Mossberg is working on a smart gun.

[mossy]

https://smarttechfoundation.org/jonathan-mossberg-smart-gun-ceo/

Mossberg is working on bringing a smart gun into the market. Smart guns are a tool for forcing backdoor gun bans on law abiding citizens. The IGun project needs to be ended. If you are a 2nd amendment supporter please don't buy ANY more mossberg products till the IGUN project is ended. Also please call and email them to make your voice heard.

http://www.mossberg.com/contact-us/

[Not a Cook]

EDIT: I may have "jumped the gun on this.. Can someone confirm? ITC's website states, "We are a subsidiary of Mossberg Group, Inc.", is headed by a guy with the last name "Mossberg", AND is using Mossberg shotguns. However, I'm not TOTALLY certain that this is the same (or a related company) to the firearm manufacturer "O.F. Mossberg & Son". Can someone here confirm one way or the other?
Per what mavericksun noted below, it looks like even IF the two companies are legally separate, they have some serious ties that would have to be TOTALLY dissolved/disavowed by O.F. Mossberg & Sons if they aren't really a party to this egregious action.

https://smarttechfoundation.org/jona...smart-gun-ceo/

Mossberg is working on bringing a smart gun into the market. Smart guns are a tool for forcing backdoor gun bans on law abiding citizens. The IGun project needs to be ended. If you are a 2nd amendment supporter please don't buy ANY more mossberg products till the IGUN project is ended. Also please call and email them to make your voice heard.
http://www.mossberg.com/contact-us/

^ Sick! Until now, I liked Mossberg. Pro-2A folks need to hit Mossberg hard and fast. Per the company's website (https://smarttechfoundation.org/jona...art-gun-ceo/):

"ITC's Position on Personalized Firearms

ITC realizes that the concept of a personalized firearm can conjure up fears of potential legislation, safety concerns, and technology limitations. These concerns are our concerns as well and we have given them careful consideration during the development and launch of the iGun. iTC does not want to see our technology or anyone else's mandated by law. Personalized firearm ownership should be a choice based on one's own careful consideration of available options and the proper weighing of risks versus benefits of such technology."

I find it VERY unlikely that a major firearms manufacturer would be unaware that any "smart gun" that is successfully developed and sold into the marks WILL trigger pre-existing legislation that WILL infringe our Second Amendment rights. Let's "educate" them and make sure Mossberg can't claim they were ignorant as to what their new product will do to harm our rights.

[keenkeen]

Smart guns? Meh.

Those rings sure look sweet however...

[mavericksun]

EDIT: I may have "jumped the gun on this.. Can someone confirm? ITC's website states, "We are a subsidiary of Mossberg Group, Inc.", is headed by a guy with the last name "Mossberg", AND is using Mossberg shotguns. However, I'm not TOTALLY certain that this is the same (or a related company) to the firearm manufacturer "O.F. Mossberg & Son". Can someone here confirm one way or the other?

Jonathan Mossberg is the younger son of the owner of O.F. Mossberg & Son.

As per his linkedin profile (https://www.linkedin.com/in/jonathanmossberg77) He was a former vice president of the company.

As per the Orlando Sentinel article (http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...-beach-shotgun) this has been his thing for a while.

Yes it is part of Mossberg.

[baranski]

Great find, articles from 2002. Thanks.....

[ElvenSoul]

You send your kids to liberal schools this is what happens.

[Not a Cook]

Jonathan Mossberg is the younger son of the owner of O.F. Mossberg & Son.

As per his linkedin profile (https://www.linkedin.com/in/jonathanmossberg77) He was a former vice president of the company.

As per the Orlando Sentinel article (http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...-beach-shotgun) this has been his thing for a while.

Yes it is part of Mossberg.

Thank you! Very sad to see Mossberg taking a stance against people's 2A rights.

[ROMEOHOTEL]

Smart guns are a tool for forcing backdoor gun bans on law abiding citizens.

Please explain how smart guns lead to a backdoor ban.

[six seven tango]

Please explain how smart guns lead to a backdoor ban.

Take a quick look at the NJ "smart" gun law, and then ask yourself that question. Or even our very own "smart" gun law, coupled with the roster.

[mavericksun]

Thank you! Very sad to see Mossberg taking a stance against people's 2A rights.

I wouldn't say they are anti-2A, they are just looking to expand the market to the people who are not gun people. They want the fence sitters who know nothing about guns and who could not bother to follow the rules of gun safety. This like all the CA safe gun BS is going to lull these idiots into a false sense of security and more "accidents" will happen. Which will in turn generate more fear that guns are dangerous and should not be part of a "progressive" society. They are basically idiots who think if they put enough "safety" equipment on it, it will be safe like what was done to the car. The market share increase is more important than reliability of the firearm. They justify their position by stating that their gun is only for limit situations and makes the assumption that there will be other guns available even after they introduce their guns. They are just idiots who don't realize that once you open Pandora's Box, you can't unopen it. The increase in sales will ease their minds about it.

[six seven tango]

Great find, articles from 2002. Thanks.....

The link that mavericksun posted might be old, but the basis for this thread is not. People are already talking about a boycott here.

[ElvenSoul]

Is it actually the Mossberg Company or just the Grandson?

[six seven tango]

Is it actually the Mossberg Company or just the Grandson?

I think it's just Jonathan, but they're still intertwined.
From bwiese's thread...

...Until Mossberg Firearms publicly addresses these issues and clearly demonstrates complete decoupling with/severance from
iGun's Jonathan Mossberg and his efforts [....and that's hard to do with heirs, stockholders, family relationships, etc.] - I think
it's prudent that shooters & retailers who always think of the 2nd Amendment in a long-term fashion....

avoid purchase of Mossberg Firearm products;

tell their FFL dealers to not stock Mossberg Firearms;

FFL dealers turn back [if & where possible] Mossberg inventory to distribution & obtain equivalent replacement
inventory in similar price range/quality. If we do this right, Dick's and Big5 can be the only ones carrying them!
(We all know about "Dick's"!)

After some time elapses, avoid doing business with retailers that continue to sell, over the long-term, Mossberg
Firearms in volume. [Let's not go after a little shop that has one or two in already-purchased inventory and needs to
recover his funds.] But if in a couple of months you see Mossbergs on the shelf at chain gun shop [especially] LET THE
STAFF KNOW YOU WON'T BE DOING BUSINESS WITH THEM DUE TO THEIR SUPPORT OF A COMPANY'S ANTIGUN STANCE.

[ROMEOHOTEL]

Take a quick look at the NJ "smart" gun law, and then ask yourself that question. Or even our very own "smart" gun law, coupled with the roster.

1) RE: CA law. I don't know the number of the bill, whether introduced by house or senate, status thereof.

2) using various keywords ('smart gun', 'owner authorized', 'recognition features of', and the like) have not helped in even finding the legislation.

3) a search on this webpage or on CA.gov (Part 6 of the Penal Code) yielded no results.

I guess I'm having a bad day since my google fu appears off. so help me out here.

But I get the gist of it. I get it that the law, if indeed it passed into law, would create a new qualification (ie, 'smart' technology) thereby making it more difficult to purchase a pistol. But I want to see the text of the legislation. Nonetheless, my question still stands.

How does creation of a new qualification result in a ban? And how is that 'backdoor'? My understanding of 'backdoor' is not a ban but may make it more feasible to enact a ban.

[six seven tango]

1) RE: CA law. I don't know the number of the bill, whether introduced by house or senate, status thereof.

2) using various keywords ('smart gun', 'owner authorized', 'recognition features of', and the like) have not helped in even finding the legislation.

3) a search on this webpage or on CA.gov (Part 6 of the Penal Code) yielded no results.

I guess I'm having a bad day since my google fu appears off. so help me out here.

But I get the gist of it. I get it that the law, if indeed it passed into law, would create a new qualification (ie, 'smart' technology) thereby making it more difficult to purchase a pistol. But I want to see the text of the legislation. Nonetheless, my question still stands.

How does creation of a new qualification result in a ban? And how is that 'backdoor'? My understanding of 'backdoor' is not a ban but may make it more feasible to enact a ban.

It's already law in NJ. The clock starts ticking as soon as there is a "smart" gun available at retail. That's why there was such an uproar about the Armatix. Here is an article on the NJ law.

I'll retract my CA law statement. I was thinking about microstamping.

There was a CA bill in 2014 that didn't make it out of appropriations. SB293, if passed, would have been similar to NJ's law, except that we would have still had rostered handguns.
Once "smart" guns are mandated as the only handguns legal to sell, it's not too hard to imagine the next step of mandating "smart" guns as the only handguns legal to own.

A "feature" commonly talked about by developers and others pushing the technology is the ability to turn these guns off if the gun is lost or stolen. It doesn't take much of an imagination to see how that could be abused.