|
2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion Discuss California 2A related litigation and legal topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#121
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Heck, if I was a criminal, I would file off the microstamps and exclusively shoot reloaded brass from the local range. It would conclusively clear me of the crime. "Your honor, these cases were stamped with the serial number 23h234bh32 when they were fired. As you can plainly see in exhibit A, my gun is not capable of such stamps, nor is that my gun's serial number. I suggest you go find the guy who owns the gun with that serial, and ask him where HE was on the night of the murder." Case dismissed. It's nothing less than an arbitrary impossible requirement designed to prevent new models of guns from being sold. It's insulting for our politicians to pretend it's something other than that. If microstamping actually came to fruition, legislators would just invent some new impossible requirement to take its place. Like all pistols have to have a GPS beacon that alerts the authorities when it detects that it's been fired at a person, or something equally ridiculous and impossible. That's why the roster just needs to go away. They can invent new nonsense a lot faster than we can get rid of it, until we can get rid of the tools they use for implementing that nonsense.
__________________
Settle down, folks. The new "ghost gun" regulations probably don't do what you think they do. Last edited by CandG; 01-28-2017 at 12:29 AM.. |
#123
|
||||
|
||||
'primed case' + 'propellant' + 'projectile(s)' is a little wonky, as opposed to saying 'primer' + 'case' ..., but it's probably just their way of making sure they catch both rimfire and center fire ammunition in the definition. In any event, I agree with your assertion.
|
#124
|
|||
|
|||
Ojisan,
"The test employed fully optimized firing pins that were designed to work with that specific model of firearm, and used five different brands of ammunition.".... "breech face markings transferred to cartridge casings were legible 96% of the time. Between firing pin and breech face markings, all eight microstamped digits were identifiable in all cases.” (1SER:0119-120.) “Although the firing pin and breech face are viable and effective locations for microstamping, various other surfaces—including the firing pin port, ejector, extractor, and chamber wall can be used.” (1SER:0118.) Ojisan, you're missing the point that the inventor of microstampoing technology has made modified parts for specific models of firearms so that his technology will work. |
#125
|
||||
|
||||
He made a couple firing pin samples...so what?
The firing pin marks the primer, not the case. No solutions or suggestions to mark the case in two places were found or made. He only made a few characters on the end of the firing pin. He did not engrave make, model and full serial number as required by law, and check that for consistency of transfer and legibility. A partial test like this does not prove feasibility or practicality....other than to prove that "the idea needs more work" (that means it does NOT work). You should read the microstamp patent, and see that it requires use of a hologram. Next read up on how to make a hologram. (A unique, individually coded hologram is needed because there is no way to put make, model and serial number on a small stamp). Tell me how the hologram will be made during the firing process. You know that if any gun maker could do this, they would have the CA market to themselves. They could all retire rich by just charging license fees for the process....no need to make guns anymore. Given the huge profit potential, why hasn't anyone, gun maker or private inventor, figured out how to do this? Simple...it can't be done.
__________________
|
#126
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#127
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I agree with what you're saying, but I also think the argument that Glock uses (which is missing from NSSF and NRA's argument) is that the second amendment allows for every individual to arm themselves with the same type of arms that are commonly being used my the majority of citizens. Since nobody in the USA is using micro stamp enabled guns, Californians don't need to either. |
#128
|
||||
|
||||
There were / are several versions of the patent.
I just skimmed this one, the glaring fault is that this explanation presumes that fired cases can be extracted from a chamber with uneven internal surfaces. Note how carefully chambers are made smooth and even so the fired cases can be extracted. Assuming a convex transfer to the case, two sets of characters, large enough and protruding far enough into the chamber to make legible stamps every time will certainly cause casings to be stuck in the chamber. Assuming a converse transfer to the case, the case brass expanding outwards to fill the character holes in the chamber walls will also surely cause stuck cases on extraction. The whole idea shows a complete lack of understanding of how firearms actually work.
__________________
|
#129
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#130
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The only way to stamp the side of a casing and have it be legible, is to have the stamper physically move out of the way before the cartridge gets extracted, and that technology definitely does not exist. The only other place available to stamp is the rear of the case, which as we already discussed, is impossible because of the pre-existing manufacturer's stamps that are there.
__________________
Settle down, folks. The new "ghost gun" regulations probably don't do what you think they do. Last edited by CandG; 01-28-2017 at 11:13 AM.. |
#131
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#133
|
||||
|
||||
There is a whole due process for holding lawmakers responsible. Ballot box, Jury box, cartridge box.
__________________
http://www.thepolemicist.net/2013/01...t-for-gun.html |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Unfortunately, I think that if I disclose details of this method on a public forum, I have just placed it into the public domain, and the technique would be "unencumbered by patents". If anyone is interested in helping to patent the method, I would gladly describe it privately after a secrecy agreement was executed. I don't want any money for it, I just think that if a few like-minded people collaborated and filed for a patent, we could keep it from being available to the state of CA. I am a retired engineer and don't want to put a lot of time into it, but would collaborate with anyone to help prevent CA from being able to use a technique that I think would be workable. Send me a PM if you are interested. |
#137
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Settle down, folks. The new "ghost gun" regulations probably don't do what you think they do. |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/C...w-11021536.php
California Supreme Court to rule on gun law By Bob Egelko Published 7:38 pm, Wednesday, March 22, 2017 The state Supreme Court agreed Wednesday to decide whether gun manufacturers have the right to challenge a California law requiring identifying microstamps on bullets fired from semiautomatic pistols, a requirement the manufacturers claim can’t be met with current technology. |
#139
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#140
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Je...of_Handgun_Law
__________________
Settle down, folks. The new "ghost gun" regulations probably don't do what you think they do. |
#143
|
||||
|
||||
If the owner of the patent freely admits micro stamping doesn't work (he produced no proof of concept) instead of doing battle with the 9th district trying to get to SCOTUS (millions of years and thousands of lives), challenge the patent at the US patent office and have it rejected. No patent, no AG certification, no requirement to micro stamp.
__________________
If you find yourself in a fair fight, you're doing it all wrong. |
#144
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The PC (31910(b)) says Quote:
The law does not require that the technology 'work'.
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.” Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. |
#145
|
|||
|
|||
If the microstamping doesn't need to work can't all manufacturers claim to have it on all current and future models already? Suppose we were talking about loaded chamber indicators. Is the language similar? Could a manufacturer claim to have one but state it just doesn't work and still expect to have that gun placed on the roster?
|
#146
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
So, the law goes into effect when there are no patent issues regardless of whether the technology exists. The requirements for stamping are spelled out in the law and they must be satisfied for a gun to be added to the roster. If a gun cannot stamp the case in two different location with certain size markings, etc., it cannot be added to the roster. Even if there was new technology that was newly patented and thus unavailable to the manufacturers "unencumbered by patents," the law has already gone into effect so nothing would change.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member |
#147
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
What Librarian meant, I believe, is that there was no requirement for microstamping to be a working technology, before making it a general requirement that all new guns need to have it. There *sort of* was a requirement for it to be a working technology before it could be mandated, but it was a half-@**ed requirement that could be sidestepped by simply having the AG sign a letter saying "ya, sure it's available" It's sort of like, if the state were to require all new cars to be able to operate submerged underwater. So then, all new cars are required to be able to prove that they can do that, even though the technology to make a modern car operate submerged underwater doesn't really exist. The law never said the technology had to work before they could require it, they only require it to work on a particular product before that product can be sold. The net result is: no new cars. Excuse me, handguns.
__________________
Settle down, folks. The new "ghost gun" regulations probably don't do what you think they do. Last edited by CandG; 04-13-2017 at 8:18 AM.. |
#148
|
|||
|
|||
Ah I understand now. All handguns must have 1oz of unobtainium and that requirement was triggered because Kamala Harris said so.
Welp that is clear cut a handgun ban. I'm sure the courts will straighten this out in two weeks. |
#149
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
More specifically, Harris signed a letter saying that she believes unobtanium is freely available to anyone who wants it, which of course makes it true.
__________________
Settle down, folks. The new "ghost gun" regulations probably don't do what you think they do. Last edited by CandG; 04-13-2017 at 11:06 AM.. |
#150
|
|||
|
|||
Micro-stamping is a ruse, designed to delay constitutional right to purchase!
If case stamping of fired rounds was a viable legal strategy to connect a firearm to a crime, California would simply pass the following: 1. Gun owners place their ammunition orders with the FFL. 2. FFL orders the ammunition from the manufacturer stamped with owners required firearm info, (make, model, serial, etc) 3. Ammunition chain of custody is strictly enforced. 4. Pass a law that possession of another owner's ammunition or casing(s) is a felony [loss of legal right to possess a firearm] I present this alternative scenario to show how ridiculous the statute is to require a firearm to stamp the casings of fired rounds. Neither scenario provides legal proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a particular projectile came from casings found at a crime scene nor the owner of a casing fired it. It is not hard to to switch bullets to different shells and can be difficult to match bullets with the casings found at the scene. http://www.firearmsid.com/bullets/bullet1.htm It is also easy to scatter casings picked up from a shooting range at the scene of the crime. Other than an eyewitness, it will be the bullet, firearm (if found), and the suspects fingerprints/DNA will be the evidence that convicts. |
#151
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Sent from my SM-T900 using Tapatalk |
#152
|
|||
|
|||
I agree, also if micro stamping ever became a viable option I’m sure it could be easily defeated in several ways from only using a revolver to sanding the rounds before using.
|
#153
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Or just a brass catcher? LOL |
#154
|
|||
|
|||
Which reminds me... I tend to spend more time at the range picking up brass casings than I actually do shooting.
If someone could come up with a brass magnet... that would be greeeeeat. |
#155
|
|||
|
|||
What we need is a "Safety for Law Enforcement" initiative. All firearms owned by the state must meet all safety requirements as passed by the legislature.
No loaded chamber indicator, the state must melt it down for safety. The state can only buy firearms with functional microstamping. When the first "fire-able by the owner" only firearm is available, the state must replace every no complying firearm immediately with the safe tech, It's for the children. Oh and police are not killers, they have no need for magazines with more than 10 rounds. Only murderous thugs have a need for that. |
#156
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
There's never been a rule for mandated smartguns in CA. Not yet, anyways.
__________________
Settle down, folks. The new "ghost gun" regulations probably don't do what you think they do. Last edited by CandG; 05-08-2017 at 6:34 PM.. |
#157
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Its called an eddy current. Might be a little bulky to carry to the range though. |
#158
|
|||
|
|||
Sorry, no intent to give the legislature new ideas.
Please note I included how simple stamping can be accomplished and defeated. Even if a firearm could microstamp a casing, proving the bullet came from the casing is difficult and likely impossible! |
#160
|
||||
|
||||
The stamp would be on the primer, which is replaced during reloading. The concept is bad guy don't stick around to pick up their brass and certainly don't bother to reload spent brass.
__________________
If you find yourself in a fair fight, you're doing it all wrong. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|