Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > 2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion Discuss California 2A related litigation and legal topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #2561  
Old 08-09-2018, 5:02 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,273
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
You lost me there. How is the panel decision not in the interest of the anti-2A crowd? Didn't the roster get upheld?
My very bad. I must have been thinking of Young v. Hawaii or just not thinking. I see that I also typed that 5 votes were needed to grant a petition for cert when I and I believe most everyone knows you only need 4 to hear the appeal.
Reply With Quote
  #2562  
Old 08-09-2018, 5:38 PM
mshill's Avatar
mshill mshill is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,747
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ5&G23 View Post
Agreed, but it does more than that. Gunowners are mostly a very law abiding group, but as CA abuses lawful gunowners more and more, I suspect the side effects will go far beyond handgun blackmarket and straw purchases. Lawful gunowners will just silently say "fooey" to other firearm related laws and just buy/sell/trade/loan/carry what the want when they want. I certainly couldn't fault that if I was a juror on such a case.
It's already happening. I know many that just don't care and when it comes to firearms and ammunition they do what they want when they want and wherever they want. Some out of ignorance others just out of spite.
__________________
Quote:
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.
Reply With Quote
  #2563  
Old 08-09-2018, 6:58 PM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 474
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I'm not sure why people bring up taking brass with microstamps on them from the range and putting it at a crime scene ..

Lots of brass has people's thumb prints on it from loading it. You could takes brass right now from a range and spread it around a crime scene with thumb prints and connect people to crimes. Guess what the CADOJ takes when you buy a gun, yeah, thumb prints.

The microstamps aren't really different from your thumb print.
Reply With Quote
  #2564  
Old 08-09-2018, 8:13 PM
Old4eyes's Avatar
Old4eyes Old4eyes is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Nevada
Posts: 1,429
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

"The microstamps aren't really different from your thumb print."

The multiple vendors (people) are turning out new products (kids) with thumb prints and the kids work.

No vendor is turning out a workable gun that has microstamping. That is a difference.
__________________
Send Lawyers, Guns and Money - On second thought, hold the Lawyers.
Reply With Quote
  #2565  
Old 08-09-2018, 10:00 PM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 9,476
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post
Guess what the CADOJ takes when you buy a gun, yeah, thumb prints.
You don't know what they do with the thumbprint and why they do it, do you? They don't remember why either it seems.

Quote:
The microstamps aren't really different from your thumb print.
Really? You have a thumb with a print on it, how many guns have microstamps? How well does each work?

Don't fall for it. It is basically just a gun ban.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #2566  
Old 08-09-2018, 10:38 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 13,924
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
A firearm having been connected to a crime by ballistics or otherwise can then be connected to the owner of record through the serial number.
If the owner says "I have no idea what you're talking about," does the "owner of record" provide any particular benefit to the prosecution?
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #2567  
Old 08-10-2018, 5:37 AM
champu's Avatar
champu champu is online now
NRA Member, CRPA Member,
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Redondo Beach
Posts: 726
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post
I'm not sure why people bring up taking brass with microstamps on them from the range and putting it at a crime scene ..

Lots of brass has people's thumb prints on it from loading it. You could takes brass right now from a range and spread it around a crime scene with thumb prints and connect people to crimes. Guess what the CADOJ takes when you buy a gun, yeah, thumb prints.

The microstamps aren't really different from your thumb print.
If a resizing die were as effective at removing micro stamps (however and wherever they are hypothetically imprinted) as a case tumbler is at removing finger prints then you might have a point.
Reply With Quote
  #2568  
Old 08-10-2018, 5:49 AM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 474
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kemasa View Post
Don't fall for it. It is basically just a gun ban.
I agree, I never said it's a good idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by champu View Post
If a resizing die were as effective at removing micro stamps (however and wherever they are hypothetically imprinted) as a case tumbler is at removing finger prints then you might have a point.
It's not the resizing die, it's the primer removal makes quick work of it.

Last edited by abinsinia; 08-10-2018 at 5:51 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2569  
Old 08-10-2018, 8:28 AM
Sousuke Sousuke is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,732
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post


It's not the resizing die, it's the primer removal makes quick work of it.
Remember, the requirement is two stamps.
__________________
WTB: Chronograph
WTB: T Series Hi Power
WTB: Bisley Revolver (Uberti type)
WTB: Pietta 45lc conversion cylinder
Reply With Quote
  #2570  
Old 08-10-2018, 9:16 AM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 9,476
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Reloaded ammo could be an issue. If the person gets range brass and has a firearm which doesn't have the microstamp, then if they are caught, it could be reasonable doubt for a jury since the microstamp points to someone else.

But lets say it is perfect and there is no reloaded ammo. So the government can trace the firearm to the original purchaser. Since criminals can't buy firearms legally, it won't trace to them. This means that it is likely that the firearm was stolen or illegally sold. If it was stolen, the trace is worthless since it would stop there. If it was illegally sold, unless you have multiple firearms which go through a given person or gun shop, it would be hard to prove anything.

Then there are a lot of older firearms which don't have the microstamp, so that could make those firearms much more valuable to criminals. Since it is just a limited law, then it means that it would be likely that the firearms would come from locations where it isn't required or older firearms which don't have it, so it won't help a thing.

Unless you can find the firearm, worse than a needle in a haystack, it won't help at all and with the no questions asked destruction of firearms gun buy backs it means that it won't matter at all since the firearm can be safely disposed of.

Then add to all that, it is likely that it would be possible to modify the microstamping so that it is useless. All of this means that it only costs money to the law abiding and has little, if any, benefit for criminal acts.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #2571  
Old 08-10-2018, 10:16 AM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,273
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
If the owner says "I have no idea what you're talking about," does the "owner of record" provide any particular benefit to the prosecution?
You tell us. If the last known owner has no explanation as to why he doesn't have the gun, like he made a theft report, sold it, lost it, or whatever, the benefit could be a narrowing of the investigation. However the owner may have a lead for the investigator, such as identifying who borrowed it or very likely stole it. That may lead to a dead end but it may not.

Last edited by Chewy65; 08-10-2018 at 10:26 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2572  
Old 08-10-2018, 10:57 AM
Uncivil Engineer Uncivil Engineer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 252
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
You tell us. If the last known owner has no explanation as to why he doesn't have the gun, like he made a theft report, sold it, lost it, or whatever, the benefit could be a narrowing of the investigation. However the owner may have a lead for the investigator, such as identifying who borrowed it or very likely stole it. That may lead to a dead end but it may not.
This argument is completely academic, microstamping doesn't bloody work. Until at least one hand gun can be mass produced that satisfies the requirement the state legislature is just banning all new guns.
Reply With Quote
  #2573  
Old 08-10-2018, 11:23 AM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 9,476
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncivil Engineer View Post
This argument is completely academic, microstamping doesn't bloody work. Until at least one hand gun can be mass produced that satisfies the requirement the state legislature is just banning all new guns.
This.

Unless and until you can show that microstamping works LONG TERM, then it shouldn't even be considered. How many rounds can be accurately microstamped? The answer might be zero, but it would need to be thousands of rounds in order for it to even start to hope that it would be effective, then it has to be done in such a manner that criminals can't defeat it since if criminals defeat it, it is useless.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #2574  
Old 08-10-2018, 11:44 AM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 609
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Even the State admits the 'technology isn't there, yet;' but, they blame the manufacturers.

More than a decade after it passed, California gun law still being fought in court

Quote:
...Firearms manufacturers say microstamping is still beyond the range of modern technology. They’ve refused to sell new models of the handguns in the state since the law took effect, and on Wednesday they asked an apparently skeptical state Supreme Court to halt the law’s enforcement...

The state’s lawyer, Deputy Attorney General Janill Richards, disagreed. Gunmakers, she countered, will have the means to comply with the law sometime in the foreseeable future, and the lawmakers are entitled to enact such challenging measures as “an incentive to push technology forward.” ...

The state’s 2013 certification cited the availability of microstamping patents and did not specify the technology needed for compliance. In a court filing, the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence declared that microstamping “has been extensively tested and found to be feasible and reliable,” but argued that the state also has the authority to pass “technology-forcing” laws requiring companies to meet new standards, like clean-air goals for cars, to remain in the California market...
You see? You guys have it backward.

The Legislature sees a patent. As a result, they decide the technology exists and is feasible. So, they pass a Law to 'force' manufacturers to implement the technology they 'believe' exists.

Thus, it is the manufacturers who are refusing to comply. That's why the manufacturer's are not selling newer model firearms in California. It's not about the roster. It's about the manufacturers failing to comply with the Law by implementing (ahem) 'existing' technology. That's why the roster exists; i.e., to force manufacturers to do their part in helping with public safety.

As I noted in another thread... Everyone is happy if you don't let a little thing like reality get in the way. Right? Or, as the State Supreme Court put it...

Quote:
In sum, the case law recognizes that a statute may contain an implied exception for noncompliance based on impossibility where such an exception reflects a proper understanding of the legislative intent behind the statute. We are not aware of any appellate precedent in California that has invoked Civil Code section 3531 or impossibility of compliance to invalidate a statute itself.
The Legislative intent is to 'force the technology' to be developed and implemented, not to ban guns. Therefore, the simple impossibility to implement the technology 'now' does not negate the Law. The manufacturers just need to work harder to make the (ahem) 'existing' technology work.

Last edited by TrappedinCalifornia; 08-10-2018 at 11:55 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2575  
Old 08-10-2018, 11:59 AM
Uncivil Engineer Uncivil Engineer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 252
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

They should read some of the free energy patents and outlaw so power plants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrappedinCalifornia View Post
Even the State admits the 'technology isn't there, yet;' but, they blame the manufacturers.

More than a decade after it passed, California gun law still being fought in court



You see? You guys have it backward.

The Legislature sees a patent. As a result, they decide the technology exists and is feasible. So, they pass a Law to 'force' manufacturers to implement the technology they 'believe' exists.

Thus, it is the manufacturers who are refusing to comply. That's why the manufacturer's are not selling newer model firearms in California. It's not about the roster. It's about the manufacturers failing to comply with the Law by implementing (ahem) 'existing' technology. That's why the roster exists; i.e., to force manufacturers to do their part in helping with public safety.

As I noted in another thread... Everyone is happy if you don't let a little thing like reality get in the way. Right? Or, as the State Supreme Court put it...



The Legislative intent is to 'force the technology' to be developed and implemented, not to ban guns. Therefore, the simple impossibility to implement the technology 'now' does not negate the Law. The manufacturers just need to work harder to make the (ahem) 'existing' technology work.
Reply With Quote
  #2576  
Old 08-10-2018, 2:43 PM
HiND-SIGHT HiND-SIGHT is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 252
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Why didn’t the prosecution make the state prove that the features and method of testing the handguns are actually in the interest of public safety? That’s the point of the lawsuit.......and an easy thing to prove the state wrong by. (LEOs use firearms not approved for public safety)
__________________
Scrödinger's Gun Case: the serial number inside is in a state of quantum flux and can appear in different random states unrelating to how a person views it.
Reply With Quote
  #2577  
Old 08-10-2018, 2:50 PM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 9,476
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HiND-SIGHT View Post
Why didn’t the prosecution make the state prove ...
Just to be accurate, it would be the plaintiff, not the prosecution. Prosecution is only in criminal cases, not civil, and is the government, not a civilian.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #2578  
Old 08-10-2018, 5:11 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,273
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kemasa View Post
Just to be accurate, it would be the plaintiff, not the prosecution. Prosecution is only in criminal cases, not civil, and is the government, not a civilian.
The plaintiff usually has the burden of proof and here the 9th Circuit bent over backwards to defer to the Legislature's finding of practicability.
Reply With Quote
  #2579  
Old 08-11-2018, 7:03 AM
HarryS HarryS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 244
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Microstamping is the bastard fanciful cousin of fired bullet databases, upon which much treasure was wasted by multiple smarties who knew they could make it work "this time". Sort of like marxists, they were, except they finally gave up after failing to contribute to solving a single case anywhere.

Marxists never give up, but that's another subject.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #2580  
Old 08-13-2018, 6:08 AM
AdamVIP AdamVIP is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 322
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Just wait till CA decides that since everyone buys revolvers now they need to change those as well. Every new revolver must now stamp and auto eject the casings. If it can't you cant sell it. This case has literally set the precedent they can make a law where as long as you can dream its possible its good enough for the 9th circuit.
Reply With Quote
  #2581  
Old 08-13-2018, 12:23 PM
keepitlow's Avatar
keepitlow keepitlow is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Born in L.A.-NYC is 2nd home-Rustbelt is home base
Posts: 13
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kemasa View Post
You don't know what they do with the thumbprint and why they do it, do you? They don't remember why either it seems.



Really? You have a thumb with a print on it, how many guns have microstamps? How well does each work?

Don't fall for it. It is basically just a gun ban.
Concur. Just another stop gap measure to chip away at gun rights until they have the vote to repeal the 2A. Once that happens, it is all over for guns.

Just look at all the dem controlled states. No mystery how they work when it comes to guns.
Reply With Quote
  #2582  
Old 08-13-2018, 12:41 PM
Solidsnake87's Avatar
Solidsnake87 Solidsnake87 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 4,163
iTrader: 22 / 100%
Default

Honestly, the manufacturers should band together and allow their guns to fall off the roster. Once off, they can't renew...... It won't look good if only second-hand pistols of old design are the only ones available in ca. It would show the ban for what it is....a ban.
__________________
Quote:
Replying to craigslist for casual encounters is like pokemon with STDs. Gotta catch em all
Quote:
If Hell ever needed a operations manual all it would need is a copy of California's laws
.
Reply With Quote
  #2583  
Old 08-13-2018, 2:22 PM
Offwidth Offwidth is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 79
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by keepitlow View Post
Just look at all the dem controlled states. No mystery how they work when it comes to guns.
If 3/4 of states are firmly controlled by D, guns will be the least of our problems.

Soviet Union 2.0
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 6:35 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.