the free market should be able to determine its viability.  ANJRPC will spare no effort or expense to prevent this gun ban from going into effect.”

 There will be a media frenzy covering this event.  The first stories available online as this alert was prepared include the following:

NorthJersey.com

NBC40

yubanet.com

ANJRPC will provide additional details when they are available.

Just when you think it’s safe to start ignoring the Brady Campaign as irrelevant, something like this happens. But it does show why Armatix’s technology has to be killed with fire and the earth that bore it salted. Brady chose the more forthright path of just forcing the technology down our throats now, rather than repealing the law first, lulling us into a sense of security, and then reimposing it later.

17 Responses to “Brady Center Sues to Implement NJ Smart Gun Law”

  1. Patrick says:

    History shows you cannot kill a technology. That’s the wrong fight. We need to fight those who want to kill our rights.

    Let NJ implement the law. We’ll see how that fares.

    The sooner this fight gets to the crux point (implementation under force of law), the sooner we can kill it. Hanging this one out for a long time is only going to make it harder. This year. Now. And I speak from one of the places likely to try to push this into law. So I am not wishing work on anyone but myself.

    I just seriously believe that some ideas are so toxic that the only way politicians can learn to avoid them is to get burned by them. Electric cattle wire works the same way – you don’t know not to cross it until you do. Then you won’t, again.

    This is one of those ideas: one so universally horrible (but awesome-sounding to politicians) that I’d rather fight this than other ideas that are merely dumb. This one could set gun control performers back with politicians because their advice was completely out-of-touch, but only if the pols see their peers get burned.

    Sorry to play the contrarian today.

    • Sebastian says:

      Normally I’d agree, but the only demand for Smart Guns comes from the pens of politicians. So I think we can successfully prevent the technology from coming to market in the short term. Over the long term, this will probably continue to be developed in other countries.

      • Nathan S. says:

        Patrick has a point. This is one law and emergent technology that is much better fought sooner rather than later. Especially while the tech is still new and unproven and almost certainly inadequate. Waiting longer will allow the tech to improve. I’ve got nothing against tech infused guns, I will fight to the bitter end to prevent their mandate by law.

        • RP says:

          This is one law and emergent technology that is much better fought sooner rather than later.

          Maybe. But I don’t know. First, you and Patrick seem to be implying that if we beat NJ in a smart gun fight, the fight’s over. That’s not the case. Once this fight starts, it never ends. When was the last time a gun control bill was defeated and didn’t come back? Never. How many times has Feinstein proposed an AWB? How many times have Philly Dems proposed the same failed crap in the state legislature? Over and over and over. The antis have no qualms with recycling failed tactics.

          Second, even European companies like Sig, Glock, and Beretta know its American civilians who butter their bread. And companies like HK and FN that focus on gov contracts know their customers don’t want this crap either. We have the ability to keep smart gun development restricted to small start-ups and companies who are starting from scratch with regards to gun engineering. As long as that’s the case, smart gun development is going to move at a glacial pace. I think we can delay this for quite a while. Long enough to be worthwhile. And considering current trends in America, we might be in a better position to fight this a few years down the line.

  2. Fiftycal says:

    ANother avenue is to attack the “exemption” “law enforcement” gets on the grounds of “equal protection”. You make EVERY GUN sold in NJ a “smart gun” and the COPS will kill this law ASAFP.

  3. Cargosquid says:

    Let NJ implement the law. Better now, than when there might actually be viable technology. And when someone dies due to the law….sue NJ AND the Brady Bunch.

    And the ammo and gun manufacturers should refuse to sell to NJ. For safety reasons.

  4. JeffG says:

    Smart gun technology only exists because anti gunners want it and pay for the research. My background is in technology and I don’t think there will be a reliable smart gun for years. If you have any doubts just look at the reliability of Apple’s fingerprint recognition. The spontaneous revulsion to any smart gun rumored to go on the market needs to continue. I am stuck living in NJ and I am greatful for the rest of the US helping to stop this technology. Gun owners in other countries will have no interest in a gun that is only 70% reliable.

  5. Terraformer says:

    And here you thought there would no news to report today….

  6. Weebs says:

    Can someone please explain how the Brady Center or Million Moms have any claim in regard to standing in this case?

    • Sebastian says:

      Good question. My understanding is that New Jersey has pretty liberal standing requirements, but I don’t know about this liberal.

  7. RP says:

    Brady is making a mistake with this move. There is a very good reason NJ is trying to backpedal on smart guns. This lawsuit will only stiffen resistance.

  8. Leonard says:

    First off I am not a expert on law. But if these groups are successful couldn’t that create a presidence. For example Obama changed the dates of when obamacare would take effect without passing a new law. Or when city’s like San Francisco wont turn over Illegal Immigrants for deportation.

    This is just the two cases that came to mind but there’s probably many more.

  9. Jack says:

    I live in NJ. This law should be struck down if it ever reaches the courts due to the ‘guns in common use’ language in the Heller decision. The law enforcement exemption is another obvious tell that the technology is not ready for widespread implementation but I expect the courts to simply ignore that as cops are part of the elite and obviously exempt from laws that effect the little people.

    Despite the obvious problems with the law I have lost all faith in the NJ court system to strike down any gun control law. Even the federal courts overseeing NJ have refused to recognize the 2nd amendment outside the home and the Supreme Court keeps ducking the issue despite a split in the lower courts. One part of me wants to see the law tested in court but another saner part is afraid of the possible results.

  10. It’s interesting that this happens now…..is this really about ‘smart guns’ or is it about Christie? Or the NRA? I mean Democrats started the rumor about Christie running for president in 2016, back in 2009!! When he was pounding Corzine into pavement in almost every poll, and it’s something they kept repeating until it’s now a national belief that the Republicans will put Christie on the ballot. Anyway, how is this about Christie? The NJAG is part of the Chrisite administration, and had with the issue over commuter traffic, the Democrats attacked Christie’s administration. Gunnies say the Christie needs to veto gun control legislation in order to go national, and maybe the haters want to try to gin up hysterics about guns as a way to keep Christie off the ballot……

    Interesting that this happens a week or two after Sen Weinberg says she’ll repeal the ‘smart gun’ law if the NRA backs off? Why would she even consider repealing something she loves? And she loves political polarization cause it gins up her base. Is she afraid this law won’t stand up in court? Why would she talk about repeal, when a month te Holder DOJ talked about mandating ‘smart gun’ tech nation wide?

    And don’t forget, there was a recent gun control panel here in NJ where a Brady Buncher actually lamented the ‘smart gun’ law……because it’s a roadblock to implementing gun control policy……(I forgot exactly why the Lamentations happened).

    So either something big is happening in the anti gun war room where we need to think outside the box, or they’re just a bunch of dopes looking for publicity to get back some sort of revelency because of Bloomberg.

  11. I hate to say it but this is a smart move on the part of the Brady Campaign. Reading the complaint it is obvious that they have been planning this for over a year.

    The timing of it coming a day after an op-ed in the WaPo by Ernst Mauch of Armatrix GmbH is no coincidence

    It is equally obvious that the NJ AG’s Office has royally screwed up by not making their legally-required semi-annual reports about the availability of “personalized handguns”. All they had to do is send a letter saying, “Nope, none out there”, and they would have complied with the law.

    All the suit officially asks is that the AG’s Office be forced to file their required reports. The Brady Campaign is counting on the Armatrix iP1 to be considered by the AG’s Office a production gun and not a prototype or specimen. If so, the 3-year clock starts. It will then be up to the Legislature to repeal the law if they don’t want it to into effect – and that is a dubious proposition given New Jersey.

top