It seems that hardly anyone is buying "Smart" guns

And this seems to be a big mystery, at least to the Usual Suspects:

The technology is here. So-called "smart guns" are being programmed to recognize a gun owner’s identity and lock up if the weapon ends up in the wrong hands. Entrepreneurs and engineers have been developing technology to make safer guns since the early '90s, and by now we've got working prototypes of guns that read fingerprints, hand grips or even sensors embedded under the skin. But after 15 years of innovation, personalized guns still haven't penetrated the marketplace.

Why? Smart guns are caught in the crosshairs of a heated debate over guns, for one thing. Pro-gun groups see it as an attack on Second Amendment rights and, you know, freedom. Anti-gun groups worry that if guns are safer it will inspire more people to buy them. Perhaps more troublesome is that consumer demand just isn't there. “The gun industry has no interest in making smart-guns. There is no incentive for them,” Robert J. Spitzer, a political science professor at SUNY Cortland told the New York Times.

No incentive? What about saving lives?

Blast all those gun owners, withholding their market demand and refusing to save lives!

The comments are running 100% against the author, pointing out what could easily have been found out in any actual, you know, journalism effort: find people on both sides of the issue, get their view of the issue, write it down without misspelling anything.

I only point this out (other than for the amusement value of the comments section) as an illustration of the utter institutional incompetence of the media to provide basic reporting on firearms issues.  Even if they wanted to play it straight (which is a big question), they simply do not have the capacity to.