PDA

View Full Version : Yo! Micro-stamping Bill is now Law??.....Wassup?


Beelzy
01-01-2010, 8:51 AM
Ok, I heard it was FUD, but my local McClatchey Rag (Fresno Bee) reported
today the the Micro-Stamping Law for Firearms takes effect this year!

What is this? I thought this was a dead deal??

Anyone know the Real Facts on this, please? :)

dustoff31
01-01-2010, 9:14 AM
As I understand it, the law went into effect but technical details prevent it from being implemented.

In other words, "This is now the law, except can't figure out how to do it. But as soon as we do, it will REALLY be the law."

As I recall, the "right people" say it's a non-issue.

Quiet
01-01-2010, 10:02 AM
Due to patent issues, it's not really in effect.

Penal Code 12126
As used in this chapter, "unsafe handgun" means any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 12001, for which any of the following is true:
(b) For a pistol:
(7) Commencing January 1, 2010, for all semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it is not designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters that identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol, etched or otherwise imprinted in two or more places on the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and that are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is fired, provided that the Department of Justice certifies that the technology used to create the imprint is available to more than one manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions. The Attorney General may also approve a method of equal or greater reliability and effectiveness in identifying the specific serial number of a firearm from spent cartridge casings discharged by that firearm than that which is set forth in this paragraph, to be thereafter required as otherwise set forth by this paragraph where the Attorney General certifies that this new method is also unencumbered by any patent restrictions. Approval by the Attorney General shall include notice of that fact via regulations adopted by the Attorney General for purposes of implementing that method for purposes of this paragraph. The microscopic array of characters required by this section shall not be considered the name of the maker, model, manufacturer's number, or other mark of identification, including any distinguishing number or mark assigned by the Department of Justice, within the meaning of Sections 12090 and 12094.

Deamer
01-01-2010, 12:06 PM
According to this Sac bee article the patent hurdle will be
"fixed" soon.

http://www.sacbee.com/capitolandcalifornia/story/2427189.html

"Co-inventor Todd Lizotte, a New Hampshire engineer, said he plans to free his patents from all restrictions in early 2010. He suggested that lawyers for the gun industry are using patent restrictions as a way to block the law."

Telperion
01-01-2010, 12:22 PM
Lizotte, a self-described conservative gun owner, said he created the technology partly to give the military a way of tracking firearms. He also wanted to give law enforcement a tool to defeat criminals whose behavior maligns law-abiding gun owners a government-guaranteed revenue stream off the backs of peaceable citizens trying to exercise their civil rights.

FTFY, Todd.

hoffmang
01-01-2010, 12:29 PM
I'm highly doubtful that Lizotte is going to give up control of his patent. DOJ has proposed regulations (http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/index.php#micro) for the implementation of Microstamping. In that they correctly require that any technology that is adopted has to go through the California APA (http://www.oal.ca.gov/Administrative_Procedure_Act.htm) process where we'll get to determine if there really are no patents encumbering the process.

-Gene

Deamer
01-01-2010, 12:40 PM
I'm highly doubtful that Lizotte is going to give up control of his patent. DOJ has proposed regulations (http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/index.php#micro) for the implementation of Microstamping. In that they correctly require that any technology that is adopted has to go through the California APA (http://www.oal.ca.gov/Administrative_Procedure_Act.htm) process where we'll get to determine if there really are no patents encumbering the process.

-Gene

So did all the other silly gun laws in this state have to go through the APA procedures? Sounds like they skipped that step.

"The requirements set forth in the APA are designed to provide the public with a meaningful opportunity to participate in the adoption of state regulations and to ensure that regulations are clear, necessary and legally valid."

hoffmang
01-01-2010, 2:07 PM
So did all the other silly gun laws in this state have to go through the APA procedures? Sounds like they skipped that step.

"The requirements set forth in the APA are designed to provide the public with a meaningful opportunity to participate in the adoption of state regulations and to ensure that regulations are clear, necessary and legally valid."

The laws don't, but the regulations implementing the laws do. That's really why we have bullet buttons. The regulations implementing SB-23 had to go through the OAL and that exposed the SKS problem. The SKS issue then lead to the definition of "detachable magazine" that makes the bullet button legal.

-Gene

Deamer
01-01-2010, 2:12 PM
The laws don't, but the regulations implementing the laws do. That's really why we have bullet buttons. The regulations implementing SB-23 had to go through the OAL and that exposed the SKS problem. The SKS issue then lead to the definition of "detachable magazine" that makes the bullet button legal.

-Gene

Thanks for the explanation.

Quiet
01-05-2010, 7:38 PM
Anyone else see this?


California Police Chiefs Association Calls for Firearms Microstamping Study (http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/california-police-chiefs-association-calls-for-firearms-microstamping-study-80722027.html)

NEWTOWN, Conn., Jan. 5 /PRNewswire-USNewswire
In a recent letter to California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown, the California Police Chiefs Association (CPCA) expressed concern over the "hasty implementation" of firearms microstamping in California and called for further in-depth study of the technology before it is implemented by law in California.

In the letter, CPCA Acting President Susan E. Manheimer wrote, "There are too many unanswered questions with microstamping in its current iteration" and raised concerns that "statements about the capabilities of microstamping may have been technologically premature." In 2007, CPCA supported legislation (AB 1471) to require firearms microstamping in California.

"We appreciate the California Police Chiefs Association call for further study of the technology," said NSSF President Steve Sanetti. "Clearly, concerns over the reliability of firearms microstamping are continuing to grow, especially within the law enforcement community."

Firearms microstamping is the process by which firearms manufacturers would have to micro laser-engrave a gun's make, model and serial number on two distinct parts of each gun, including the firing pin, so that in theory the information would be imprinted on the cartridge casing when the pistol is fired. Legislation mandating microstamping in California was signed into law in 2007 by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-Calif.) and was slated to take effect this New Year's Day (2010); however, since the technology remains encumbered by patents it cannot be certified by the California Department of Justice and therefore has not been implemented.

The letter continues, "We support further research of microstamping in light of the new information that has surfaced since California passage of the legislation. Publicly available, peer-reviewed studies conducted by independent research organizations conclude that the technology does not function reliably and that criminals can remove the markings easily in mere seconds. We believe that these findings require examination prior to implementation." The CPCA also expressed concerns over implementing the technology during a very difficult budget environment and the negative impact on law enforcement budgets which are already under significant pressure.

Members of the firearms industry, through the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) -- the industry's trade association -- have long supported further study of microstamping since legislation was first introduced in California.

"As many in law enforcement now recognize, independent research has demonstrated the technological failures of firearms microstamping and the need for further study," said NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane. "Understanding this fact, and taking into account the current fiscal crisis in California, we anticipate more groups will follow the CPCA lead and rethink support for this unreliable and easily defeated technology."

bwiese
01-05-2010, 8:52 PM
Interesting.
Susan Manheimer is the semi-anti San Mateo Police Chief.

rbgaynor
01-06-2010, 9:52 AM
KPBS radio in San Diego covered micro-stamping in their annual program on new California legislation yesterday (5th). They also got it wrong - stating that it went into effect on Jan 1:

CAVANAUGH: Another new law thatís now in effect in California some people would say was way past due. This is a microstamping bullet casings requirement. The proposal was enacted way back in October of 2007 and the idea is to make it easier to trace bullets shot from a semi-automatic pistol, but it didnít become effective until this January first and why is that, Dan?

EATON: Well, technology has to catch up because what it requires is that these semi-automatic pistols have to be designed and outfitted with some sort of technology that allows the make, model and serial number to be transferred or stamped onto bullet casings that come from those particular guns. So you have to give the manufacturers and the retailers and so forth some time to catch up technologically so this kind of technology can be used. Now, of course the idea is that if you have all of this information about the gun from which the casing came, itíll be easier to trace the perpetrator and whoever shot the gun and maybe thatíll make it easier to solve crimes.

CAVANAUGH: And this is the bullet casing, not the bullet itself.

EATON: No, the bullet casing.

CAVANAUGH: Right.

EATON: So the bullet itself would have presumably done the damage.

CAVANAUGH: I see. I see what youíre saying. And so Ė And what Ė Does this only affect guns sold now? Or is it retroactive in any way?

EATON: Oh, no, it goes into effect now. For example, if you sold it before, like when the law was passed, you wouldnít be in trouble but starting January 1st, 2010, it really does go into effect and now all guns sold have to have this specially fitted technology.

But a quick posting and they actually posted a correction (too bad that didn't go out over the air):

Editor's note: Legal Analyst Dan Eaton stated that California's new bullet-stamping law went into effect on January 1. However, the Department of Justice must first certify that the technology exists and is available. It has not done that yet. We regret the error.

Here's the complete transcript (and an audio link): http://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/jan/05/legal-update-new-california-laws-2010/

psycho_klown66
01-06-2010, 3:52 PM
So assuming that this is on the firing pin to imprint all that information... it would be wise to pick up all of your brass. Even at the firing range.

So what happens if you don't pick up your brass at the range, it's all imprinted with your information. Someone picks them up, leaves them at the scene?

Seems to me that if I firearm did this, I would be paranoid to leave any brass that has my make, model, and serial number on it.

Did I understand this correctly?

bwiese
01-06-2010, 3:55 PM
No, you didn't understand.

Please see the other thread on microstamping and why it won't be implemented in CA.

spacecase0
01-06-2010, 3:59 PM
there are so many issues with the serial numbers on your brass,
someone can just make up a number, imprint,
and use that on a casing left at a crime to miss lead police.
they can pick up brass at the range really easy,

if you own a gun with a serial number stamper,
you are at risk of being easily framed.

I will only buy revolvers if this law really gets implemented.

The Director
01-06-2010, 4:40 PM
Chillax. This law is going nowhere fast.

zenmastar
01-06-2010, 4:56 PM
My take on it is that it's coming quicker than we'd like. The issue is that "unencumbered" is not defined specifically in this particular section of the penal code. So DOJ is doing the safe approach which is to go through the APA process for each implementation. This would give them more room as to what unencumbered by patents mean in terms of microstamping.

Of course for us, unencumbered would mean no royalties are required. For some, it probably means no patents or all have expired. However, Identity Dynamics holds the key patents and these were granted around 2003. So these will not expire until after 2020.

So for anti-2nd amendment supporters, unencumbered probably means no unreasonable royalty payments and patent owners must grant licenses to all.

Time will tell though, probably within the next 12 months as to what specifically "unencumbered" means for microstamping.

The other screwing the handgun industry can get is the completed devoid of all pistols on the certified roster. If a microstamping implementation is accepted, the question is what happens to the existing roster of firearms. These will need to be resubmitted for certification again, but does the current handgun safety requirements apply to ones already on the roster when re-certifying for microstamping? The proposed regulations going through APA right now will have to be scrutinized and red-flags raised should this appear to be happening.

bwiese
01-06-2010, 5:01 PM
"unncumbered by patents" means no patents.
It does not mean Todd Lizotte grants a free license to use.

And even if Lizotte gives up, there's a ton of prior art relating to marking/etching technology.

DOJ BoF is budget strained and can't even complete voluntary registration paperwork until 6 - 8 weeks afterward. Ongoing prospective staff changes and staff reductions (thru diversion to other bureaus/depts) all combine to not make this happen.

dfletcher
01-07-2010, 3:53 PM
Is this "new" news and all all important?

http://www.alphecca.com/?p=1991