- Journal Archives
- Volume 17
- Volume 16
- Volume 15
- Volume 14
- Volume 13
- Volume 12
- Volume 11
- Volume 10
- Volume 9
- Volume 8
- Volume 7
- Volume 6
- Volume 5
- Volume 4
- Volume 3
- Volume 2
- Volume 1
A California firearm store just released a new and innovative product for its customers: America’s first “smart” gun. Unlike other guns on store shelves, the Armatix iP1 comes with an accessorized water-proof watch. When this watch is within close enough range of the gun, a green light appears on the gun’s handle, effectively enabling its operator to use the gun as he or she pleases. Once the gun loses contact with the watch, however, the gun automatically deactivates and is rendered useless.
Advocates of the new smart gun posit the device is akin to cars’ airbags and that gun owners will thus demand these features in hopes of reducing the casualty rate of gun violence. Critics, though, are skeptical of the device’s utility and fear what will happen if the device fails when a homeowner encounters an intruder in his or her home.
Regardless of the debate surrounding the utility of such devices as the Armatix iP1, there is no doubt that smart guns could have a significant impact on society. James Mitchell, a pro-gun enthusiast and owner of a gun club outside of Los Angeles, imagines that these technologies “could revolutionize the gun industry.”
Legislators around the country have taken note of the potential value these smart guns could provide their constituents. Back in 2000, the right-leaning New Jersey State Senate passed the Childproof Handgun Bill, which mandates that all handguns sold in the state be childproof (within three years of the Attorney General of New Jersey concluding that such childproof guns are available and can be purchased on the open market). Last year in California, a similar bill made its way through the State Senate. And even at the federal level, Congressman John Tierney (D. Mass.) has introduced such a bill.
Only time will tell whether other legislatures around the country will mandate that all handguns sold must contain smart-like capabilities of some sort. Should they enact such legislation, though, I wonder whether the Second Amendment will soon be interpreted as only protecting a citizen’s right to bear “smart” arms.
Recent Blog Posts
- EU Charges Google with Antitrust Violations
- After Adobe, will more data breach cases survive a standing challenge?
- Can the FCC Create Net Neutrality?
- AT&T Levied with the Largest Privacy and Data Security Action the FCC has Ever Taken
- MLBPA Contemplates Legal Action Against the Cubs
- Monday Morning JETLawg
Tagsadvertising antitrust Apple books career celebrities contracts copyright copyright infringement courts creative content criminal law entertainment Facebook FCC film/television financial First Amendment games Google government intellectual property internet JETLaw journalism lawsuits legislation media medicine Monday Morning JETLawg music NFL patents privacy progress publicity rights radio social networking sports Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) technology telecommunications trademarks Twitter U.S. Constitution