Previous Post
Next Post

“The battle over the nation’s first smart gun has shifted to Maryland, with a Rockville dealer saying he will sell the Armatix iP1 after a California gun store removed the weapon from its shelves to placate angry gun rights activists,” reports. “Andy Raymond, the co-owner of Engage Armament, a store known for its custom assault rifles, said selling the handgun was a ‘really tough decision’ after what happened to Oak Tree Gun Club, which was lambasted by gun owners and National Rifle Association members who fear the new technology will be mandated and will encroach on Second Amendment rights.” That might have something to do with the fact that . . .

Once a “smart gun” is commercially available anywhere in the United States, New Jersey law mandates that all handguns for sale in the Garden State must be “smart guns” in three years.

Given the ferocious blowback that Oak Tree experienced when they stocked the Armatix iP1, what yutz would put his gun business on the line to promote a reviled product? A realist?

“If the same reaction happens here, we’ll be out of business,” [co-owner Andy] Raymond said in an interview.

He’s willing to risk that because Maryland, with its strict gun-control laws, “has already essentially put us out of business.” He also believes that firearms like Armatix’s will expand the market to people who want an ultra-safe gun.

Raymond said he’s on the “right-wing vanguard of gun rights” but is vehemently opposed to gun rights activists arguing against the idea of a smart gun — or any gun.

“To me that is so fricking hypocritical,” Raymond said. “That’s the antithesis of everything that we pro-gun, pro-Second Amendment people should be. You are not supposed to say a gun should be prohibited. Then you are being no different than the anti-gun people who say an AR-15 should be prohibited.”

No one said the P1 shouldn’t be sold. Well, not many people. But gun rights guys and gals aren’t likely to hail the gun stores that do so, are they? Given the New Jersey thing and the possibility that other states or even Uncle Sam could follow suit, destroying the market for “conventional guns” and opening the possibility of a government-controlled “on-off” switch. Andy?

“This is not Armatix screwing over the people of New Jersey,” he said. “It’s the legislature screwing over the people of New Jersey. Bushmaster didn’t screw over the people of Newtown. Adam Lanza did. It’s just disgusting to me to see pro-gun people acting like anti-gunners. What is free if it’s not choice?” . . .

“If this gets more people, especially those on the fence, to go out and enjoy their Second Amendment freedoms, to go sport shooting and realize how much fun it is, then I am all for it,” he said. “This is really not a bad thing.”

Yes, it is. As Mr. Raymond is no doubt discovering as I type.

Previous Post
Next Post


    • I used to buy guns from these people; spent thousands of dollars at their store. Sorry that their business is in the toilet, but yeah, I’m never going to buy a thing from them ever again.

        • “Smart” guns are guns that only let certain people use them. For instance, one model would have the user wear a special bracelet with an RFID chip. If the gun detects the bracelet nearby (presumably a couple inches), it’ll fire. If the bracelet’s too far away, it won’t. To me, it’s kind of like the USFA Zip: it’s an interesting novelty, but it’s trying to fill a non-existant need, and ultimately it’s potentially more dangerous to the owner than is a conventional gun.

      • They haven’t done you really anything wrong, no reason to boycott them. They are just offering another product, if you don’t like it then don’t buy it and it will soon go away quietly.

  1. Consumers vote with their dollars. I’m curious to see how the market will judge this overpriced, underpowered product.

    • I’d wager that in a few decades, the ten or twelve of these things that get sold will be worth a mint to collectors as a curiosity of the ignorant past like those goofy inventions in museums that never really made it.

    • Frankly the sooner Jersey adopts their insane law the better off we’ll be. Once its out and hanging over their already disarmed heads people will have standing to challenge it in court along with crap like Cali’s microstamping as the arbitrary and defacto bans that they are.

      • -1

        New Jersey resident here. We are not completely disarmed just yet, and none of us want to sit around as guinea pigs for years as this moves up the court system or gets ignored by the SCOTUS session after session.

  2. that should read ‘maryland dealer to offer smart gun for sale’. or is some one already counting down their waiting period?

    • That is something to be said about weed or any other money waisting product that doesn’t affect other people. If people waist their money on this “smart” gun, then they are negatively affecting other peoples 2A rights. Especially in NJ!

  3. Andy is right. And he is free to make that decision, just as he is free to deal with the backlash. But I think any backlash is unwarranted. By choosing to sell this gun he is pushing the conversation forwards – he is making us address the crappy laws. Time has proven how foolish it is to sit around and hope that technology can be thwarted indefinitely, especially so to evade a broken law already on the books. So blame the laws and the law-makers. Direct that anger and energy at the legislators, not Andy.

    • The first dead person who dies by this gun failing to fire would be on your head then, feeling that letting it hit the market and fail, to prove the technology is bad and the laws are draconian is foolish.

      • Sigh. Nothing like an emotionally charged over the top response to a discussion on guns.

        Bad legislation should not dictate what guns get sold. THAT IS A FACT.

        I don’t like smart gun tech. I think it’s glitchy and an obvious attempt to placate the anti-gun types that have systematically proven that they cannot be placated until they’ve abolished legal gun ownership.

        But if this guy wants to sell a product he’s legally able to sell, the emotional backlash is the stupid stuff that got folks upset about black rifles on the other side of the aisle.

        If we’re going to throw stones on the lack of logic and reason on the antis side, may as well try our best not to do it from a glass house.

        • Look, I agree, in an ideal world. Sell smart guns all day long. However, we need to be realistic about this. There is a real fight for 2nd Amendment rights in all 50 states, and making a decision like this, is not helping the cause. Putting those guns up for sale after the law is scrubbed would be great, before hand… that’s not helping anything.

        • Sigh. Another commenter who doesn’t know fact from opinion. You don’t get to declare your opinion, CRZ, as to what should be, then artificially validate your own personal opinion by calling it a fact, in all caps no less. Granted, we’re all entitled to our own opinions. However, no one is entitled to his own facts.

          Regarding use of emotion, what the POTG take exception with is the antis’ excessive and exploitative use of raw emotion in furtherance of their hidden agenda, in equal parts ignorance and defiance of facts. That’s an unbridgeable chasm far, far removed from the useful and legitimate role of emotion in helping to make connections which are already substantiated by facts. After all, I happen to love my wife with very deep emotion; but that’s in addition to, not in replacement of, her outstanding qualities as a partner and a mother. Emotion helps cement the already well worthy union.

          So I’m ok with this poster’s invoking some emotion to illustrate the real and well reasoned risks associated with these electronically hobbled products. It’s ok when emotion helps to make a point, so long as emotion isn’t the point itself.

      • The first dead person who dies because of this would have no-one but himself to blame for buying such a thing (or not researching it well enough before he bought it). Isn’t that the whole point of a free country and a free market? People voting on products with their dollars, and being responsible for their own choices.

        • But then if someone dies because of that, the CPSC would be all over the death like a cheap suit.

        • In case you missed it, in NJ smart guns will be the ONLY guns available in 3 years. So in NJ, they get smart guns or they get no guns. Relying on SCOTUS to save this pile isn’t giving me the warm fuzzies either…..

  4. On the one hand, philosophically I agree with him. Ultimately people should be able to buy what they want and the market should decide what’s viable. But because the die has already been cast in New Jersey, and everyone KNOWS that the anti gun crowd will try to shoehorn the damn thing down our throats, that the resistance to it’s entering the market is entirely justified. After all, this is the community saying “no, we don’t want it”, which is NOT the same thing as saying “it should be illegal to make or own one”.

    • The “community saying no” is normally expressed by not buying the product. Not by boycotting the store for selling that product – that is beyond just saying no for yourself, and firmly into the realm of trying to deny the same thing to everyone else (by driving any store that makes it available out of business).

      • Gun stores are part of the community and just as responsible to boycott as the buyers are

      • Seriously? That doesn’t even make sense.

        So it’s one’s personal and acceptable-to-you prerogative to say “no” by not buying this exact product from this store (or any store), but…’s somehow “firmly in the realm” of denying other people their rights if one chooses not to buy anything from this particular store, as by boycotting it? It’s ok to refuse to buy one thing, but it’s anti-democratic and bullying if one refuses to buy anything at all? Good grief. That’s firmly in the realm of asininity.

        Anyone’s free to buy or not buy whatever the hell they want from this store. If they want to coordinate and not buy in unison, that’s their right, as well. It’s called freedom of association. Look it up. If someone goes out of business because of it, so be it. It’s called the free market. Look that up, too. I think you’re confusing “boycott” for “blockade.” This activity involves no physical action on anyone’s part to impede anyone else’s freedom to do business with this store.

        • I agree with a lot of what you’re saying, but, there are two points I wish to address, and unfortunately I had to put my comment here in stead of where I wanted it to go, point one, bad legislation is bad legislation, whether it’s being touted as fact or not makes so little difference it may as well be a snowball in hell. point two, blockade or boycott makes no difference, if the supply/demand curve for current weapons changes too drastically one way or another, the government is going to use whatever change is seen, and mandate something else that everyone will hate. for example, if everyone starts buying these POS “smart” guns, the government will use what foothold they have in MD to push the same laws and mandates into other states, if it goes the other way, they will start pushing the registration laws that have been put into effect onto states such as Idaho, Oregon, and Montana… most of this second point is logical progression, but the first point is strictly common knowledge truth (though common knowledge seems to be going the way of common sense these days)

    • Finally someone hit it. There is a difference between attempting to make something illegal and attempting to dissuade others from doing it.

      Anyone who can’t see the gulf between lobbying for legislation or petitioning a court to rule and simply saying I won’t do business with a certain entity because ‘X’ and think you shouldn’t either is having serious issues with proportionality and distinguishing the difference between that which is political and that which is social.

      Put another way, I don’t smoke pot and don’t think you should either, however I don’t think it ought to be illegal to do so.

      This compares, I don’t think this business should offer this gun for sale because it’s insulting, thus I will not do business with them and will encourage others not to as well. However I believe they have a right to sell the gun and will not attempt to interfere with that in any legal way.

      Consider this, if the antis simply boycotted gun shops and encouraged others to do the same all would be fine and dandy for the POTG. Our rights are intact and the antis get to carry on their social/cultural campaign, which is their right.

      The right of free speech and association exists, the right to keep and bear arms exists, however one does not have a right to a successful business. Success in business does not rise to the level of a right and could not practically be a right anyway.

  5. “…will expand the market to people who want an ultra-safe gun.”


    These things are NOT ‘ultra-safe guns.’

    They are simply guns that are overly complicated, prone to several different kinds of failure, and cost more than they should because they are ‘bleeding edge’ technology.

    Should they try and sell them?


    If they can.

    Let the market decide if they are worthy. If no one is buying them then the companies making them will quit doing so.

    • “These things are NOT ‘ultra-safe guns.’

      They are simply guns that are overly complicated, prone to several different kinds of failure, and cost more than they should because they are ‘bleeding edge’ technology.”

      Yes, this right here – I’d also argue they promote bad safety habits – I can point my gun anywhere I want because I’m not wearing my magical wrist watch!

    • Is this not still an experimental technology? I for one would not be a bit comfortable betting my life on the results of a late-beta test. Windoze was a bad enough experience.

  6. Interesting. I know Andy personally and have shopped at Engage several times over the last few years. He testified against last year’s gun control push here in MD, to no avail. The guy is squarely on our side, and I can even understand his decision. But to be the first guy…

    • This decision says otherwise. Sorry, but actions speak far louder than words.

      • NO. The NJ legislator is responsible for this law, not this guy. If anything he’s giving us a ground to challenge a blatantly unconstitutional law.

        Place the blame on the people who are actually restricting our freedom! Not the people offering you *more* options!

        • I’m glad you guys live in fantasy world, but in the real world, the NJ law was already passed, and while gun rights organizations work to get this law overturned, aiding and abetting this law’s activation WHILE THE LAW IS STILL ON THE BOOKS, is completely in opposition of 2A specific freedom and at a minimum shows a complete lack of concern on their part for anyone but their bottom line. Meanwhile, I’m sure most of you guys wanted the companies to stop selling to LE in restrictive states like Conn, NJ, and NY and wanted Cheaper than Dirt to burn in hell.

      • You have a very strange definition of gun rights, if selling a gun can infringe on them.

    • Ask Andy how drunk or high he was when he thought this was a good idea. He has collectively fucked over 2 state populations in one blow (CA and NJ). Or maybe he knows this damn well, and that so far, he will be the only one able to sell in these markets.

    • If this gets serious discussion on the merits AND the failures of this type of technology, or even if this just gets the discussion rolling on how inane the laws are regarding this technology then I am all for it. Someone has to be the first.

    • Your little gun buddy quisling is only doing this because he’s in Maryland, figures there won’t be a backlash there, that this is the future, anyway, so he may as well get out in front of it and profit from the start. Maybe he’ll get some LEO contracts the traditional firearms, you know, the ones that work and actually save lives.

      I’ve heard of “first adopters” before, but this guy is more of a “first ‘surrenderer’.” I guess it’s only his steadfast friendship with the 2A community that he at least shows us the respect of stabbing us in the front, huh? With friends like that, who needs storm troopers?

    • I cannot believe all the moronic statements made by some on here supporting this guy. As a business owner, sure he can sell whatever he wants but don’t any of you dare say he’s a “good guy” or “brilliant” and knows what he’s doing. This guy is an enemy of the 2A community and cause. Just because you can do something doesn’t make it the right thing to do.

      This “smart gun” BS will infiltrate all states in the future and spread like cancer. Saying screw NJ because it doesn’t affect you personally is what’s wrong with people. We should stand together just like with CT and NY on all gun issues not just the ones that are inconvenient for you.

      Finally, as a NJ resident who has gone to Trenton several times in opposition of gun control bills and calls and writes representatives, there is no changing the legislators when you are surrounded by liberals.

      Personally, I’ll be calling this guy’s shop to give him a piece of my mind. Hope his business suffers severely. Yes, this angers me.

      • “The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.”
        ― Abraham Lincoln

  7. I am not optimistic that this will lead to any push to repeal the smart gun law. One only has to look at California with their handgun roster and now microstamping. Nobody is going to repeal that law because there are more of “them” than there are of “us” and the votes to get “them” out are going to be close to impossible.

    • That would depend on if the SCOTUS can hand us a victory in Drake. With a favorable Drake ruling, there will be many more CCW permit holders in the game, and more people knowing what they really want in a defensive weapon (IE – no BS “smart guns”) will mean more voters that will put pressure on the legislature. Why else is the NJ AG so scared about the SCOTUS ruling?

      • SCOTUS won’t touch Drake. They were careful to stay away from actually requiring politicians to follow the “shall not be infringed” portion of the Second Amendment in DC v Heller and McDonald v Chicago. SCOTUS won’t take away that kind of power from the politicians who put them in office – we likely won’t see another Second Amendment case in front of SCOTUS for decades.

        • While I agree that the Supreme Court, which has long since abandoned the Constitution and any pretense to uphold it, won’t touch Drake, I don’t see that they have any loyalty to any politicians, either. What realistic recourse does any senator or president, especially once out of office, have against any Supreme Court justice?

        • You realize that the Justices serve for life, right? Not answerable to any other branch of government and all that?

  8. This is akin to making a 5.45 pistol and not giving a damn that doing so will shut off the import of cheap surplus ammo due to the interpretation and implementation of stupid laws by a bureaucratic organization that lacks any oversight. You hurt more people than you help.

  9. “I have learned to love my shackles. They are a token of the love Dear Leader has for me.”

    Memorize and repeat this phrase whenever asked how you feel about such topics.

  10. You guys don’t realize how much Maryland is in the pocket of the Dems. Virginia is the closest, and safest, place to go.

    • Virginia is in trouble too with their Governor and AG now Dem and eyeing control. A Clinton Bundler no less. I live in Maryland and looking to get out asap. I know a few that were fleeing to WV or PA to get away from the mess here. Living here is like living behind enemy lines, they drink the kool-aid and eat the brownies, only a few of us can converse freely without getting strange looks. Working here in this state is stressful if you don’t follow the line.

  11. I wonder if Bloomberg, Buffett or one of the grassroots billionaire everyman of Everytown will buy one? Theyre pretty much the only people who could afford one.

  12. No one said the P1 shouldn’t be sold.

    I’ll say it – as long as laws such as New Jersey’s are on the book, it shouldn’t be sold. What kind of sociopath would put making a few bucks over the civil rights of millions?

    If such laws didn’t exist, then I would have no problem with a store selling it. However, that’s not a world we live in.

    • Well, perhaps selling the gun and triggering the law will allow it to go to court and be overturned.

  13. Dumbest. Idea. Ever.

    Who in the heck is going hand over their fingerprints and fees in MD to get an HQL to get a smart gun?

    Who in VA comes to MD to buy handguns?

    I wonder if the owner is setting up for a big see I told you no would buy this crap but we tried.

  14. “… “If this gets more people, especially those on the fence, to go out and enjoy their Second Amendment freedoms, to go sport shooting …”

    Yes, he went there … the 2A is all about ‘sport shooting’ duncha know? Note also the mention of 2A “freedoms”, not RIGHTS … yes, I think words matter.

    • If this wee truly about offering more choice then I am all for it. But with the government trying to get a kill switch for phones and the Internet. I am highly dubious of this particular “choice.” Also Jersey’s law will now go I to effect, removing CHOICE from the slaves in jersey. Effectively banning ALL firearms except this unreliable piece of tech.

  15. I severely want to get my hands on one of these just to see how easy it is to break through it.

    • I with you. Though it may be illegal in some jurisdictions to deactivate the smart safety, I’ll bet it’s a lot easier to do than converting a semi auto rifle to full, and that’s not exactly hard.

  16. The point is this technology is not good for us and never will be. Therefore the gun community should not support this technology with any money. If there is no market for a product then there will be no development of the product.

    Gun dealers have as much responsibility as the buyers do in creating or not creating a market for this technology. Whether engage likes it or not, they are opening a door that is funding the development of a product that will completely change how reliable and controlled our firearms are.

  17. “The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.”

    V.I. Lenin

    Ropes, smart guns, whatever. Some things never change.

  18. Maybe his business plan is to go out of business. My son lives in the People’s Republic of Maryland. Ex military, carried a gun in the Middle east. Works for DOD. Won’t have guns because he’s got 3 kids. Maybe this crap would “safe enough” for him.LOL

  19. The only good thing about this is that it will force New Jersey to either enforce it’s idiotic law (and almost certainly have it thrown out in the courts) or not enforce it and thus show it to be ridiculous.

  20. I have guns that are around 100 years old. You pull the trigger and it goes boom. 100 years from now if I keep them stored properly my great-great grandkids can grab the gun, pull the trigger, and it will go boom. Lets see how a smart guns works in 20-30 years. Where an obsolete design in gun technology will still get the job done, a smart gun with dead electronics becomes an outdated, crappy paper weight.

  21. “This is not Armatix screwing over the people of New Jersey,” he said. “It’s the legislature screwing over the people of New Jersey” Andy, you seem to have forgot one person thats screwing the people of NJ over. Heres a hint its you!

    • Maybe the title of this post should read: “Dumb Maryland Dealer to Sell Smart Gun”

      • Lighten up. He’s been in business in Montgomery County for 30 years. It finally rubbed off.

  22. In a state where Demoncrats outregister Repubes 3 to 1, nothing is going to change the Gesztapo State if the pols don’t think their jobs are threatened.

  23. The store owner is pro money……. for him. That is the definition of selling out.

    • Now, here I thought selling out was compromising one’s principles and ethics in the pursuit of money. This owner states that by selling this gun he may doom his business. That’s the opposite of selling out.

      • This won’t doom his business. That and the rest of his casuistry is fooling no one but himself. Like most men, he believes himself to be basically honest and principled. Doing something like this requires a massive dose of denial to get him through the night. If he’s still guilt tripping come morning, then he can cry all the way to the bank. There’s no risk whatsoever to his business. If anything, he’ll become a minor celebrity with a book deal and hefty advance funded by Bloomie.

  24. Good luck to them, I for one will never buy a “smart gun” nor will I ever be forced to buy one.

  25. Let’s see, over a grand for for a 22cal pistol. I think that is a turn off from the get go.
    Never mind the fact there will be backlash.
    He will go out of business in short order, people protest with their wallets.
    He has a right to do what he wants, and Armatix is trying to sell a product, which isn’t 100% reliable to a market which doesn’t really want it. Having the ticking time bomb in legislation makes it even worse.
    If it grew naturally, and was proven, free market would handle the rest.
    This however, is not the case. I wish them well, but reality is, they probably just assured themselves a fire sale and going out of business in short order.

  26. So do any NJ police departments use “smart guns”? I would think the legislature should mandate that first.

    • Maybe the pro-gunners should lobby for a law that requires the NJ cops to buy their arms from NJ dealers. Then see if the Lege would force NJ dealers to sell only “smart guns”…

  27. I wouldn’t pay $1500 for a .22 LR pistol that has a good chance of not working when I need it to work. Or that the part that permits it to work could be lost, stolen, or not on me at the moment. My Px4 has a 99 percent or higher chance of working correctly if I pulled it from it’s place of concealment and fired it right now. This P1? Not so much. So many points of failure.

  28. “after a California gun store removed the weapon from its shelves to placate angry gun rights activists,”

    How amazing. Start off with the wrong action, on the wrong premise, and take it from there.

  29. by selling these things, he’s giving ammo to the anti. Now they can point to this shop and say “Look. Smart guns. They must be a good idea. They’re selling them in Maryland. So we can make them mandatory now.”

  30. He needs to sell this. The gun costs an arm and a leg. That won’t change. In three years, only the wealthy can legally buy a handgun in the Nation’s Armpit. A defacto ban on handgun ownership. As Heller showed us, weapons in common use cannot be banned. Break out the poll tax arguments if you have to.

  31. I agree with Mr. Raymond that he certainly has every right to sell it. Sooner or later some store was going to sell a “smart gun” and trigger that idiotic NJ law, but given the fact that this is a nearly $2,000 .22lr pistol (as we all know a good .22 can be had for south of $300) which has absolutely no independent testing to document reliability, along with all of the other things consumers look for in a new firearm, I think he’s going to create a lot of fuss for very little profit. I just don’t get it from a business standpoint.

    • Want to bet he is getting paid to sell the gun? Given the backlash, it is just stupid for any gun store to sell it. Look at the backlash on The Remington R51. The gun community will tolerate a lot of crap.

      For $2000 there are a hell of a lot of nice 1911’s that can be had for that amount of money.

      • I think you’re on to something. The WaPo article states that Raymond & his store already had a relationship with armatix, helping them import the first pistols into the U.S. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they were being paid handsomely to do this, with armatix’s goal being a “captive market” in NJ in 3 years time. Like some others have said though, that law will plainly violate the “common use” part of Heller and most likely be struck down once in effect.

      • Isn’t that a bit of an oxymoron for the retail business? Of course he’s “being paid”. That’s rather the point of running a retail business.

      • Publius, NO. It is the fault ONLY of THE PEOPLE OF NJ (and the Citizens of other states with similar laws).

        Those PEOPLE can rise up and reclaim their Rights AT ANY TIME.

        It can NOT be any other way.

        And I know I’m correct, because I used many all-caps words to prove it!

        • Oops, posted that in the wrong spot and my work firewall won’t let me request deletion. Mods, please remove the comment above this.

      • Maybe the continued viability of his business license may have some little thing to do with his decision. Or the Zoning Board possibly changing the rules on him. After all, Maryland has the finest government money can buy…

      • I was just about to say the same thing, about the price being comparable to a nice 1911; you beat me to it.

  32. “If the same reaction happens here, we’ll be out of business,” [co-owner Andy] Raymond said in an interview.

    And there will be plenty of people happy to help you hang the “Out of Business” sign.

    • Yeahhhhh I’m going to have to say that if you’re intentionally stripping every citizen in NJ of their right to keep and bear arms, you’re not pro-gun.

      • *He* didn’t do that! The NJ legislator did!

        We need to be very clear about this because we need to stop caving in to arbitrary restrictions like this. The same thing happened with ammunition, the government says we can’t import steel core pistol ammo, someone makes a pistol that shoots 5.45, and people get mad at the gun designer? Why not get made at the freaking government that passed the asinine law against steel core ammo!?!

        We are a hypocritical bunch sometimes.

        • No, this is HIS fault because he knew the atrocious law. As long as someone like him doesn’t sell the gun, then the NJ law is meaningless. He chose to active the timer on the nuclear bomb looming over the rights of people living in NJ and he said “Screw it, I’ll sacrifice their rights to make a few bucks.”

          Yes, the NJ legislature passed the bad law, but this scumbag is the one who’s choosing to activate it.

        • “Yes, the NJ legislature passed the bad law, but this scumbag is the one who’s choosing to activate it.”

          The NJ legislature is the one that chose to make the law activatable for routine economic activity. You should place blame where it belongs – which is to say, solely with the legislators.

        • Publius, NO. It is the fault ONLY of THE PEOPLE OF NJ (and the Citizens of other states with similar laws).

          Those PEOPLE can rise up and reclaim their Rights AT ANY TIME.

          It can NOT be any other way.

          And I know I’m correct, because I used many all-caps words to prove it!

        • Let’s hope that we all need to realize that we are ONE in this together. Every citizen of every state should be cognizant of all guns laws around the nation, for it is becoming an “us versus them” situation. States can pass bad laws because in many there is a majority that is in power to do so unfettered. We can all guess those blue states. WHY help them?

  33. Apr 14 ·
    Whoa! A customer just brought this MagTactical lower in. Cracked during firing. No es bueno my friends. New stuff can be really cool but there is always a quality curve while bugs get sorted out.

    38 Likes·29 Comments

    That was taken from their Facebook page. I guess they don’t mind their customers being the beta testers for smart gun tech despite the warning given above about a different product.

    • It didn’t say they sold it, just that it was brought into the shop fool.

      • Check your reading comprehension idiot. I never implied, nor did the facebook post, that they sold the bum lower. They gave a warning about possible bugs in new tech then turn around and start selling something with no track record.

    • More oxymoron statements.

      Every retail product ALWAYS has a first-time-to-market, and there are NEVER any 100% guarantees for ANY product, whether new OR time-tested.

      • I don’t think that word means what you think it does. I eagerly await your review of the gun…

  34. I dunno, seems to me if you train hosses, you oughta be smarter than the hoss. And if you sell “smart guns” you oughta be smarter than the gun. As dumb as the Armatix is, I don’t think Mr. Raymond qualifies as “smarter”. At least not based on this decision. Even without the controversy, who would buy the damned piece of small-caliber unreliable tech with that butt-ugly watch (sold separately) you have to wear with it?.

  35. He has a right to sell it, just as I have the right not to buy it

    I don’t think that this is a good idea anyway, sorta like those ak pistols, I see a bunch of politicians pointing at this and saying “see, it works!”

  36. Maybe this is what it will take to wake people up enough to take back their Rights. Hopefully it works, and if so, kudo’s to this store owner.

    Otherwise, nothing lost but more apathy.

  37. I’ve met Andy personally and can say he is as pro 2A as they come. He’s put a lot of time and money into fighting for our rights in MD.

    • And he just p!ssed all that away. One “AWSH!T” erases ALL the “ATTABOYs.”

  38. Anyone who decides to sell this pos will be out of business within a year. Unless of course they have deep pockets and decide to just operate without customers and just coast on their savings until they’re done. In my opinion this is just a PR stunt for the store. I guarantee you that they will pretend to be carrying it and after the backlash from the customers they will pretend to side with them and not carry it. All the while they will have tons of free PR… Regardless, this POS disgusts me. I will not shop within 100 feet of any store who even thinks it’s a good idea… just saying…

  39. I’m still waiting to see a real review of this thing. And beyond I want to see a review that includes a complete well done tear down of one of these things to see how exactly it works.

  40. It would be a different matter if the New Jersey law didn’t go into effect unless somebody actually bought some of these guns, or they represented a certain percentage of sales… (a non-zero percentage)

  41. Because of the terrible NJ law and the fact that the courts very well may uphold it, I think he is an enemy of gun rights. The “in common use” argument is laughable. Multiple courts have acknowledged the “in common use” argument and yet STILL upheld the assault weapons bans. To be so sure that courts will declare “smart guns ” unconstitutional is a huge gamble.

    And his logic is bogus. First of all, in doing this, he is eliminating choice for NJ owners. Secondly, no one is against choice, they are against adherence to a law that is going to end choice.

    • Fuck New Jersy gun owners, and fuck gun owners in all the other states. Every time I ever asked for help getting a stupid and needless “no sales to MD” policy revoked, I got “lolz, move out of your slave state”. I could only wish this would fuck over more than people in New Jersey, because maybe they’d see that YOU HAVE TO HELP EVEN WHEN IT DOESN’T DIRECTLY MATTER TO YOUR FREEDOM.

      I hope Andy sells a million of these things. He’s done more to fight for Marylanders’ gun rights than all of you haters combined.

      • I have never had that attitude. I care about gun rights everywhere. And unless this guy has some underlying logic to his selling this gun, he is only harming gun rights.

  42. I’m guessing that several years from now USED guns (ie, private transfer) will hold their value MUCH better, as they’ll be the “DUMB” guns that just plain work. So I guess it could be considered economically prudent to buy a bunch of standard guns now and keep them “mint, in box.” Of course, assuming such private transfers are not regulated by then.

  43. I’ll just leave this here…Andy during SB281 testimony here in MD. He is both a very out- and well-spoken activist…

  44. I’m just waiting for the instructions to be available on the internet for building a portable jamming device designed to deactivate this pistol. It’s going to happen, sooner or later. All “smart” guns based on RFID technology are in principle vulnerable to this.

    • You must have posted this while I was typing. So at least two people thought of this already. This technology is too easily defeated.

  45. How long before someone creates a jammer for the signal? Should be easy and cheap to make.

  46. For those so adamantly opposed to the sale of this firearm I have a question:

    How is anyone in New Jersey supposed to have legal standing to challenge the smartgun law if it is never triggered?

    Standing is a real issue when challenging unconstitutional laws, many cases have been tossed by the courts due to lack of standing.

    As Abraham Lincoln once said, “The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.”

    • And what happens then if the court upholds it, as they have done with the assault weapons bans thus far?

  47. Smart gun or no smart gun I’m getting a .357 revolver and I don’t care what the state says.

  48. Unless and until the police or the military start using them en-masse — and we can actually get our paws on “civvie-friendly” versions — then, no. I want something that won’t fail in the dozen different ways that a smart gun can and will fail. There are already enough ways for Murphy’s Law to take effect.

    • Even if the military and police did start adopting them and the technology became more affordable and reliable, I STILL wouldn’t buy them. A firearm is a simplistic technology in many ways. That’s one of the reasons shotguns are so popular for example. I want my firearms to remain that way.

  49. Hopefully pena v cid goes to the SCOTUS and is decided in our favor. That would eliminate stupid laws like the one in NJ.

    As far as this shop goes, I think that they are making a terrible business choice.

  50. I would be moderately interested in picking one up at a closeout price, just to examine mechanics of it and store it as a collectors piece like a modern Dardick pistol or Johnson rifle. Just something for the ideas that didn’t really take off category for my safe.

  51. Hey Andy, have the MSP and MOCO Police been beating down your doors clamoring for your iP1s yet?


  52. The market will decide the electro-gun’s place. We are the market.
    If not Engage doesn’t sell them, someone else will. It’s inevitable.
    Let the market decide, and decide it will.

    The reactions I’m reading are akin to lefties all in a wad because of Cody Wilson’s 3D printed boogeyman Liberator. The Armatix has achieved the same level psychological mind-fvck.

    Our state of MD, and others like NJ, CA, CT, and NY do not represent the face of 2A restoration. They’re all desperate outliers devoid of proper representation that will not succeed forever in their current modes of 2A restriction.

    Personally, like the Liberator, I think the thing is physically garbage. Betting your life on it doesn’t make any sense to me. It likely won’t be bought too much though, considering it’s an $1800 (essentially $2200 for a first-time buyer in MD…) handgun that shoots .22, when usually these caliber handguns can be had for less than $300 in most cases…

    • I live in NJ and can’t move out due to family issues. The NJ law says once a smart gun is on market the clock starts on the gun ban – it doesn’t have to work, it can be taken off the market but three years later no more handguns unless they are “smart guns”. I put up with enough crap from NJ politicians I don’t need gun rights people in other states making things worse here.

      • So stampeding on the rights of a private business (or businesses) because of a law you can choose NOT TO ABIDE by — NY and CT residents are doing pretty damn good right now practicing this — is OK? It’s not OK.

        Is everyone going to manage to squash every FFL that starts selling these or similar? Nope. If you think your legislators are waiting for this gun to go on sale to enact that law, you’re nuts. If that representation doesn’t change and one of these guns doesn’t hit the market, they’ll find another way to infringe your rights.

        In MD, we killed the penalties like those in NY and CT from being passed into law. We have a governor and a legislature that’s so far been determined to limit the amount of privately owned firearms in state. We prevented more bad laws from being passed this year, one of which would have led to GPS tracking being built into firearms…

        If not Engage, another FFL. If no FFL sells them, more laws anyways. Take the fight back towards egregious lawmakers, not FFLs. Remember, you have a RINO governor who’s lining up for a presidential run… Imagine the national backlash if a GOP candidate lets handguns disappear of the market under his watch…

    • Those are some very populous states though, so I wouldn’t necessarily call them “outliers.”

      • Compared to the scope of 2A rights the majority of the Country has, they certainly are. Go back 30 years and carry of any kind was rare… Look at today…

        Who would have thought Illinois would be shall-f-ing-issue???? Call me an optimist, but if that can be achieved, so too can the tramplers of the 2A be defeated.

  53. Once “smart gun” goes on market clock starts to ban of all non “smart guns” in NJ Even if they only sell one and it is withdrawn from market. We have to convince him not to even sell one because he will be working with gun haters. Sure he didn’t pass law but so what.

    • I don’t think so. They were on the list of places I was going to stop at this weekend on my quest for a new gun.

      Not any more.

  54. One thing, but for those so sure that this law will be shot down by the courts, I wouldn’t be so sure. For one, the “in common use” argument has not stopped the courts from upholding “assault weapon” bans. Similarly, the same reasoning could be used with regards to this law, because right now, it effects only hand guns. A court could say something like, “This court recognizes that hand guns without smart technology are very much weapons in common use. But this court also recognizes that this law does not apply to rifles and shotguns, which are very much also in common use as self-defense weapons. Therefore, this court does not see it that this law infringes on one’s Second Amendment protected right to self-defense.”

    In upholding the D.C. “assault weapons” ban, the court relied on a study conducted by the BRADY Campaign of all groups, and used that to argue that semiautomatic guns, despite being in common use, are so dangerous, that they can be banned anyway.

    The anti-gunners want guns with microstamping, GPS tracking devices, and so-called “smart-gun” technology.

    • First off, I’m not sure what ‘Assault Weapons Ban’ the court upheld or what court you’re speaking of?

      If you’re talking about SCOTUS then the decision is clear, those guns in common use cannot be banned. Given that smart guns aren’t in common use but all common types of handguns are by definition in common use NJ’s law is a non starter. Based on the decision in Heller, which specifically indicated that handguns are ‘arms’ for the purposes of the 2A this isn’t a case likely to make it to SCOTUS, since the precedent is clear and the lower courts should have no trouble striking down the de facto handgun ban that the NJ law would create.

      • A California court upheld a ban on AK-47-type rifles. A court also upheld the Washington D.C. assault weapons ban. A judge in New York also just recently upheld that state’s assault weapons ban. So I’ll believe it when I see it.

  55. very disappointing, since it’s a nice shop and i see some portion of his argument. and has been stated, they have done a lot of legitimately good stuff for MD gun owners. but anyone that’s arguing some $1800 combo is going to get a bunch of new people into sport shooting is not pitching an entirely strong argument.

    and since i can definitely see some MD legislators using a combination of “local shop stocks this” and “other states passed laws saying smart guns rule” to slam us with smart gun laws in the future, i think i won’t be patronizing a shop that will stock such a product in the future.

    • It’s already the law here, friend.

      “(d) Report. —

      (1) The Handgun Roster Board annually shall:
      (i) review the status of personalized handgun technology; and

      (ii) on or before July 1, report its findings to the Governor and, in accordance with § 2-1246 of the State Government Article, to the General Assembly.
      (2) In reviewing the status of personalized handgun technology under paragraph (1) of this subsection, the Handgun Roster Board shall consider:
      (i) the number and variety of models and calibers of personalized handguns that are available for sale;

      (ii) each study, analysis, or other evaluation of personalized handguns conducted or commissioned by:
      1. the National Institute of Justice;

      2. a federal, State, or local law enforcement laboratory; or

      3. any other entity with an expertise in handgun technology; and
      (iii) any other information that the Handgun Roster Board considers relevant.”

      It’s inevitable, regardless of who starts selling them. It’s our job as Marylanders to go after and replace the lawmakers and who make this crap up, not our FFL holders, whom have all seen their businesses falter since the enactment of SB281 (FSA2013). We’re watching MD’s plan of choking the dealers slowly start to work. It’s a gun. It may suck, but that’s besides the point. Anti-gunners don’t want private citizens owning anything that goes bang, and to that end this pistol is a slap in the face to them.

      • fair point, but that is still quite a bit different from the scenario in NJ.
        and i agree the lawmakers are primarily to blame. but you can’t help them screw over gun owners in the state and hold your hands up and say “it’s not my fault.”

  56. Sorry Andy, but you’ve blown all the good will you had with me (I was a regular shopper in your old store in Kensington). I guess I’ll stick with Mark at 2A Sales in Jessup.

    P.s. There are ways around MD laws, legal ways.

  57. Facts:
    1. The Armatix pistol has not been and never will be offered for sale by Engage Armament.
    2. Engage Armament is strictly pro-gun. Any possible repercussions in New Jersey are completely unintended and not the responsibility of a small business.
    3. Engage Armament is not seeking to capitalize on “smart” guns, especially not at the expense of other peoples’ rights.
    4. Andy has received death threats over this issue. He is the last person to ever screw over the gun community. Those people harboring ill-will toward Andy are seriously misguided and should re-direct their rage towards their representatives who made these anti-gun laws to begin with.

    You complacent, hypocritical, armchair activists can go screw yourselves.

    • WIsh the comment section showed the most recent comment first. That way more people can read/listen to Andy’s exact words versus a Washington Post article

  58. What happens in NJ/NY usually ends up happening here (Maryland). Heck somtimes all three states get into a race to see who can enact bad laws the fastest (NY usually wins). NJ is already screwed, but I would bet at least a dollar that smart guns become a legislative issue next session in MD because of this. As a lifelong resident of MD, I know how that sort of legislative issue goes… parliamentary rules suspended and bills rushed through after being voted down.

  59. Excellent commentary Robert. You are correct, Mr. Raymond apparently is a yutz. He can’t claim ignorance or that he was duped on this one. Something or someone made him sell these. And for what? How many would he actually sell??? People who buy guns, shoot them. They appreciate the modern advances in a firearm that makes them work so well, and are so reliable. There is nothing the Armatix pistol offers technologically in the way of sights, function, caliber, reliability, etc., other than the fact it is “smart.” It’s a gimmick, and plays right into the hands of politicians who hate conventional guns.

  60. For a gun store owner, he sure is uneducated about the Second Amendment.

    “If this gets more people, especially those on the fence, to go out and enjoy their Second Amendment freedoms, to go sport shooting and realize how much fun it is, then I am all for it,” he said.

    It’s not about sport shooting.

    • I’m willing to give him a pass on that particular comment, though. He could be referring to who his customer base is. Maybe THEY are sports shooters who don’t really care about the Second Amendment per se.

      As a business owner, I suppose his goal is to sell guns. If that segment is an untapped market, it makes sense for his copy to try to appeal / attract sales in that area.

      I’m not dismissing your point, but I think this statement on its own does not imply anything one way or another about his 2A views.

  61. Me thinks there may be a handful of instances where this technology makes sense for a family.
    Should these weapons become the ‘law of the land’ though, you can bet the gubmint will develop the ability to have an ‘on off switch’ as someone mentioned earlier. Biggest problem is the home invader crooks will beat them to it.
    It also adds a whole new layer to the ‘fail to fire’ things that can go wrong.
    I have no problem with a store selling these.
    I do have a problem with a populace that elects the un-American morons that support trying to mandate crap like this.

    • “Me thinks there may be a handful of instances where this technology makes sense for a family.”

      Off loading personal responsibility and safety discipline to technology does not, in my opinion, make sense for a family.

      This is a step on a slippery slope, and one that we’ve been on for some time. The use of tech has a tendency to replace…thinking…and lowers diligence. That’s my observation, anyway.

      A good example is traffic lights. Though people run red lights all the time, and cause collisions doing so, people do seem to drive with an expectation that it is “safe” to enter an intersection just because the light is green.

      Another is anti-lock brakes on cars. The tech does fail and there are times that it is not ‘better’ anyway, but people are no longer taught (not in a way that sticks with them, at least) proper braking.

      Here’s a more general look at the problem by a writer far, far, far better than me, Asimov’s “The Feeling of Power”:

      I’d much rather teach my children gun safety (and I do teach my children that) and put the standard of expectation very high on them that they WILL obey these safety rules without question or exception, than to ignore all that supposedly secure in the though that the so-called “smart device” will do the protecting for me.

      Obviously, some users of such a device will do both in a layered approach. But many will not. Many will adopt a “they can’t shoot that gun” attitude based on the expectation the tech creates. And that’s very, very bad. For example, what happens then why such a child encounters a non-‘smart’ gun without the tech?

      Tech like this is an illusion. It serves no fundamental purpose. Strip away the shininess and the marketing speak (and legislative speak) and there is nothing of substance. That’s not “good tech.”

      • All good and apropos points JR. However, if these firearms can add a bit to the comfort level of folks who are otherwise un-defended in their homes, I count is as a win.
        Just pray they work when needed.
        And it’s a fair bet accidental discharges with these firearms isn’t gonna be 100% foolproof either.

        • Yeah, that’s another big concern with tech like this.

          So, what’s the next step when the tech fails and someone “accidentally” kills someone else with one of these ‘smart guns’? Slippery slope, indeed.

  62. Once a major agency like the Secret Service, FBI, NYPD, LAPD or something similar has 5-10 years’ experience demonstrating the safety and efficacy of these “smart” guns, get back to me and I’ll see what I think.

  63. the problem is, this starts the “in common use” of smartguns and empowers hoplophobic legislatures to promote more of the same

  64. Andy’s a great gun guy and a great dealer. I gladly bought my SAM-7R from him and would do so again with another if I had the option. I don’t blame him on this, I blame both MD and NJ for their idiotic gun laws…and you can’t fight the constitutionality of a law if it’s not in effect. We could have lost Heller, etc, but that wasn’t a reason to fight the laws in DC to begin with.

  65. I may not agree with his decision to sell a “smart gun” (and I do absolutely not), but I would defend with my life his right to sell it.

    So-called gun rights advocates who turn on him, or for that matter, the guy who made 5.45×39 pistol, remind me of slaves turning on the one among them who was brave enough to try and escape. It sickens me.

  66. Sell the gun and to hell with what the anti-gunners say. Oh, and if you are pro-guns except for “smartguns” then you are as much anti-gun as any of the people who are pro-gun except for “scary lookin assault guns”. And, you are anti-second amendment to boot.

    There isn’t any halfstepping allowed. If you don’t like the NJ law, then go to NJ and change it.

    Sounds like a bunch of fair weather folks to me.

  67. From my limited understanding of how the NJ law was written: I was just thinking about the New Jersey law from a “Devil’s Advocate” point of view. Would it be possible for a pro-gun control person to acquire a Federal Firearms License, establish a “Gun Store” and sell this weapon to another pro-gun control person, thus activating the NJ law?

  68. if the Government requires backdoors into encryption, who is to say they won’t require a “backdoor” that shuts off all smart guns? or at least, all smart guns that aren’t in their hands? a powerful radio scrambler might make all RFID smart guns into paperweights…if smart gun tech becomes mandatory, just how long do you think it will be until EVERY patrolman, every police cruiser, every SWAT MRAP vehicle carries a “smart-gun disabler” as a matter of principle?

Comments are closed.