> But zero smart guns are on the market. How are they evaluating this? A crystal ball?

It doesn't take a crystal ball to presume that a device designed to prevent a product from working might prevent the product from working in a situation you didn't expect.

> Why do we not consider “doesn’t shoot me, the owner” as a reliability plus?

Taking this question in good faith: You can consider it a plus if you like when shopping for a product, and that's entirely fair. Despite your clear stated preference, it's not relevant (or is a negative) to reliability in the context of "goes bang when I intentionally booger hook the bang switch".

I'm not trying to get into the weeds on guns and gun technology. I generally believe in buying products that behave as I expect them to and don't think they know better than me. It's why I have a linux laptop and an android cell phone, and why I'm getting uneasy about the latter.