Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Thursday October 20 2016, @03:08AM   Printer-friendly

German firearms manufacturer Armatix LLC is planning to release its second smart gun in the U.S. next year after sales of its first model -- the .22 caliber iP1 -- were quashed by pressure from some gun owners and gun rights advocates who saw it as a threat to Second Amendment freedoms.

Unlike the iP1, which used RFID technology, the new iP9 9mm semi-automatic pistol will have a fingerprint reader. The iP9 will be available in mid-2017, according to Wolfgang Tweraser, CEO and president of Amratix LLC.

How long before the smart guns go all WOPR?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 20 2016, @03:08PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 20 2016, @03:08PM (#416702)

    Yeah, but that law IS unconstitutional, and WILL be struck down, so it doesn't matter

    In order to strike a law down using the courts, a case involving the law must be brought to the courts. The person bringing the case to the courts needs to have standing to do so, which usually means the person has had criminal charges levied at them!

    So, unless you like the idea of a dice roll with your own meager resources versus the effectively unlimited resources of government which also has armed agents with carte blanche to ultimately kill you if you resist - it DOES matter!

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 20 2016, @03:58PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 20 2016, @03:58PM (#416734)

    I guess the manufacturer of a non-smart gun who wants to sell it in that state would have a standing. And probably also enough money to fight in court. And not more to lose than it pays for the lawsuit (when losing, the manufacturer is in no worse position than before — actually the company image effect alone might be worth the cost of the lawsuit, as their customers are surely not the proponents of gun control), but much to win (namely a market).