Gun Grabbing Politicians Endorsed Smart Gun Company Files Chapter 11 Restructuring
Well, here’s some failed gun news I actually like to hear. A gun company seeking to produce a smart gun has filed chapter 11 restructuring.
Armatix, makers of the ip1 smart gun, a gun that was pushed by communist gun-grabbing Democrats and the only gun that could be legally sold in New Jersey in 2014, under Governor Chris Christie, entered into “chapter 11-style restructuring proceedings in Germany” on May 20, 2015.
“This is a corporate restructuring, not an insolvency proceeding,” a spokesperson said in an emailed statement. “Armatix will continue operations and does not anticipate any changes to its majority shareholders.” The spokesman did not return calls seeking to discuss the situation further, nor did the company’s U.S. CEO Belinda Padilla or its chief shareholder Bernd Dietel, who is based in Switzerland.
The timing of the development was unfortunate for the company. Today Armatix was to have been a key presenter at the first of five smart gun technology fairs that a gun safety group had organized to familiarize local law enforcement officials with developments in the area. On Tuesday, however, Armatix informed Rabbi Joel Mosbacher, a co-chair of the group, that it would be unable to attend today’s fair at the New Rochelle (N.Y.) Police Department because the custodian appointed to oversee the company’s finances had refused to authorize travel expenses, according to Mosbacher. The fair will go forward with four other smart gun designers participating, Mosbacher says.
Armatix is a private company based in Unterföhring, Germany, near Munich. Its last publicly filed financial statement was for the 2012 year, and it appears to show €3 million in losses that year, on top of €11 million in losses for the previous year. (Armatix declined to comment on the figures, which were previously reported by Examiner.com.)
But the company’s performance since then cannot have been favorable. Its first two attempts to sell its personalized pistol—in February 2014 at Oak Tree Gun Club near Los Angeles and in May 2014 at Engage Armament in Rockville, Maryland—were each stymied within days when each dealer was hit with boycotts and death threats. Many of those protesting cited a New Jersey state law, enacted in 2002, which provides that if a personalized handgun is for offered for sale anywhere in the country, the clock starts ticking, and three years later only personalized handguns will be lawful for sale in New Jersey. (State Senator Loretta Weinberg, the original sponsor of the legislation, has said she is considering introducing a bill to repeal or modify the law later this year.)
Many pro-gun advocates have pointed out that smart guns are just another means of gun control, and they’re right. The gun requires the user to wear a wrist device to fire the weapon and plans are in the works to require the gun actually to verify a fingerprint before firing.
The National Rifle Association wrote back in February 2014,
“government mandates that require the use of expensive, unreliable features, such as grips that would read your fingerprints before the gun will fire,” according to the Web site of its lobbying arm, the Institute for Legislative Action. “And NRA recognizes that the ‘smart guns’ issue clearly has the potential to mesh with the anti-gunners agenda, opening the door to a ban on all guns that do not possess the government-required technology.”
Additionally Chris Carrington pointed out the obvious problems with such a gun.
“For a start, the gun owner will no longer know his family is protected when he is out of the house…only he can fire the gun rendering it useless for the family left at home.
Looking at the wider perspective, how long will it be before the government restricts sales of guns to ONLY those who can be fired by the registered owner of the weapon? This will be done under the guise of making law enforcement simpler, police will KNOW who fired the weapon removing ambiguity. Will such a move render forensic techniques such as checking for gunshot residue a thing of the past in cases where smart guns are involved?
What happens when the gun is fired but none of the other evidence stacks up? This will happen, we already know from other smart appliances that there is always someone who can work around the system.”
To make matters worse, what criminal will acquire a gun that they have to deal with such restrictions? None, and that’s the point. These guns will be marketed to law-abiding citizens, not criminals.
While the iP1 is a .22 caliber with a ridiculous price of $1,800 (one of many really, really bad marketing moves), the company is also attempting to produce the iP9, a 9mm version.
These types of guns are simply gun control in another form. I’m glad the company has had to file chapter 11. Now, let’s hope they have to file chapter 13 bankruptcy.