New Smart Pistol Worries Gun Rights Groups


The first so-called “smart gun” is causing gun-rights advocacy groups to worry about a future filled with strict new gun regulations, according to news outlets.

KitUp! first wrote about he Smart System iP1, a .22-caliber pistol made by the German gun-maker Armatix GmbH, in February. The James-Bond style pistol only works when it’s used in close proximity with a special wristwatch.

When the RFID-equipped watch is activated by a PIN number and placed near the gun — like when a shooter grips the handle — it sends a signal to unlock the pistol, activating a green light on the back of the grip.

The iP1 could revolutionize gun safety, but the National Rifle Association is concerned that the new technology will lead to a government mandate that all firearms be similarly equipped, according to May 6 New York Daily News story.

Engage Armament, a gun store in Maryland, had planned to carry the smart pistol starting May 1. But the owner called it off after he received threats over the issue, according to news reports.

These pistols sell for about $1,400 and the watch retails for another $400 – that’s about three times more than the price of a new, high-quality semi-auto pistol.

About the Author

Matthew Cox
Matthew Cox is a reporter at He can be reached at
  • orly?

    Again, speculations. Too much tin foil for me.

    As for the gun, its the first model.

    I’m speculative on that.

    • Richard Fletcher II

      I don’t think anyone should ever think of letting a government to regulate someone’s ability to shoot their firearm. Scenario– guns start using RFID chips and our government decides they don’t want to let us continue to bear arms. What’s to stop them from disabling the RFID somehow and rendure your self defense weapon useless? How can we become a unified militia and stop tyranny, if you are defending yourself and freedom with paper weights?

      • Joe-bob

        I agree, the government nor the NRA should intervene here. If individuals want to purchase and fire the iP1, that is their decision not yours or the NRAs. What happened to our capitalist free market economy?

  • moondawg

    New Jersey already has a law on the books that as soon as a smart pistol goes on the market anywhere in the U.S., than only smart pistols will be allowed to be sold in N.J.

    • runtohim



        2013 New Jersey Revised Statutes
        Section 2C:58-2.3 – Reports as to availability of personalized handguns.

        Universal Citation: NJ Rev Stat § 2C:58-2.3 (2013)

        2C:58-2.3 Reports as to availability of personalized handguns.

        2. a. On the first day of the sixth month following the effective date of P.L.2002, c.130 (C.2C:58-2.2 et al.), the Attorney General shall report to the Governor and the Legislature as to the availability of personalized handguns for retail sales purposes. If the Attorney General determines that personalized handguns are not available for retail sales purposes, the Attorney General, every six months thereafter, shall report to the Governor and the Legislature as to the availability of personalized handguns for retail sales purposes until such time as the Attorney General shall deem that personalized handguns are available for retail sales purposes and so report to the Governor and the Legislature. In making this determination, the Attorney General may consult with any other neutral and detached public or private entity that may have useful information and expertise to assist in determining whether, through performance and other relevant indicators, a handgun meets the statutory definition of a personalized handgun set forth in N.J.S.2C:39-1.

        b.For the purposes of this section, 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. As used in this subsection, the term “production model” shall mean a handgun which is the product of a regular manufacturing process that produces multiple copies of the same handgun model, and shall not include a prototype or other unique specimen that is offered for sale.


        • shawn1999

          I’m confused. According to what you pasted, it states that:
          1) the Attorney General will report to the Governor & Legislature when personalized handguns are available for retail sale
          2) The Attorney General will report every 6 months if it is determined they are not available for retail sale
          3) “Available for retail sale” means 1 manufacturer has delivered one production model
          4) “Production model” means a handgun produced by regular manufacturing process capable of producing multiple copies of the same model

          I don’t see anything that mentions smart guns, nor do I see anything stating they will be the only permissible firearm once they are available.

      • KLP

        There you go. Within 3 years of a viable “smart gun” comes to market, all firearms sold inside the state of New Jersey will require some kind of “smart technology.” No tin foil, no black helicopters – a bill in NJ that causes affects all handgun sales in the state.

        The speculation that California and New York would be quick to likewise pass a similar bill or update an existing bill is not, in my opinion, too far away from the realm of possibility. Regardless, this response is almost entirely a market reaction to the technology. The free market won’t sustain Armatix so in my opinion, let them fail here and return to Germany.

        • Gregg

          It does not say that if it becomes available anywhere then that is all that will be sold.

          It says if it is available anywhere then it can be sold in NJ.

          • KLP

            “Assembly Bill No. 700, as amended and released by the committee,
            regulates the future sale of handguns in New Jersey. The amended bill
            specifies that three years after it is determined that personalized
            handguns are available for retail purposes, it will be illegal for any
            registered or licensed firearms manufacturer or dealer to transport,
            sell, expose for sale, possess for sale, assign or transfer any handgun
            unless that handgun is a personalized handgun.”

            You’re saying that the law states that if it is available for retail sales, FFLs are then permitted to sell, expose for sale, possess for sale, assign or transfer a personalized handgun.

            What it actually says is if it’s available anywhere, it much be incorporated into all handguns sold in the state of New Jersey. An FFL cannot sell, expose for sale, possess for sale, assign or transfer any handgun unless it is personalized.

          • tiger

            Gregg, your word playing.

          • shawn1999

            And that’s what the Law comes down to – the Judge or Jury’s interpretation of each attorney’s wordplay as it relates to the wordplay of the legislators who passed the law and which of the attorney’s word play fits best into the word play of the written law. The question is which attorney- KLP or Gregg- would win in New Jersey court of law, which would then set precedence for future trials and interpretations in other municipalities.

    • Bbabbitt

      It’s just what the anti-gun jerks have been waiting for — a non-weapon. This is even dumber than micro-stamping.

      • Musson

        How far from the watch will the gun operate? If someone could take it away from you
        and shoot you – It Ain’t That Smart.

    • orly?

      Yay Chris Christie right?

      • shawn1999

        Why are you crediting the Governor? He didn’t write the law and may not have even signed the law. Why not credit the legislator that conceived it, or those who helped write it? Same thing happens at the federal level- Congress screws up the budget or passes unpopular laws and Obama gets the blame…

    • 4/12 Cav

      While NJ is at it, why not make it a felony to use a non-personalized firearm in the commission of a crime? OH WAIT! It’s ALREADY against the law to use a firearm in the commission of a crime. Silly me!
      When seconds count, first-responders are only minutes away… (No offense to first-responders (I am one), just a reflection on reality).

      • shawn1999

        No one has as good of a response time as the people involved in the incident. theirs is down to their own reflexes & knowledge.

  • emclean

    i will happly adapot electronic to make my gun fire, right after all LEO’s and military brancehes do.
    my livelihood is basied on all machenes will fail, and often wehn needed. i will not be trusting a defenceive weapion to haveing the right watch on the right hand if i ever need to defend myself.

    also consitering tHe 2002 law in New Jersery that will require all handgun sold in the state to be “smart guns” three years after the first one goes on the market, there is good reasion for the NRA’s consern.

    • glennb61

      Learn how to spell so you will be more believable. What is your fear about gun safety? Are you afraid that the gun will be smarter than you are?

      • NorthWoodsChuck

        You got that right, Glenn

    • doc

      reason-no I. machines-yes I. apparently the machine your using now has failed with spelling and grammar as well.

    • Deere Doctor


    • Geoff

      We have had this same kind of mechanism in our cars for a long time, and they work. If the key is not in the proximity of the car, it will not start…or on some models, the car will die in a few seconds…and I have never worried about this system failing. It works every time. Same with all three cars in my garage.

  • Juanito Grande

    “…could revolutionize gun safety.” How “safe” is a handgun which can’t be used to defend one’s self, one’s home, or family? Will criminals be required to use “smart guns” when conducting armed robberies, home invasions, murders, rapes, etc? This feel-good contraption will only serve to make criminality safer.

    • Mick

      As someone with two young kids in the house, I’m more interested in my children’s inability to shoot themselves/others accidentally.

      And why can’t it be used to defend oneself?

      • Guest12345

        Then how about doing these two things:
        1. Keep your guns locked up at all times.
        2. Teach your children, as young as possible, to respect guns; do this by education, and actual range time.

      • James Howard

        I raised 3 young kids. They never shot themselves though they were involved in shooting sport from about 8 yrs. and older.

    • shawn1999

      It’s as safe as strict gun control laws and gun free zones are.
      There’s absolutely no chance of a criminal getting hurt by any law abiding citizen at all.

    • Travis

      I’ve tried making this case to pro gun control liberals. Sometimes it seems that the only answer they can provide is that of a small child covering his ears and shouting as to not be able to hear you.

    • vnzppr

      You’re right Juanito. This is not a safe weapon at all. What happens when your wife is alone at home and needs a weapon? How ’bout the 15 year old who’s mother is being beaten or raped by an invader of some kind, armed or not, and this thing is the only weapon in the house? I can see a lot of problems with this piece of crap!

  • planethou

    Just as an aside to the author (M. Cox) for future reference: “PIN number” is redundant. Think about what PIN stands for.

    • Shakes

      PIN numbers should just be for ATM machines.

    • NorthWoodsChuck

      People who use “PIN Number” rather than the correct PIN, have been a special source of annoyance for this English teacher’s son.

      • shawn1999

        Got to hate those personal identification number numbers…

    • Guest

      My favorite is auto “VIN number” and the “PAT” Team (process action team). And orientated instead of oriented.

  • kjenkinsaf

    God forbid that my family is attacked, and one of us incapacitated. Here honey, use my gun. Oh wait, take my (bang) watch too. This is way too stupid an idea to work. Oh wait, that makes it PERFECT for the gun grabbers.

    • ajspades

      Get a second wristband then. Simple solution

      • Dave

        Why should he have to buy a wristband at all?

        • ajspades

          Because that is what this manufacturer has decided is the most effective and profitable way to incorporate an external safety mechanism that is unique to the user. Another simple answer to a simple problem. Keep them coming.

    • Not Disclosed

      …and a .22 to add insult to forthcoming injuries… Like you have to be able to sneak up on something and shoot it in the skull case for it to be anywhere near affective… Not very useful for defense… more likely to cause an “enragement”…

  • I would offer a slightly different and more effective product. A watch, which when worn, measures the wear’s IQ, emotional state, genetic predisposition for instability, excessive exposure to video gaming and derelict parents. Thresholds can be established for those predictors, and if the threshold is exceeded, in one or more category, the watch stops all neural activity right at the synapse.
    A much more effective solution, and marketable at $300 to $500 with a tactical version at $600.

    • shawn1999

      what do video games and derelict parents have to do with anything? there are those who play video games and have no issue functioning normally in society. There are those who have extremely bad parents and because of that resolved (and succeeded) in being much better than their parents.

    • Jesper

      Wow, your argument seemed smart and stuff until you mentioned video games.
      Scientific studies have shown that playing video games wont make you aggresive and kill people, a person has to have had a mental sickness to do that.

  • cas.z

    you guys want a handgun that’s tied to a wanna-be wrist watch, and another threaed today wants to put “auto-scopes” on M-4’s (“tag” a target that duck down, then auto-fire when something in that proximity appears…….. either way, both “solutions” are nuts…… the ‘smart pistol’ is a worthless if I’m “down”……… an autofire score takes out a friendly that has nuetralized a taget from the rear…….. Both equally dumb.

  • BTNova

    Several issues come to mind:
    – It is only chambered in .22, not much use besides plinking
    – We have not seen any actual independent reviews of the gun
    – The draconian NJ law tied to the sale of this “smart gun”
    – The near $1500+ price tag
    – How secure is the technology? Meaning can it be hacked to be disabled by anyone.
    – How weather resistant is the gun and its electronics?
    – How durable?
    – Tamper resistant?

    Those are just of the top of my head.

    Oh and it makes for a good story that Engage Armament received threats but the only proof we have is the drunken tirade by one of the owners and no actual supported proof that it happened. It does make for a nice sensational news story though; you know the kind the press loves when it can spin some bad light towards the gun rights groups.

    • MrHasselblad

      A few answers…

      Please do not try the caliper debate. Any reasonably well trained person could easily kill with a 22. Add to that who is going to stick around after getting shot (even very minor injuries) with a 22?

      How secure is the technology? Besides being a career profession photographer, I’m a literal computer hacker, gray hat, blue hat, etc… It wouldn’t take all to much knowledge to be able to fold the RFID link between watch and gun. Not to hack either one of those, but to get an elementary radio device with enough wattage that it would completely block out the watch and gun linkage. Similar attempts have been proven already on video with groups such as HAK5.

      Weather resistant, with RESISTANT being the key word. One would be surprised how many people confuse the words resistant to waterproof. I’m going to try to get a hold of this exact model gun to test that one out. So whenever it becomes available here in america (or elsewhere within reasonable reach) I’ll test that one out.

      As for durable; doubt it would be as durable as one of the top ten present brands, but definitely more durable than some which appear in print advertisement.

      Tamper resistant? Gun, watch, or both? If it is hackable I can hack it.

  • always3rd

    So what would happen in the even of an EMP? Obviously, in the chaos that ensues directly after, I am no longer able to defend myself or my family due to a now $2k paperweight. Maybe thats been the idea all along?

    • tiger

      Seriously? That is top of your daily worry list?

      • JCitizen

        A simple static discharge can wipe out any electronic device. It is common in manuals to call these EMPs. I’d be just as worried that a dead battery could leave it a brick!

    • James

      For criminals it’s easier. Go to radio shack and get a jammer or scrambler that works on that wavelength and they could rob banks, houses, etc… at will.

  • Transporter

    Good for the inventor for creating something unique. It is not however the answer society is looking for to end gun violence. Am I really going to wear around this watch all the time and when I’m not wearing it, I guess I better place it under lock and key (and not just because it is a ridiculous $400)? I just plain DO NOT see the NEED for a weapon such as this; especially in .22 cal.
    ~Long live the right of the people to bear arms (however many and whatever kind they want)~

    • James Howard

      Not to mention you become a target when carrying concealed because you are automatically identified as having a gun.

  • Bbabbitt

    Smart pistol — dumb idea. Oh, time out, wait my battery just died.

  • c1)moose

    Will there be an exchange program, so all the criminals with their dumb guns can have smart guns, instead?

  • hank

    what a silly thing to build! most folk would be dead before they got the first shot off!

  • mgunns

    Criminals would not be able to use this pistol, ya its a smart pistol. If you buy one you would be in the same group as the criminals, ya a smart pistol.

  • JDs Handsome Son

    If this were a smart society the only things made to wear some kind of electronic device would be our elected officeholders and their high-ranking appointees. They are the biggest menace to us all, not guns or anything else. They have become wicked, evil and dangerous with all their surveillance and scheming. Look at their pictures if you doubt me. They all look sick and disturbed. Each day we wake up and read about yet another plan they have to corral us, take our stuff, violate our rights, and restrict what we can say and do. I propose that these sinister people be fitted with headcams, ankle bracelets, and other sensory devices so that we can know where they are, who they’re with, and what they’re doing 24/7.

    Our Federal representatives are required to fill out conflict of interest and financial disclosure forms annually. It takes Senator Dianne Feinstein over 30 pages to document all her vast wealth and all the business ventures she and her $$Billionaire husband have, including LLC’s and companies created to bid on lucrative government contracts she steers to him that pay him $$Millions. Why does any “servant” of the public need a 30 page disclosure form? Shouldn’t she be limited to 5 pages? Shouldn’t she have to turn in all her financial instruments and business ventures until what remains to her would fit on 5 pages?

    • Rhys F

      3 lines should be enough…

      A “Blind Trust” to operate all investments, ownerships and interests other than the ownership of one house or apartment in D.C. and one house or apartment in the Congressional or Senatorial seat they represent. ALL other interested to be dealt to by trustees so they only have their Congressional or Senatorial salary to live on and know nothing about what is happening to their wealth until the retire from political life.

  • BBGun48

    I think it is a cool Idea. I think anyone who wants one should be able to purchase or sell it anytime and anywhere they choose. With that said, it should never be mandated that It can be the only gun sold or purchased. That is the problem with America. The State Governments can’t try and shovel this stuff down our throats and expect us to eat it.. It will not happen…

  • David p

    As a law prior emforcement officer this gun is a terrible a idea I have trained shooting with both hand in case I can not use my shooting hand. Now how do I swith the watch over to the other hand.

    • Airborne_fister

      Or better yet, what if someone is right handed? Doesn’t that mean they wear a watch on their left wrist? I mean most of us know two hands, two hands, and did i say two hands. But if I threw this gun to a friend, in a fire fight would he/she know two hands? Or better yet, what if I’m in bed asleep. Who wears a watch while sleeping? So bump in the night. Gotta run to the bathroom or where ever I left my watch, put it on then. Then grab my gun, then I’m in the fight.

  • Jim

    There’s nothing “smart” about this pistol, and nothing personalized either. Anyone possessing its watch can fire it, so I imagine that doesn’t meet the test(s) specified in the NJ statute.

    In fact you don’t need the watch to use this gun, you need the RFID chip inside the watch. Let’s say these did go on sale and could somehow be mandated for purchase (after all the years of court challenges that is). After plunking down eighteen Benjamins the first thing I’m going to do is spend another $10 or so on some cheap tools, take that watch apart, pull out the RFID chip and tape it to the gun.

    The pistol does need batteries for its RF transmitter and some would complain about relying on batteries in a life/death situation, but I don’t think that’s a big deal. Ask anyone with a pacemaker about relying on batteries. Presumably this thing uses button cells (think watch battery). Those things last 10 years or more in storage and they’re cheap. So buy a few and replace them every 6 months just like you do with your smoke detector (you do replace those batteries, right?).

    Now, I’m in no way arguing for or against this gun, and certainly I don’t want to see any single item mandated for purchase by a government, be it guns, cars, microwave ovens, or anything else. I say let the free market decide the issue. I’m just saying that its smart/personalized functionality is overblown and easy to remedy. As a proof of concept this is an interesting piece of kit. As a commercial venture I think it will fail. It may, however, point someone else to a solution that is actually feasible from a commercial, technical and practical standpoint.

    • Rodney Keene

      Most intelligent reply to this article I’ve seen so far.

  • JJ Murray

    If I have a smart gun then I don’t need rules that ban me from carrying a concealed weapon without a class and a permit. In fact, since it’s a smart gun I should be able to open carry anywhere. After all since the anti-gun crowd always blames the weapon a “smart” gun should be safe to carry anywhere since it’s not going to jump out and start shooting people.

  • Stefan s.

    Batteries fail you die! Nothing is “smart” these days. You can’t have a computer that doesn’t crash. Now firearms will too!

  • MilMotoXr

    If they’re going to make a $1500+ watch and firearm combo at least make it an Oakley, MTM or bare minimum a Sunto.

  • MilMotoXr

    I stand neutral on this firearm. One thing for sure is I won’t buy it. Just because I won’t buy it, it shouldn’t mean others can’t buy it (starting to sound like a democrat, “if I don’t want it, NOBODY should/can buy it”). The only thing I’m worried what this firearm “could” do is add fuel to the Anti-Gun crowd but it’s just speculation. This gun could be a great choice when you have kid(s) around. It’s just an extra layer of security or problems depending on how you see it.
    Again, it’s not for me. Caliber is puny, not everybody wears watches, expensive, etc. I have kids and their friends running around constantly. I teach my kids gun safety, to not fear guns but respect it. I also use pin activated, hardmounted Gunvaults around my house placed at an adult height level.

    • shawn1999

      Wow… a responsible adult! Too bad we don’t have more of those in this society (including politics). We wouldn’t have half the problems we do today…. Maybe that’s why Bugs Bunny and Tom & Jerry weren’t issues “back in the day” but are all but banned today (because we do want the Gov to raise our children for us so we don’t have to…)

  • Richard

    It would’t take much for Gov with appropriate manufacturers to develop a pistol that cannot be fired even by it’s owner say at Police/Gov Agents. This could use the same technology or even a simple radio transmitter receiver device to block the trigger mechanism. You could have a situation where complete housing blocks are covered and any pistol/rifle/weapon [not knives] could be disabled from firing. To do this only Gov issued trigger disabled weapons can be sold and every other legacy weapon collected and destroyed by Gov.

    • Richard

      Forgot to include that by Gov allowing US residents to bare arms they are still within the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution however they could have full remote control of your Gov issued weapon!

  • BPE383

    I saw a special on this gun, and the person (can’t remember their name) who wrote the law in question said they are will reverse the the law if store owners are wilingl to sell the gun. That was the jest of the interview at least. True or not I don’t know, because I’m not the one who can really do anything about the law.

    One person said something to the effect of, anyone who has the watch can fire the gun. That’s not 100% true. A code has to entered into the watch first. Granted once that code is in, I’m guessing anyone with the watch can fire the gun. But I’m sure if it’s a life or death situation, it will not be easy peasy to get that watch off a person wrist.

  • fredwilliams58

    I will get one of these as soon as they are considered reliable enough that the police and military start using them.

  • So what happens if you have to use your other hand? If someone “on your side” needs to use it?

  • I’d be wanting to see Bloomberg’s guards or the Secret Service using these first.

    Guessing that will never happen.

  • Mongo5339

    shawn1999 – The fact that this website is a private enterprise is irrelevant and has nothing to do with SAR’s comment. He writes, “I guess kitup does not like the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.” complaining about their PC filter for these posts. The fact that they have a right to censor/filter their own posts is not the issue, but the fact that they actually ARE censoring them is! Why should they be afraid of their readers making their case using the Constitution and Bill of Rights, especially since it is germaine to the argument against the subject of this article?

    UNLESS – SAR violated any of the tenets of the Kitup Commenting Policy which is posted at the bottom of the website. Either way, he has a right to complain and Kitup has a right to post his complaints – or not! The validity of his argument remains.

    • Riceball

      As any long time visitor/poster to this site can attest to that KitUp doesn’t do much monitoring. Your deleted posts are most likely due to a glitch in the sites software that randomly deletes post for no apparent reason. You could post a comment saying that you love KitUp and that they are the absolute best site around and you could still get your comment deleted. It’s a known bug and one that, to the best of my knowledge, has yet to be diagnosed much less resolved.

  • Grand Poobah

    As an RFID engineer and gun owner, there’s no way I’d depend on this weapon. RFID is a very promising technology and useful in tracking materials, expensive equipment, and valuable shipments. However, it’s also very susceptible to interference and can be jammed by an assortment of radio frequencies. As a former military officer and concerned American, I know that the government has the technology to jam these devices over a large area, making them worthless in an emergency situation. No thanks, Big Brother.

  • eodjedi

    consider that anything that is trying to pick up a signal can be jammed. So the gun can be jammed using a radio that transmits on the same frequency as the RFID tag. You just have to out power the signal. Any idiot can actually make a jamming device, as there are plans on the internet. Criminals will figure this out, the government already has that capability, this is one reason they are pushing technologies like this. What better way to control guns than stopping “we the peoples'” guns from working.

  • prgrmr01

    This firearm is dangerous to the 2nd Amendment. If all our cell phones can be listened to, what’s to stop the guns from being disabled, ANYWHERE! All at once if anyone needed to. It is operational only because it is wireless.

  • tadchem

    It is useless to simply fret about what *might* be. This is just a ‘heads up’ moment.
    Prepare for the future, plan to use it, and guard your rights as you would your familes.

    • Guest

      Directed to all —- it fixes no known problem —— but it certainly does create one for the lawful, legal
      owner simply trying to enjoy a hobby which also provides self protection.
      Seems to me t6hat it IS a constitutional right.

      Now if they can come up with any device which will predetermine a wanton killer/criminal then I would have some interest..
      Complicating the law abiding citizen’s life and his rights as a first move is simply a liberals ideal.
      Their point is GUN CONTROL regardless of what it costs others (never themselves) and all the other hurdles they can place in the way.

      This IS (or is that WAS) a Constitutional Republic —— NOT a democracy as democracies (simple majority rule) never have worked correctly —–!~


  • smacked

    It just keeps shooting you in the balls.

    I like the concept of safety mechanisms which are reliant upon the function of the weapon. Both passive and active. The electronic safety concept can insure a trigger pull is proper.

    In this case someone is taking things away from you. Eh? How about if you don’t have the watch on, the gun explodes?

  • Mike

    If someone wants to buy one why not? You don’t want your right to bear arms to be infringed, yet it is ok to infringe someone elses right to the arms they want to bear. Pretty hypocritical. To threaten someone who wants to sell them is outrageous. That is the kind of person you do not want armed if there is no law and order. If they don’t get their way the open fire.

  • Beibiboy

    what happens if our government gets corrupt and we try to defend our constitutional right can they just send a signal to disarm all our firearms fuck that

  • beibiboy

    how about if the battery dies right when your going to defend your wife or daughter from being gang rapped and killed.

  • beibiboy

    someone should get the creator of this gun and have a show down with a real gun and see who gets the fist shot off

  • Kurtis E.

    It isn’t a smart gun. It’s a dumb gun.

    It depends on extra parts, easily mislaid. It is electronic, therefore fragile in several ways : radio interference, water, shock, dead batteries, (government) hacking and expired capacitors. It is a .22, so cannot be called a reasonable defense, unless the opponent is a rabbit. It is costly to the point of prohibition. It is attractive only to those who object to people having the means to resist.

    Bottom line : I can make a better gun in my garage for around a hundred bucks. So can you.

    • Kurtis E.

      It’s me again.

      Making my own gun is totally legal. Selling it is another matter entirely. I can make my own bullets too, and legally sell them.

  • Just a thought

    Everyone here seems to think that the sole and exclusive purpose for purchasing a gun is to have it available in the event you need to “defend” yourself against an intruder, or in the event of some catastrophic societal meltdown. In reality, what are the chances that you’ll be faced with an armed intruder in your home, or having to deal with armed incursions due to an EMP strike? I, for one, have concluded the chances are very, very low and accordingly, have personally decided against purchasing a firearm for these reasons.

    In reality, the vast majority of civilian firearm use in America is recreational. Looked at from this perspective, this firearm makes great sense. I’m only going to be using this gun when and where I want to, probably at a gun range or some other venue appropriate for shooting. I might have a real interest in controlling who fires my guns, and when, and this offers a choice for people who otherwise might not purchase guns at all.

  • cylrin

    All I have to day is Jamming signal

    • cylrin

      errr say

  • Karl

    So, an EMP strike could effectively disarm you. Great plan???
    I don’t think that’s going to sit too well with the preppers.

  • Eddie

    If the “smart” gun is controlled by electronics, the government will have the technology to make the guns inoperative whenever they desire, thus gun control.

  • Mitch Gant

    The worrisome issue is not whether this type of gun should be sold, but whether it will be mandated that all weapons must eventually employ the technology. Handcuffing your defense to a second device to activate it which just might not operate or be available at the spur of circumstances or locations seems foolhardy to me.

  • guest

    No way I would own one of these, if I actually need a gun I;m not in the mood or have the time to put on a wrist watch

  • Jay

    Oh really? Cause I like using handguns that rely solely on my previous cleaning of the weapon and knowledge of how to shoot a firearm. I REFUSE to put my trust in electronics that have a chance to fail, compared to a piece of metal that isn’t going to short-circuit on me. That one time that gun fails to recognize you as a malfunction and you die… Well, I suppose it won’t matter for you then.

  • Tazman72

    OK the point is and always has been. A gun is a tool like a hammer. The problem is PEOPLE, not guns.

  • Chris

    So uhm, what police and military organizations are excited about these? Hmm? Hmmmm?

  • pov

    I just read through the comments and . .whoa . . I’m amazed that there can be so many paranoid people posting in one thread.

    Anyway the gun is a first step. Not that great since anyone who grabs the watch can use it. Eventually guns will be keyed to biometric signatures.

  • David

    There are a couple of interesting things associated with this weapon, as well as some common sense issues to consider. First, the gun is designed by a German company. A lot of fine weapons come out of Europe. But realize that owning a weapon in Europe is altogether a different matter. Some weapons such as shotguns are owned by the general populace for hunting purposes only. But hand guns in most of Europe…no. We in the US enjoy a unique freedom in our right to bear arms that most of the western hemisphere do not. So just who is this “smart gun” being developed for?

  • David

    As for the technology; it is certainly in the early stages. Improvements will come. The comments here regarding the watch having to be on the same wrist has the hand on the gun; I’m not sure if that is what the write up indicates. I got the impression the watch has to be in the vacinity, meaning in could possibly be on the opposite wrist, but maybe I’m mistaken. Regardless, that does not mean I ever have intentions of owning one. Yes, it is only in a .22 cal right now, which I find interesting since it is coming from Germany. You would expect it to be in a European cal. But maybe that goes back to the question, just who is this being developed for. I would expect it to eventually be available in other cals. I’m sure that is very dependent on the success of this model.

  • David

    As for use by the military or police; probobly not now. But that may depend on where the technology goes. Consider much of the technology currently being developed for the “smart soldier”. Is this really such a big leap? My suggestion to everyone on this site is to your keep minds open. Not in the sense of accepting the direction the anti-gun left is trying to push us, but by keeping your ears and eyes open to what this may mean to us who believe in the constitution and our right to bare arms. And keep in mind also that technology can be used for both good and bad.