Screwed

[sfbay]

Will the micro stamping affect ppt? Or just new purchases from stores?

[llamatrnr]

Watched Cam Edwards on Sportsman Channel Wed. - he says the stamping will be on the firing pin; pretty easy fix. I think he said also somewhere in the barrel, another easy fix . . .

Another absolutely senseless law written by people with no knowledge related to the basics of firearms.

[jben]

Already well covered in the 2A forum:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=763952

[MakeYaBootyBurn]

Wally so are you going to be the 1st to fork over the additional costs to cover this technology? would you like to be the one to beg pistol manufactures to add this, when they sure as hell don't want to!

think about it, if it's been available for a while, and they haven't added it to their pistols it's cause it's not effing worth it. further more "Susan" why would anyone care to purchase it.

as far as the "criminal" getting his hands on a microstamp pistol, what makes you think he won't file the stamp off?! THINK

[Kyle1886]

Wally, if you have ever been to a range, you see a lot of fired casing on the floor/ground. All that mixed brass has a microstamp. I'm a bad guy. I pick up hands full of brass, some of which came from Wally2528 gun.

I do a dastardly deed, drop a hand full of picked up brass, Wally's included...but I pick up mine. Wally is now a possible suspect along with those others that the old brass belong too.

Far fetched--not in the least.

Respectfully
Kyle

ETA: Reloaders buy and sell brass all the time. Since the "stamp" is required in two places, reloaded brass will have multiple stamps...and...

[Zartan]

not all gun laws are bad necessarily, if they aim to keep law abiding persons in legal posession of guns, and remove guns from the criminals hands is not a bad thing, in my opinion.

Impossible

[Tanner68]

Wally,
How hard do you think it will be to defeat the microstamping on a gun. How many microns deep will it be? A little judicious polishing with a file, Flitz, or by some other means, and your gun won't microstamp anymore. But it will still cost a ton more to produce for the manufacturer, and be more expensive to buy for the consumer. And there you have the real point. Microstamping is not about crime reduction. It is about slowly and steadily eroding your 2A rights in California. Fewer manufacturers will comply, and the dwindling pool of guns for sale in California will get more and more expensive.

That is the purpose and motivation. If you believe the purpose is crime reduction and prevention, then you have a lot to learn.

[sjm9877]

Micro stamping = FAIL

[Bruce]

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=763952

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=11369088&postcount=82

[stevemc1979]

It says that this is in effect as long as the process is unencumbered by patent laws? Also, the method must be available to more than one manufacturer. If every manufacturer patents their own method, isn't this law nullified? Similar to "evil features" and "the bullet button"?

[six10]

This latest (already tried) micro-stamping imperative is just another lulabelle backdoor attempt to make the production of CA-compliant handguns so cost-prohibitive to firearms manufacturers that they'll simply stop accommodating CA's ludicrous "roster" requirements (-LCIs, MRs, dumbed-down mags) and exeunt the CA market entirely. Which of course is the intended goal of this asinine law.

And yes, Bruce, this is a multiple-dupe thread, but not everyone reads CGN in its entirety and this odious, most cynical decree deserves widespread reiteration, imho...

[SJgunguy24]

I am probably one of those uniformed ppl you mention above, but thinking in my family and my personal security, I believe this measure is aiming to ease the tracking of the firing gun when a felony is committed, so the owner can be spotted and identified in real time and brought before justice, so how bad is that?, if it is a criminal or a person that should not have access to guns, the gun would be confiscated immediately, and it that is the case, to confiscate guns in dangerous hands, it should be supported. Cost increase? Just budget what your income allows you to. A less fancy smartphone probably will cover the gap. My 2 cents.

SO do you beleive that poor people have a right to self defense? If someone can only afford a Hi Point at 175$, the 200$ price increase is going to hurt them.

Well, not being a lawyer or a cop I can tell that stolen guns are not counted in thousands to begin with, if a gun is stolent the owner must be held accountable for the lack of preventive measures like having a safe. Second if he reports the gun stolen he is in the safe side and when the gun gets recovered the marks in the case might tell if it is linked to a felony so the last person in posesion is at stake, not a bad thing, right? Third you will be surprised by the amount of people buying guns legally and then selling them to illegal hands (ATF's Fast and Furious case rings a bell for you? With this measure the felon and the legal buyer of the gun are both screwed, does that sound OK to you? Believe me, I do not want restrictions etiher, but let's be logical sometimes, not all gun laws are bad necessarily, if they aim to keep law abiding persons in legal posession of guns, and remove guns form the criminals hands is not a bad thing, in my opinion.

Your at work and some douche bag steals your safe, should you be heald acountable for the action of an object that you have no control of? If you actually did a little reaserch you would find out that Maryland had a system where every gun sold had to provide their state police with a fired case for crime tracking. They cancelled the program after 10 years because it helped solve......ZERO crimes and cost over 10million a year to maintain. Canada cancelled their program as well.
You ever go on vacation? What if when you got back the police arrested you at the airport for murder. When you were gone for a month your guns were stolen and used to kill someone. By your reasoning, your going to the pokey.
Or even better if one of your guns gets stolen should the cops be allowed to take the rest of them because your irresponible?
I'm sorry but your reasoning is a lesson in Fail and we should all learn from you.

What part of this isn't clear?

A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

[SJgunguy24]

Don't forget, Kamala Harris is the same person who refused to push for the death penalty of a man who murdered a SF police officer by shooting him in the back.
She also used City money to deport illegals who were facing serious felony crimes even including murder. She is not a freind to anyone.

[rm1911]

it seems at least in the interim, the on roster guns are not affected. So as long as an particular make and model are being produced and rostered, new production of old models will still be available. unless I read it wrong, which is possible.

that will give us time to fight this nonsense. what avenues would be successful?

most certainly the certainty factor. there is quite simply no guarantee that any brass recovered at a scene would belong to the firearm used. as with DNA testing, and other forensic tests, there is always a margin of error. it would be too great with respect to fired brass unless a) the gun was relatively new b) relatively clean and c) the ammo was factory fresh.

I doubt criminals are familiar of hoppe's #9 and break free. dirt and residue would very much impede the process. also, reloaded ammo would ave multiple stamps and since the firing pin would be easily de-stamped, (only a tiny area of the pin contacts a primer) a case might have multiple stamps. in fact, there's only two places a stamp could be imprinted: the pin and the chamber. neither is effective or impossible to overcome. a breech would not contact the case hard enough nor have a pointed enough piece to imprint. as for chambers, the micro stamping piece would be visible upon inspection and again, easily alterable. and of course barrels for any semi-auto are easily replaceable.

next argument comes with application and intent of law. here again, the law fails. if the intent is to trace guns used in crime, it won't work. what it would do is place undue burden on purchasers of firearms as the price would be prohibitive. so the intent and application of the law are clearly different than stated purpose. clearly, as has already been shown with the roster, the number of handguns available to the public has dwindled. the actual result of the roster is to limit firearms purchases, not make them safe.

what has been the effect of the roster

http://blogs.sacbee.com/the-public-eye/2011/04/california-sees-big-drop-in-accidental-firearm-deaths.html

don't read the headline. we have had the roster since 2001. during the first years accidental deaths increased, then peaked in 2005 (which was a huge abberation) then declined. ok, so what has the roster proven? statistically nothing. it has not altered accidental deaths, no matter how you try to spin it.

but what has it actually done? made impossible (or damn near unless you SSE) to acquire new models of firearms. it has limited our rights to legally purchase firearms. which proves the intent. They've had 10 years + to see the outcome of the roster and the only logical outcome is that it limits the availability of handguns. period, end of story.

which is of course their only purpose in passing the laws. as we all know.

[Mikeb]

Don't forget, Kamala Harris is the same person who refused to push for the death penalty of a man who murdered a SF police officer by shooting him in the back.
She also used City money to deport illegals who were facing serious felony crimes even including murder. She is not a freind to anyone.

I hope everyone remembers this ^