PDA

View Full Version : AB 352 (Microstamping) again in play (6/20/06)


mikehaas
06-20-2006, 5:01 PM
06/20/2006 - AB 352 has been removed from the inactive file and is again in play. After a long period of inactivity, Koretz is again trying to move the issue of Microstamping. NRA requests members contact the Senate and voice your strong opposition to AB 352.

This bill would, commencing January 1, 2007, expand the definition of unsafe handgun to include semiautomatic pistols that are not designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters, that identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol, etched into the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and which are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is fired.

The latest information and contact tools can be found at:
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab352

FIX YOUR GUN - FACE A FELONY

In AB352, the proponents seek to mandate that all new semi-automatic handguns introduced in 2007 would be required to have information (make, model & serial number) about the firearm "micro-stamped" on the surface of parts of the handgun. This "micro-stamped" information would supposedly be transferred onto the cartridge case of the ammunition when it is fired.

The technology being mandated in AB352 has not been studied or tested in the real world and is only available from a single source and would create a government sanctioned monopoly for that company.

The advocates of AB352 claim that the addition of this requirement in the manufacturing of handguns for California will assist law enforcement by creating additional evidence for solving crimes. In committee hearings the author admitted that the “micro-stamped“ cartridge cases could not even be used for evidence!

There is NO SUPPORT from the California law enforcement organizations, That includes the California Police Chiefs Association (Cal Chiefs). The Police Officers Research Association of California (PORAC) opposes AB 352.

The parts of the handgun that would have the 25 microns deep (half the thickness of a fine human hair) "micro-stamping" etched on them can be easily replaced without the use of tools. The markings on the parts will also be degraded and easily erased with the normal wear and tear in using the handgun.

A review of federal law has revealed that AB352 would make the everyday practice of maintaining and repairing firearms (as outlined in the handgun owners’ manual) a felony. If a person needed to replace commonly worn out “micro-stamped” parts to keep their handgun safely operating, that person would be violating Federal law because the alteration, removal and obliteration of a manufacturer’s or importer's markings on those parts carries the penalty of up to ten years in federal prison and $250,000.00 fine. If AB352 becomes law: If you “FIX YOUR GUN you FACE A FELONY.”

Mike

Charliegone
06-20-2006, 8:21 PM
Oh God...this guy doesn't quit does he? I believe it was Enstein that said someone who tries to do something over and over again is insane.:D Insane In the Membrane Koretz!:rolleyes: :mad:

6172crew
06-20-2006, 8:43 PM
Mike, we have seen this lame *** law more than twice now, how come we dont see a push from our guys in power to have a approved AW list or maybe a CCW reform bill?

It seems like one of these times this thing is going to pass why dont we meet him with a wacky bill each time he trys to get us with one?

Fight fire with fire.:cool:

AxonGap
06-21-2006, 12:23 AM
Smokescreen legislation that cries "Look at me everyone, I'm actually doing something!". Nice legacy building, Koretz!

m1aowner
06-21-2006, 1:13 AM
Flippin moron is not enough of an insult for this man. My four year old niece has more original thoughts in one second than that guy has in one year.

LeoC
06-21-2006, 1:42 AM
I copied the talking points Mike listed as part of the email, hope that's ok.
Dear Senator,
Unbelievably, Assemblymember Koretz’s ridiculous ‘handgun microstamping’ bill is again in play. This bill should die for the same reasons it died when it was first introduced. It is completely unworkable. As a refresher as to why this bill would be useless:

In AB352, the proponents seek to mandate that all new semi-automatic handguns introduced in 2007 would be required to have information (make, model & serial number) about the firearm "micro-stamped" on the surface of parts of the handgun. This "micro-stamped" information would supposedly be transferred onto the cartridge case of the ammunition when it is fired.

The advocates of AB352 claim that the addition of this requirement in the manufacturing of handguns for California will assist law enforcement by creating additional evidence for solving crimes. In committee hearings the author admitted that the “micro-stamped“ cartridge cases could not even be used for evidence!

There is NO SUPPORT from the California law enforcement organizations, That includes the California Police Chiefs Association (Cal Chiefs). The Police Officers Research Association of California (PORAC) opposes AB 352.

The parts of the handgun that would have the 25 microns deep (half the thickness of a fine human hair) "micro-stamping" etched on them can be easily replaced without the use of tools. The markings on the parts will also be degraded and easily erased with the normal wear and tear in using the handgun.

A review of federal law has revealed that AB352 would make the everyday practice of maintaining and repairing firearms (as outlined in the handgun owners’ manual) a felony. If a person needed to replace commonly worn out “micro-stamped” parts to keep their handgun safely operating, that person would be violating Federal law because the alteration, removal and obliteration of a manufacturer’s or importer's markings on those parts carries the penalty of up to ten years in federal prison and $250,000.00 fine. If AB352 becomes law: If you “FIX YOUR GUN you FACE A FELONY.”

The technology being mandated in AB352 has not been studied or tested in the real world and is only available from a single source and would create a government sanctioned monopoly for that company.

The cost to manufacturers to design and implement ‘microstamping’ parts to their guns and the added expense that will inevitably be passed down to Californian gun owners has been grossly and negligently underestimated. This bill is wholly unworkable and naively unrealistic.

I sincerely believe that Assemblymember Koretz should receive a public reprimand for wasting the legislature’s valuable time with this ill-thought out bill. He obviously has no working knowledge of firearms design and function, nor an accurate view of the root causes of gun crimes (ie. the CRIMINALS), so he proposes a bill that would inconvenience and possibly create felons out of lawful Californian gun owners.

Please vote against AB 352 (Koretz)

Sincerely yours,
LeoC

Anybody feel free to use whatever parts to compose and send your own emails

xenophobe
06-21-2006, 1:50 AM
The manufacturer of the microstamping equipment is heavily lobbying for this bill. That is the only reason it is still in existence, and they are directly responsible for this bill. They're the ones convincing the politicians that it is feasable, even though it's already been examined and considered a waste of time, money and resources. The same with the Serialized Ammunition... There is only one company that is really pushing this.

m1aowner
06-21-2006, 1:55 AM
Oh please tell us who the manufacture is? A little cash in Kortez's freezer?

The manufacturer of the microstamping equipment is heavily lobbying for this bill. That is the only reason it is still in existence, and they are directly responsible for this bill. They're the ones convincing the politicians that it is feasable, even though it's already been examined and considered a waste of time, money and resources. The same with the Serialized Ammunition... There is only one company that is really pushing this.

xenophobe
06-21-2006, 6:00 AM
I don't know who it is. I heard the report of their 'pitch' from someone in firearms forensics. From what I gathered even the proprietor of the technology knows how worthless it is, but is still pushing it because it will make him rich.

SemiAutoSam
06-21-2006, 6:19 AM
Dont these people know what a brass catcher is ?

If this thing wood pass it would just be a logistical nightmare.

John does gun was stolen so thats one that we can take off the list of firing pin serial numbers or at least maybe that would be one they would be on the lookout for more ?

Whats wrong with balistic tests the way they are now ?

paradox
06-21-2006, 7:30 AM
I've been trying to dig up where the money for this is coming from. While I haven't found a smoking gun, I have found some interesting stuff:

The holder of the microstamping patent is:
Lizotte; Todd E. (Manchester, NH)
Identification Dynamics, LLC (Pottstown, PA)
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=microstamping&s2=ammunition&OS=microstamping+AND+ammunition&RS=microstamping+AND+ammunition
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=2&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=microstamping&s2=ammunition&OS=microstamping+AND+ammunition&RS=microstamping+AND+ammunition

According to http://www.followthemoney.org neither Todd Lizotte nor Identification Dynamics, LLC contributed anything to Cali politicians.

According to http://www.opensecrets.org, Todd Lizotte has donated the following:
LIZOTTE, TODD E MR?MANCHESTER,NHno03109
HITACHI VIA MECHANICS USA INC/ENGIN
8/31/2004
$250
Bush, George W

LIZOTTE, TODDE MR?MANCHESTER,NHno03109
NANOVIALP/ENGINEER / OWNER
11/19/2001
$250
Republican National Cmte

LIZOTTE, TODDE MR?MANCHESTER,NHno03109
NANOVIALP/ENGINEER / OWNER
1/23/2002
$250
Republican National Cmte

mikehaas
06-21-2006, 8:34 AM
Mike, we have seen this lame *** law more than twice now, how come we dont see a push from our guys in power to have a approved AW list or maybe a CCW reform bill?

It seems like one of these times this thing is going to pass why dont we meet him with a wacky bill each time he trys to get us with one?

Fight fire with fire.:cool:

I know it seems like years (my, how time doesn't fly when you're rights are under constant attack), but Microstamping was only introduced last year, 2005 being the first of a 2-year legislative cycle. it passed it's house of origin (the Assembly) by the 2005 deadline, passed the required Senate committees but then languished in the Senate (where it still is, of course). Despite reports to the contrary (probably by groups that needed to do some fundraising), it has remained inactive since 2005 and was only "re-awakened" in the last few days.

But, I believe AB 352 is expected to be amended. That means, if it DOES pass the Senate (nobody should be surprised if that happens), we have another crack at it in the Assembly when it goes back for the concurrence vote. Normally, we have a better chance of stopping anti-gun legislation in the Assembly (despite AB 352's history).

I know, fight fight-with-fire is a good tactic, and NRA has been trying to do that in introducing lots of pro-gun bills. This year, we started off with SIX, and 3 have passed their house of origin (the antis have only gotten 2 that far this year). I know they are not "pro-gun" enough for some on the forum. That's OK - NRA doesn't always do things the way I'd prefer either, but the important thing is to keep working together because public infighting just keeps us from making progress.

Gun-owners can't launch big public battles for (hopefully) obvious reasons - we are outnumbered. But NRA is "fighting smart" - in addition to the incremental gains being attempted (which is how we lost our rights in CA), they are constantly improving our standing with the legislature, which is how we can pass even small pro-gun issues in this hostile environment.

And each year we do that and the greater degree we do that gets us closer to the day when we CAN try something larger. (But IMO, every anti-NRA post just pushes that day off farther in the distance.)

For now...
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab352 (oppose)
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2111 (support)
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2714 (oppose)
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=sb59 (oppose)
...are the increments on which to focus, if you want to help slide the scale a bit more "forward". (BTW, it's too early to contact the governor on ANY of these issues.)

Oh, and we ALSO need to get as many OTHERS to join in as possible. So while we're executing the battle plan, we also need to make room for others in our foxholes. BTW, you guys are welcome in mine ANYTIME. :-)

Mike

m1aowner
06-21-2006, 10:59 AM
Mr. Hass, can you find out what manufactures will be responsible for providing micorstamping support to the state, and gun makers. I think we need to let these a holes know were aware of their no bounds greed. We have to expose these fat backs. I'm sure the NRA can find this out. Right?

paradox
06-21-2006, 11:27 AM
Mr. Hass, can you find out what manufactures will be responsible for providing micorstamping support to the state, and gun makers. I think we need to let these a holes know were aware of their no bounds greed. We have to expose these fat backs. I'm sure the NRA can find this out. Right?

I'm pretty sure it is http://hitachi-via-usa.com/, because Todd E. Lizotte’s previous company NanoVia has this to say at their site http://nanovia.com/ (now registered to Hitachi Digital Graphics):

A Statement

To all our customers and technology partners worldwide we would like to announce that NanoVia's semiconductor and microelectronic assets were purchased by an industry leader. As of September 2003, NanoVia has closed its facilities and operations.

Furthermore, NanoVia's assets in its Ballistic program were also acquired by a firm that has technical and marketing expertise better suited to pursuing and implementing the technology within a government and defense related marketplace.

From the Management and Staff of NanoVia

So it will be a huge Japanese conglomerate who profits from Americans having their second amendment rights chipped away. I bet there are some WWII vets who would be mighty pissed at this turn of events.

http://japanfocus.org/images/541-3.jpg
A Hitachi prisoner of war camp (U.S. National Archives)
(from http://japanfocus.org/article.asp?id=541)

mikehaas
06-21-2006, 1:45 PM
Mr. Hass, can you find out what manufactures will be responsible for providing micorstamping support to the state, and gun makers. I think we need to let these a holes know were aware of their no bounds greed. We have to expose these fat backs. I'm sure the NRA can find this out. Right?

While that would probably feel pretty good, I would suggest that it is much more effective to focus on the legislature, specifically on the specific committeee or body that ab 352 is facing. Hammering on that company just won't change anything, at least in the time-frame we have in which to produce results.

At this moment, AB 352 is before the senate and a vote could come at any time. I always try to note the bill's progress here and provide contact tools and info for the appropriate body:
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab352

I appreciate the sentiment. Thanks for getting fired up!

Mike

6172crew
06-21-2006, 2:01 PM
NRA doesn't always do things the way I'd prefer either, but the important thing is to keep working together because public infighting just keeps us from making progress.

And each year we do that and the greater degree we do that gets us closer to the day when we CAN try something larger. (But IMO, every anti-NRA post just pushes that day off farther in the distance.)


Oh, and we ALSO need to get as many OTHERS to join in as possible. So while we're executing the battle plan, we also need to make room for others in our foxholes. BTW, you guys are welcome in mine ANYTIME. :-)

Mike


I agree Mike, just get pissed when I see some scam being pushed at us time and time again, it like they didnt hear us the first time.:)

aklover_91
06-21-2006, 7:24 PM
Makes sense, criminals always re-register stolen guns, right?:rolleyes:

m1aowner
06-21-2006, 9:19 PM
Alaready sent a message to Kortez with my contact info. Like that will do any good.:rolleyes: Sent a response to the committee also.

AntiBubba 2.1
06-23-2006, 5:44 AM
Mike Haas,

By determining the company that makes the microstamping technology, we can determine if a financial link between them and Koretz exists. It's time to shine a bright light on the roaches.

Remember, there is an "I" in NRA-and I want to be able to fight this crap on every front. The Senate and Assembly are only one front.

DrjonesUSA
06-23-2006, 9:13 AM
Um, guys; a long email like the one Leo drafted is NOT effective, IMO.

Elected officials get a staggering number of emails, phone calls, letters, etc.

Long emails only serve to drown out your message, which is to voice either support or opposition to a specific bill.

A letter/email for the purpose of expressing support or opposition to a piece of legislation should be as short as possible.

Something like the following is ideal: (This is what I sent regarding AB 2714)


Hello.

I am writing to urge you to vote AGAINST AB 2714.

This bill would provide, subject to exceptions, that no ammunition or reloaded ammunition designed and intended to be used in a handgun may be delivered pursuant to a retail transaction unless the purchaser personally presents bona fide evidence of his or her identity and age, as specified, to the seller of the ammunition.

This unConstitutional bill would infringe upon the rights of law-abiding American citizens to own and USE firearms by attacking the sales of ammunition.

Again, please vote NO on AB 2714.

Regards,
Drjones



Anything longer than that probably doesn't even get read and may well get completely ignored.


NOW, this is NOT to say that you can not or should not send longer emails/letters/articles/essays/whatever, I'm simply stating that if your intent is to express support or opposition to a specific bill, you are best served keeping it short, sweet and polite.


Thanks and keep writing!!!

JPN6336
06-23-2006, 11:23 AM
Everytime I write an email in opposition of bills like this I get more and more frustrated. The basic flaw, as I'm sure all on this board know, is that criminals by definition don't obey laws and so only us law abiders are limited. It is such a basic common sense idea that I can't believe those that we elected to represent us and make our laws don't understand it. It makes me madder to think that many of them probably do understand, but know the majority of the voting public don't and push anti-gun bills to get re-elected.

DrjonesUSA
06-23-2006, 11:57 AM
Everytime I write an email in opposition of bills like this I get more and more frustrated. The basic flaw, as I'm sure all on this board know, is that criminals by definition don't obey laws and so only us law abiders are limited. It is such a basic common sense idea that I can't believe those that we elected to represent us and make our laws don't understand it. It makes me madder to think that many of them probably do understand, but know the majority of the voting public don't and push anti-gun bills to get re-elected.



That's because gun control is NOT about "safety" or reducing crime: the sole purpose of any and all gun control is to disarm law-abiding citizens and to make it more difficult for them to purchase, own, carry, shoot and use firearms.

Anyone who tells you otherwise is either lying, stupid or ignorant, or some combination thereof.

Period, end of story.

blkA4alb
06-23-2006, 12:54 PM
The argument that my mom always uses against guns is that they make it easier for a husband (or anyone) to just kill another person (in the house or otherwise.) Like in a domestic dispute. Any rebuttles out there? :rolleyes:

JPN6336
06-23-2006, 1:41 PM
The argument that my mom always uses against guns is that they make it easier for a husband (or anyone) to just kill another person (in the house or otherwise.) Like in a domestic dispute. Any rebuttles out there? :rolleyes:

So do kitchen knives, baseball bats, chainsaws, etc.

Glock22Fan
06-23-2006, 2:18 PM
I'd like to get a half dozen of these guns and fire the same (reloaded) brass through each of them. Then challenge these idiots to tell me which gun did the deed.

We all know about the brass catchers, that revolvers don't throw brass around and that anyone can pick up a bunch of brass at the range and throw it around at a crime scene ("OMG, the BG fired 376 rounds from 123 different weapons!")

Has anyone told them about the extremely expensive Maryland "fired cartridge" database that infallibly identifies guns, and has never resulted in a conviction?

However, they know full well that this won't work. They don't care. It will cost us a lot of money and price some of us out of owning guns. That's their real agenda.

Glock22Fan
06-23-2006, 2:23 PM
The argument that my mom always uses against guns is that they make it easier for a husband (or anyone) to just kill another person (in the house or otherwise.) Like in a domestic dispute. Any rebuttles out there? :rolleyes:

They also make it easier for her, or her husband (assuming she's still married), to stop a BG from killing her. Which does she trust more, herself, her husband or some drug-crazed home invader?

Librarian
06-23-2006, 10:36 PM
The argument that my mom always uses against guns is that they make it easier for a husband (or anyone) to just kill another person (in the house or otherwise.) Like in a domestic dispute. Any rebuttles out there? :rolleyes:
There's about 300 million privately owned firearms in the U.S.

Somewhere between 30% and 45% of households have at least 1 firearm - the distribution is definitely uneven, but even the best available data, from the General Social Survey, can't get the information; apparently gun owners are not being very forthcoming, and there is no validated proxy to count. The Census Bureau says there were 111.3 million households in 2003, so there are roughly 33 to 50 million households which have firearms.

The 2004 FBI data shows 14,121 murders, of which 1,804 involve some family member as victim [table 2.11, Murder Circumstances, by Relationship - Uniform Crime Reports (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/violent_crime/murder.html)]. 9,326 of all the 2004 murders were committed with firearms (about 66%).

1,804/33,000,000 (the worst case - all the family member murders by gun, which is unlikely, and the smallest number of households) is 0.0000546, - about 57 chances in a million. The real likelihood is probably somewhere between 24/million and 36/million in a year (66% of the 1,804 divided by 33 and 50 million households).

With all those guns around, it's pretty unlikely one will be used by one family member against another.

And remember, these are MURDERS - intentional killings. WISQARS (http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html) tells us that firearms accidents - I-didn't-know-it-was-loaded, it-went-off-when-I-dropped-it events accounted for 730 deaths in 2003. Things which might be ruled 'manslaughter' are not broken out, so far as I can find; UCR reports the initial charge, as given by the reporting agency, and does not followup on prosecution or dismissal.

More people died from simple falls than were murdered with firearms - 17,229 to 11,920 in 2003. More people were accidentally poisoned - 19,457 - than murdered with firearms. More people suffocated - 12,992.

Take Mom shooting some day - it's safer than a lot of other things she might do.

dwtt
06-25-2006, 8:09 PM
Letter sent to Liz Fig again, and I think she'll ignore me again and vote pro-ban. I'm kinda glad Liz Fig didn't make it to the Lt. Gov. finals on June 6, but I'm afraid to think where she might resurface again in the future.

Glock22Fan
06-27-2006, 9:17 AM
I know someone who says that nobody should own a gun because he once pointed a gun at his partner in anger.

"Yes," I said, "but you didn't actually shoot, did you?"

"Even though you shouldn't have gotten that far, if you can control yourself eventually, why do you think the rest of us can't?"

sohijiro
06-30-2006, 12:14 PM
the company whos pushing the microstamping bill is ravens forgen they have the patents. they build anti-skateboard stuff. it was all over the newspapers . i remember all this from the last time they tried to push this crap


www.ravensforge.com

DrjonesUSA
06-30-2006, 2:34 PM
the company whos pushing the microstamping bill is ravens forgen they have the patents. they build anti-skateboard stuff. it was all over the newspapers . i remember all this from the last time they tried to push this crap


www.ravensforge.com


Are you sure about that?

dwtt
07-08-2006, 2:07 PM
When does the legislative year end? I know the fiscal year ended in June, but does the legislative year end in December? How much life does AB352 have left? I just received a letter from Liz Fig, who represents Fremont, and she gives the same response she always does, which means she will vote for AB352 when it goes to the floor. I hope that never happens, though.

chiefcrash
07-26-2006, 2:37 PM
According to my little NRA email, it's on the senate floor for a vote TODAY

just thought you'd like to know

DrjonesUSA
07-27-2006, 9:20 AM
I received this notice as well. Does anyone know the outcome?


So what happened??

www.leginfo.ca.gov shows the last activity on this bill being JUNE 28 - over a month ago!

WTF is going on?????

ketec_owner
07-27-2006, 9:27 AM
The schedule shows they are out of session until August 7.

tenringtaz
07-27-2006, 1:44 PM
Are you sure about that?
Actually, RavensForge is not the patent holder - it is a company in a company in PA.
Inventors: Lizotte; Todd E. (Manchester, NH)
Assignee: Identification Dynamics, LLC (Pottstown, PA)

Appl. No.: 10/232,766
Filed: August 29, 2002

Not surprisingly, they hold the patent on the reading technology as well...

<sigh>

tenringtaz
07-27-2006, 1:57 PM
Also, if you ever want to find a patent, the US Patent Office has a site that makes it pretty easy to find a patent.
http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html

johnny_22
08-02-2006, 10:11 AM
Received an unofficial vote count email this morning:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_0351-0400/ab_352_vote_20050906_0740PM_sen_floor.html

UNOFFICIAL BALLOT
MEASURE: AB 352
AUTHOR: Koretz
TOPIC: Firearms: microstamping.
DATE: 09/06/2005
LOCATION: SEN. FLOOR
MOTION: Assembly 3rd Reading AB352 Koretz By Dunn
(AYES 20. NOES 19.) (FAIL)


AYES
****

Alarcon Alquist Bowen Cedillo
Chesbro Dunn Escutia Figueroa
Kehoe Kuehl Lowenthal Migden
Ortiz Perata Romero Scott
Simitian Soto Torlakson Vincent


NOES
****

Aanestad Ackerman Ashburn Battin
Campbell Cox Denham Ducheny
Dutton Florez Hollingsworth Machado
Maldonado Margett McClintock Morrow
Poochigian Runner Speier


ABSENT, ABSTAINING, OR NOT VOTING
*********************************

Murray

Librarian
08-02-2006, 12:11 PM
Umm, that vote was September 6, 2005.

johnny_22
08-02-2006, 1:10 PM
Here is the date and time on the email.

Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 05:36:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: comments@www.leginfo.ca.gov
Subject: OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA BILL INFORMATION


Not sure why this information was emailed out being nearly a year old.

Sorry about that.

Librarian
08-02-2006, 2:37 PM
I believe you - I got it too. Maybe this was the first time they posted the amendments (:mad: !ptui!) from 6/28?

T. Lizotte
08-02-2006, 5:41 PM
Hello,

I am todd Lizotte, the inventor of microstamping. As for your diligent search for donations, I can save you time.

I only donate to the Republican Party in NH, Republican presidential candidates and the NRA legislative action committee. Yes, I am an NRA member and a gun owner.

As for how this project is moving forward, it is owned by ID Dynamics a group in Seattle WA. As of last month the board of directors agreed that the technology is going to be given free of charge to the firearms industry. So there will be no royalty costs at all.

Also, Hitachi does not own microstamping.

As for who will make money on it. Your guess is as good as mine.

Best regards,
Todd

Librarian
08-02-2006, 6:24 PM
Hi, Todd. Welcome to the group.

Since you've joined us, perhaps you can answer a few questions.

I can certainly understand a commercial motive for promoting a technology or application. But what would you expect to be the public benefit of adopting microstamping in firearms?

It appears this applies only to semiautomatic pistols, though perhaps a different version might apply to rifles. I am not aware that there is a reasonable way to retrofit this to existing weapons. Given there is about 300,000 million firearms in the US today - and those weapons, with minimal care, will last for a century or longer - , what public safety value is added with this technology applied to only a small number of weapons?

An inventor is not usually responsible for how a legislator may (mis)use his invention. Given California, however, do you feel any misgivings in this case?

taloft
08-02-2006, 9:33 PM
My question is since most firearms that are used in crimes are stolen, how will this help reduce crime? It won't enable the police to determine who used the weapon. Seems to me that we will have a rash of Legal Owners getting their front door kicked in by the local PD, just because the poor guy got his gun stolen, which the PD didn't check for prior to getting a warrant.

It might improve forensic ballistics's ability to match a spent casing to a firing pin to some degree, but wouldn't increase the accuracy of ballistic fingerprinting of bullets. All the bad guy would have to do in the case of a semi-auto is pick up the spent casing and we are back square one. A revolver doesn't leave casings unless emptied at the scene.
Since the firearm already has a serial number this seems redundant for any other purpose. What is to stop people from just changing out the firing pin that was etched with the Micro stamp prior to committing the crime, then changing back afterward? What is to stop criminals from collecting same caliber brass at the range and tossing it at the scene to mislead investigations. I can see false arrests being made it this fashion. It seems to me that this application of your technology creates more problems than it solves.

I do like the technology and feel that it has great potential in some areas.
I would love to see it applied to marking household items that are commonly stolen. Since it would be hard to locate something that small, it would make it difficult for a thief to erase the serial number of an item.

By the way, this technology can be used for any gun with a firing pin. For those of you who are not sure how the technology works here is a link. I'm not sure of the correctness of this article, but it sounds somewhat feasible.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_2_46/ai_58446506

JPglee1
08-02-2006, 9:41 PM
What is to stop people from just changing out the firing pin that was etched with the Micro stamp prior to committing the crime, then changing back afterward? What is to stop criminals from collecting same caliber brass at the range and tossing it at the scene to mislead investigations. I can see false arrests being made it this fashion. It seems to me that this application of your technology creates more problems than it solves.


Generally speaking, anything one man can do, another man can un-do....

Micro stamping is totally easy to get around for someone with any basic machining knowledge.

Remachine bolt face, make a new firing pin.

Its just another useless law designed to infringe on LEGAL gun owner's rights. As we know, criminals don't use LEGAL guns, so whats the point...


JP


P.S In this day and age of $2000 table top CNC mills, a crook could do a lot if he was an educated crook.

socalguns
08-02-2006, 11:34 PM
Generally speaking, anything one man can do, another man can un-do....

Micro stamping is totally easy to get around for someone with any basic machining knowledge...
Higher education or machining equipment is not neccessary
to subvert that micro stamping. Just rub the afflicted parts on something hard , like the pavement or a metal file :)

m1aowner
08-02-2006, 11:46 PM
Yes, microstamping would be very easily defeated in any gun. A little grind and poilsh here and done. Or you can just replace the firing pins. Revolvers would probably become the weapon of choice for criminals. I'm scared what Arnold might do if this reaches his desk, since he's in super pandering mode, who knows? If CA wants to reduce crime, give us law abiders the right to carry.

accordingtoome
08-03-2006, 3:40 AM
Mike, we have seen this lame *** law more than twice now, how come we dont see a push from our guys in power to have a approved AW list or maybe a CCW reform bill?

It seems like one of these times this thing is going to pass why dont we meet him with a wacky bill each time he trys to get us with one?

Fight fire with fire.:cool:

ditto that thought:D

chris
08-03-2006, 4:09 AM
hopefully this law will be defeated we can only hope. when it comes to the next vote. there needs to be a mass mail and phone calls on this one. we all know this law will do nothing for crime reduction.

others have said there will be increased harrasment of lawful owners by police and an overzealous DA looking for prosecutions in gun crime.

i have to say this technology is completely useless in firearms because it seems easy to defeat. and i can see the criminal element getting used brass from ranges and tossing them at crime scenes.

this bill needs to be defeated. and if it does reach the govenors desk he needs to know our opposition in a very big way.

from what i read on the board as of late is that we are more doomed now than when i left. it we a gun owners sit on the sidelines again this november i guess we have decided to give our guns up. we must not sit on the sidelines like in the past. the gun owners need to kicked in the arse and vote.

mikehaas
08-03-2006, 11:00 AM
Higher education or machining equipment is not neccessary
to subvert that micro stamping. Just rub the afflicted parts on something hard , like the pavement or a metal file :)
That would be a felony.

In fact, this is one of the arguments AGAINST AB 352.

Gunsmiths cannot detect microstamping, much less microstamp a new part. So if you have your gun serviced, and the firing pin/boltface/whatever is replaced, the microstamping is gone. You and/or your gunsmith may be prosecutable for altering serialized info from a gun part (that's the felony).

It gets worse - since the gunsmith cannot see the microstamping, he may not even know he's done this.

It gets worse - someone else may end up with the microstamped part for YOUR GUN.

It gets worse - your gun may end up with the microstamped part from some drive-by gang-bangers gun.

NRA calls it "FIX YOUR GUN, FACE A FELONY". See
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab352.1&year=2006

Mike

mikehaas
08-03-2006, 11:18 AM
...this bill needs to be defeated. and if it does reach the govenors desk he needs to know our opposition in a very big way...
And if that happens, we'll be there with tools to help you do that.

But most importantly, keep checking:
http://calnra.com/?summary=ab352&year=2006

If the status of the bill changes, likely it will be reflected there within the hour. WITH recommended actions and contact tools for the right committee/body.

AB352 passed it's house of origin by the 2005 deadline but then stalled last year in the Senate. Until recently, it remained on the inactive file, but it can progress at any pace. It was amended in the Senate, so if it passes there it has to return to the Assembly for a floor vote. This is good, as we stand a better chance stopping bills in the Assembly than in the Senate. All are simple majority votes - the SAME BILL (no amendments) has to receive greater than 20 YES votes in the senate and over 40 YES votes in the assembly to move on to the governor.

last year it couldn't make it through the senate. We can stop this thing AGAIN if we all work together.

Mike

chris
08-03-2006, 9:26 PM
And if that happens, we'll be there with tools to help you do that.

But most importantly, keep checking:
http://calnra.com/?summary=ab352&year=2006

If the status of the bill changes, likely it will be reflected there within the hour. WITH recommended actions and contact tools for the right committee/body.

AB352 passed it's house of origin by the 2005 deadline but then stalled last year in the Senate. Until recently, it remained on the inactive file, but it can progress at any pace. It was amended in the Senate, so if it passes there it has to return to the Assembly for a floor vote. This is good, as we stand a better chance stopping bills in the Assembly than in the Senate. All are simple majority votes - the SAME BILL (no amendments) has to receive greater than 20 YES votes in the senate and over 40 YES votes in the assembly to move on to the governor.

last year it couldn't make it through the senate. We can stop this thing AGAIN if we all work together.

Mike

well said mike and if we work together we can kick their arse and i would love to see that.

paradox
08-04-2006, 6:59 AM
Hello,

I am todd Lizotte, the inventor of microstamping. As for your diligent search for donations, I can save you time.

I only donate to the Republican Party in NH, Republican presidential candidates and the NRA legislative action committee. Yes, I am an NRA member and a gun owner.

As for how this project is moving forward, it is owned by ID Dynamics a group in Seattle WA. As of last month the board of directors agreed that the technology is going to be given free of charge to the firearms industry. So there will be no royalty costs at all.

Also, Hitachi does not own microstamping.

As for who will make money on it. Your guess is as good as mine.

Best regards,
Todd


Check out my comments on page 2. I didn't do too shabby in a few minutes of web searching. I got the Hitachi connection wrong, but that’s where the trail seemed to end.

Anyway, Todd, from the bottom of my heart, you are yet another Bill Ruger. Donating to the NRA does not absolve you from stabbing gun owners in the back. Some things shouldn’t have the energy invested in them to invent, patent, and sell to the highest bidder. Microstamping is one of them. May the grand Irony of the Universe stab you in the back in a most unpleasant way.

chris
08-04-2006, 9:51 AM
i just hope we defeat this bill once and for and guys like todd should just go away and never come back we (gun owners) don't need guys like this stabbing us in the back. i think we can defeat this bill third time is a charm.

Doctor Suarez
08-04-2006, 6:08 PM
I haven't read the whole thread, but I have to say: We may have to throw our lot in with Schwarzenegger.

I know he's been less-than-stellar, but things are so dicey in this state right now that a gesture of disapproval means Angelides gets elected, and he'll sign any and all anti-gun bills that reach his desk. Arnie has vetoed the vast majority of anti-gun bills he's seen.

This is no time for gestures. We have to do what's best for our rights at all times or risk losing them in a meaningful way.

Besides, gun-owner support might even persuade Arnie to back us even harder. Just a hope, I know, but there it is.

chris
08-04-2006, 10:09 PM
we must get out the vote this year if not we will lose so big i may move out of here sooner rather than later.

DrjonesUSA
08-07-2006, 10:25 AM
I haven't read the whole thread, but I have to say: We may have to throw our lot in with Schwarzenegger.

I know he's been less-than-stellar, but things are so dicey in this state right now that a gesture of disapproval means Angelides gets elected, and he'll sign any and all anti-gun bills that reach his desk. Arnie has vetoed the vast majority of anti-gun bills he's seen.

This is no time for gestures. We have to do what's best for our rights at all times or risk losing them in a meaningful way.

Besides, gun-owner support might even persuade Arnie to back us even harder. Just a hope, I know, but there it is.



Oh, ABSOLUTELY!!!!!!!

I firmly believe that Arnold is absolutely UN-defeatable!

He's too big of a celebrity to be defeated.

He'll have to be termed out....that's the only way he'll get out of office.

As you said, he's not the gun owner's best friend, but he sure as heck isn't our enemy like angelides or Red Davis.

bg
08-10-2006, 12:00 PM
L.A Mayor and Police Chief sound off regarding AB352
even though Bratton admits it will do little on one scale. >
http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/local/Los_Angeles/Los_Angeles_Times/SIG=133dit0uj/*http%3A//www.latimes.com/news/local/los_angeles_metro/la-me-guns10aug10,1,3142603.story?track=rss

Opponents complain that the bill would do little to deter criminals, and even Bratton acknowledged that only a small percentage of Los Angeles gun crime is caused by criminals using properly registered weapons.
These two guys can't control their areas, so they pick
an inanimate tool to attack..:rolleyes:

T. Lizotte
08-10-2006, 12:34 PM
Hello Todd Again,

I understand about being a member of the NRA, luckily do not feel I need to be absolved from anything, nor do I have sleepless nights.

I do believe it is in our interest to assist law enforcement. As for if this technology will help or not, the key is what ballistic forensic professionals think, not what I think

As for how to invent, what to invent and measuring the fall out ... For everyone one of you, there is someone who thinks the opposite. So, in the end, neither of you have the answers.

With regards to your technical analysis, appropriate, but not 100% correct. The microstrcutures are difficult to see and remove. The type of cirminal we are talking about are not super smart. As for what it gives law enforcement .. information on trafficking patterns, routes and leads to straw purchasers who make it difficult for the industry and all of us.

I do not have time to go into detail today, but I will log back on next week to outline the details of the technology.

I appreciate the feedback and understand your position.

Just a note: the industry has started to make inquiries about the technology, I think it will be implemented with or without a law being passed.

Best regards,
Todd

grammaton76
08-10-2006, 2:16 PM
With regards to your technical analysis, appropriate, but not 100% correct. The microstrcutures are difficult to see and remove. The type of cirminal we are talking about are not super smart. As for what it gives law enforcement .. information on trafficking patterns, routes and leads to straw purchasers who make it difficult for the industry and all of us.

I think the biggest issue, is that if it becomes an identifying mark of the gun, then it becomes a federal crime to remove it by replacing a firing pin. If you could address that one concern, that's probably the biggest issue any of us have with this. I know it is for me.

chiefcrash
08-10-2006, 2:19 PM
I think the biggest issue, is that if it becomes an identifying mark of the gun, then it becomes a federal crime to remove it by replacing a firing pin. If you could address that one concern, that's probably the biggest issue any of us have with this. I know it is for me.

that and the price jump for guns...

and what about milsurp guns?

grammaton76
08-10-2006, 2:26 PM
that and the price jump for guns...

and what about milsurp guns?

If it were passed, I believe it only affects admitting guns onto the 'safe handgun list', right? C&R doesn't go through that, and anything currently listed would stay listed. Price jump, yeah, that would definitely suck.

VeryCoolCat
08-10-2006, 2:38 PM
This law is a waste. Ammunition can be stolen and reloaded.

What if you fired your gun and you missed a few brass pieces... some guy picked em up, reloaded em, and sold em cash & carry. Which will make huge amounts of money and open a new entrepreneurial experience for the criminal mastermind.

That reloading ammo is used in a crime and they trace it back to you. This argument can be used in all... if not... majority of crimes as a defense against any thing this law will do.

AxonGap
08-10-2006, 5:28 PM
This legislation is based on theory and statistics. I deal w/ statistics all day, and statistics can be molded to fit an agenda. As for the technology, I don’t think any of us should underestimate the effectiveness of microstamping, likewise I don’t think the creators and administrators of this device should underestimate the intelligence of a criminal that is well informed.

anotherone
08-10-2006, 6:02 PM
This law is easily defeated by any criminal smart enought o use the internet. Unless they're going to make it unlawful to purchase firing pins online it will only take moments for a criminal to not only aquire unmarked parts, but also to learn how to install them step by step. Just look at how many AR-15s got into the state... 99.9% of those rifles came across the border as parts and many were assembled by people who had never done any gunsmithing in their lives. The internet is very powerful.

rorschach
08-10-2006, 7:13 PM
This law is a waste. Ammunition can be stolen and reloaded.

What if you fired your gun and you missed a few brass pieces... some guy picked em up, reloaded em, and sold em cash & carry. Which will make huge amounts of money and open a new entrepreneurial experience for the criminal mastermind.

That reloading ammo is used in a crime and they trace it back to you. This argument can be used in all... if not... majority of crimes as a defense against any thing this law will do.

You're kidding right??

Microstamping stamps the primer not the brass. Primers are replaced when the brass is reloaded. I doubt, even if this does pass, that there will be a huge underground criminal black market for used brass.

If passed it would only apply to new semi-auto handguns added to the list starting in 2009. Revolvers, long guns, and semi-auto handguns already on the list would be exempt. I really don't think the feds would go along with serialized firing pins as an identifying mark, as it is not part of the receiver, and firing pins can easily be swapped out. There's no way they could ever enforce this crap.

AxonGap
08-10-2006, 8:42 PM
One of the first things most crooks do to stolen weapons is remove any identifying marks. Even though full removal of the serial # is almost impossible unless you alter the metal somehow, they will simply add one more thing to the laundry list to make them untraceable (new firing pins). Sounds like it will work, and in a perfect world it would be an awesome way to ID stolen weapons, but criminals are ALWAYS going to find new ways to beat the system!

dwtt
08-10-2006, 9:06 PM
I do believe it is in our interest to assist law enforcement. As for if this technology will help or not, the key is what ballistic forensic professionals think, not what I think

As for what it gives law enforcement .. information on trafficking patterns, routes and leads to straw purchasers who make it difficult for the industry and all of us.
Todd
Folks, this guy is a tool of the gun grabbers, and he's trying to make a lot of money in the process. All his talk sounds just like the BS that comes from his buddy Koretz. He even uses the right key words like "trafficking" and "assist law enforcement".
This "technology" won't help the police solve crimes and it certainly won't give information on trafficking patterns.. The police haven't asked for it. This guy is just helping the gun banners make it eventually so difficult to buy guns that no new guns will be sold in CA. I don't consider him any different from the folks at the Brady bunch and he is our enemy, just pretending to be our friend.

grammaton76
08-10-2006, 9:18 PM
I don't consider him any different from the folks at the Brady bunch and he is our enemy, just pretending to be our friend.

I never saw him pretending to be our friend, actually. Just a guy wanting to try to correct what he sees as a faulty view of his product.

Personally, I want to see him answer the question of serialization, as that's the single most critical point it raises, and he hasn't spoken to the issue yet.

Talkin2u2
08-10-2006, 11:05 PM
Folks, this guy is a tool of the gun grabbers, and he's trying to make a lot of money in the process. All his talk sounds just like the BS that comes from his buddy Koretz. He even uses the right key words like "trafficking" and "assist law enforcement".
This "technology" won't help the police solve crimes and it certainly won't give information on trafficking patterns.. The police haven't asked for it. This guy is just helping the gun banners make it eventually so difficult to buy guns that no new guns will be sold in CA. I don't consider him any different from the folks at the Brady bunch and he is our enemy, just pretending to be our friend.


YES!

That is exactly right! You could not be more correct!

We should not be fooled.

RS
Sac, CA

Icarus
08-11-2006, 8:35 PM
Mr. Lizotte states in part, "the key is what forensic professionals think". Some of these professionals were instrumental in enacting Marylands law which requires a fired casing to be sent to the State lab and registered to the gun owner. The objective is the same as microstamping but more cumbersom. This system has been a failure, not because the theory didn't sound great but because it was just not practical over the short term. Unless there is a blanket requirement covering all firearms and law enforcement is willing to wait years to establish a nation wide data base the system isn't practical. Perhaps the corporations who own the rights to manufacture the equipment will donate it to law enforcement in the interest of public safety and billionaire New York mayor Bloomberg will donate the money to pay the extra LE people required to implement the system.

anotherone
08-14-2006, 6:55 PM
Microstamping is simply an attempt at a state-wide handgun ban. Everything except C&R handguns will be going "bye-bye" becauuse no gun manufacturer is going to bother making a gun with all the crazy requirements: disconnect, loaded indicator, microstamper!

Eventually the US Supreme court is going to have to hear a 2nd Amendment case. I'm tellin ya the PRK is darn close to banning guns through a patchwork of strict "safety requirements" and feature bans.

Doctor Suarez
08-14-2006, 10:43 PM
This argument that "criminals aren't smart" is pure wishful thinking.

Criminals get away with the majority of their crimes. Sounds pretty smart to me.

I knew guys who, as little kids, knew how to steal candy bars from 7-11 by filling slurpee cups with them and then dispensing slurpee over the top. Pay 75 cents and walk out with $20 worth of candy. These were children.

Some criminals will always be stupid, because some crimes are stupid. Other criminals will be far more savvy and innovative. The stupid ones are the ones we know about, because they get caught. The rest will brush this and all of Mr. Lizotte's other brilliant ideas like so much dandruff.

Mr. Lizotte, you must remember that my freedom is more important than your good idea.

hoffmang
08-16-2006, 8:43 PM
Mr. Lizotte, isn't it true that a study of your technology is currently being conducted by experts at U.C. Davis? Wouldn't you agree that it is premature for the legislature to even consider AB 352 until at least that study is completed?

Antigun supporters of AB 352, namely the Educational Fund of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (http://www.csgv.org/) (CSGV) and their lobbyist Bob Ricker, with whom you have aligned yourself, told the legislature that adding your technology to would only increase the cost of firearms by a few pennies. Yet, isn't it a fact that your company is charging U.C. Davis (and ultimately taxpayers) $150 per firing pin for U.C. Davis to conduct its study of your technology? Isn't true that the cost of adding your technology will greatly increase the cost of firearms in California?

Mr. Lizotte, isn't it true that major California law enforcement groups, such as the Calif Association of Police Chiefs , the CA DAs' Association and the CA Sheriffs' Association are not supporting AB 352?

Mr. Lizotte isn't it true that the study by Professor Krivosta in the Winter 2006 AFTE (http://www.afte.org/Journal/AFTEJournal.htm) Journal proves that all of your statements were not true? Isn't it true that in this study the markings were removed in a matters of seconds using common household tools and that the firing pins were then re-instered into firearms that functioned (fired) perfectly?

Isn't also true that criminals can simply remove a marked firing pin and replace it with an unmarked spare part in a matter of seconds?

Are you really not going to benefit financially? Wouldn't it be best to let the market decide if this is worthwhile before legislating it?

-Gene

boosterboy
08-20-2006, 4:35 PM
This argument that "criminals aren't smart" is pure wishful thinking.

Criminals get away with the majority of their crimes. Sounds pretty smart to me.

I knew guys who, as little kids, knew how to steal candy bars from 7-11 by filling slurpee cups with them and then dispensing slurpee over the top. Pay 75 cents and walk out with $20 worth of candy. These were children.

Some criminals will always be stupid, because some crimes are stupid. Other criminals will be far more savvy and innovative. The stupid ones are the ones we know about, because they get caught. The rest will brush this and all of Mr. Lizotte's other brilliant ideas like so much dandruff.

Mr. Lizotte, you must remember that my freedom is more important than your good idea.

That's very true. I recall reading the Autobiography of Malcom X, and one of Malcom's cell mates said :

"the difference between us and people on the outside is that we got caught"

rick_in_lb
08-26-2006, 5:44 AM
Well Gentleman and Ladies it is a wait and see situation now. I really want to see how they implement this and to what arms. Mil Surp, Heck we can make our own pins or have friends make them. Older guns, how are the going to be identified, will the be recalled? On stamping the primer, I understand that but someone mentioned they are going to stamp the case, how are they going to do that without redesigning the weapon. Like I said it is a wait and see situation now. Mr. Lizotte said he will get back to us so I hope he keeps his promise. We do need more answers that we are assuming here. Yes our minds do wander and ideas of Big Brother coming down float around also. Time will tell. I have to go to work know and find a good small fine file :D

AxonGap
08-26-2006, 8:50 AM
LEO's have a hard enough time trying to ID assault weapons let alone enforcing miniscule laws like this. Agencies are stretched too thin as it is. Are they supposed to take a microscope in the field to inspect our firing pins? Or perhaps we'll have to put huge sticker on our firearm that says "AB 352 compliant", kinda like a hybrid car in the carpool lane!

Can'thavenuthingood
08-26-2006, 9:31 AM
No it did not pass yet. I believe it goes back to the Assembly for concurrence of changes made, amendments, while in the Senate.

This bill doesn't take effect until way out in 2009, I thought it was Jan 2007? A way to squirm out of bill ownership? Let time pass and so memory.

Regardles its one step closer. Once they discover that criminals are using "out of state" guns or revolvers, they will come up with repairs to this bill to make it ironclad.


Vick

Elandur
08-26-2006, 1:12 PM
Great, another inconvenience to lawful gun owners...
Thanks a lot, Mr Lizotte. You'll be making our streets safer from the really stupid criminals that cant figure out how to use a file -_-

hoffmang
09-01-2006, 11:32 AM
I just wanted to put up a hopefully last post on this thread. AB-352 was defeated. Good work all here, good work NRA.

Admin - unsticky this post!

Kestryll
09-01-2006, 1:29 PM
I'm going to unsticky this in a happy mood for the victory, I do expect that next year we'll have a sticky up about this same issue however.
These Assembly people need to realize we're not the bad guys.

Mute
09-01-2006, 3:31 PM
These Assembly people need to realize we're not the bad guys.


What makes you think they don't already know that or care?

RT13
09-01-2006, 5:30 PM
Awesome awesome! Good job everyone and thank God!

mikehaas
09-01-2006, 5:49 PM
Editorial: Ballistic sleuthing
High-tech imprints target 'straw' sales

Published 12:01 am PDT Saturday, August 26, 2006
Story appeared in Editorials section, Page B6
...[other beeswax deleted]...
Both the Assembly and Senate have passed AB 352, and as soon as they finish the reconciliation process, it deserves the governor's signature.

http://www.sacbee.com/content/opinion/story/14308634p-15198929c.html
I wonder when the Bee will report the governor has signed it?

Mike

6172crew
09-01-2006, 6:02 PM
I wonder when the Bee will report the governor has signed it?

Mike:D
Im sure everyone one of them is saying "WTF!" right now.