Cali's microstamping law: de facto Semi-auto handgun ban

[68Charger]

S&W and Ruger are no longer going to sell SA handguns to CA residents, due to new law requiring microstamping of firing pins.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/01/24...ue-to-gun-law/

what a useless idea- criminals will just file their firing pins... or stolen firearms wouldn't point to who has it in their posession.

Maybe an enterprising individual will sell firing pins microstamped with whatever you like on them?
If every shell casing found has "MOLON LABE" stamped on it...

[Gman]

Normal wear will make the stamps useless...and emory paper can make that happen in seconds.

...but that logic and rational thought has no place in our country anymore.

[Zundfolge]

If every shell casing found has "MOLON LABE" stamped on it...

Except that most folk that would get a "Molon Labe" stamping firing pin are the last people that are going to leave shell casings at a crime scene.

Normal wear will make the stamps useless...and emory paper can make that happen in seconds.

Next step is to make it a felony to have a microstamping gun that doesn't microstamp properly.

[mcjhr]

California Dems politicians are the devil. I swear next they'll want tracking chips in guns.....

Eta: what's next, passing a law that all guns can only fire a single round then break?

[merl]

California Dems politicians are the devil. I swear next they'll want tracking chips in guns.....

Eta: what's next, passing a law that all guns can only fire a single round then break?

CA also has the smart gun law in effect, as soon as the tech is in production it becomes mandatory in a couple states. That could be considered a 0 shot before it breaks law and once you have electronics anyway a tracking addition is easy...

[HoneyBadger]

Claims made by proponents of the technology include:
-Microstamping enables law enforcement to match fired cartridge cases from a crime scene to at least the last registered owner of the firearm. Not true at all. Anyone could go scoop up a handful of fired cases from the range and sprinkle them all over a crime scene.
-Microstamping would allow law enforcement to track illegal trade in guns. How exactly? By comparing casing from crime scenes are perpetually chasing a gun around?
-Low cost of implementation; the technology owner claims as low as US$0.50 per firearm or as high as US $8.50, depending on the volume of the manufacturer. No way would it be that cheap...
-High reliability; the "nearly as hard as a diamond" firing pin provides long service life. LOL! Since when are firing pins as hard as diamonds?


Claims made by the opponents of the technology include:
-Stamped casing can only be traced to the last registered owner, not to the person who used the gun when the casings were stamped. In the case of a stolen gun, as is the case for most firearms used in crime, the stamped case would not lead to the criminal.
-Unscrupulous individuals could collect discarded brass from a firing range and salt crime scenes with microstamped cases, thereby providing false evidence against innocent people and increasing the workload for investigators.[5]
-High costs for testing the efficacy of the technique must be passed on to customers, increasing the cost of firearms for those who obtain them legally.[5]
-Microstamping is easily defeated. Diamond coated files are inexpensive and will remove microstamping. Firing pins are normally replaceable and can be changed with simple tools or without tools. Firing a large number of rounds will wear down the microstamp.[5] Marked components such as slides, barrels, firing pins and ejectors are all easily and commonly replaced items.[6]
-Microstamping is an immature, sole source technology, and has not been subjected to sufficient independent testing. Transfer of microstamped marks to the cases is less reliable than proponents claim.[5]
-Microstamping would be irrelevant/non-applicable for implementation of revolvers as these types of weapons do not eject shell cases necessarily.
-Ejected casings can be easily collected and removed from a crime scene.


Specific to California, opponents say:
-Firearms sold to law-enforcement are exempt. Problems could arise if a police officer's firearm is used in a crime or stolen, and the fact that a firearm is "unsafe" if not provided with stamping technology exposes the police to liability.[7]
-Guns manufactured before an effective date are exempt and the bill does not extend to guns outside of California. There's no possibility that this bill would ever cover enough guns to provide the investigative advantage claimed for it by the proponents.[5]
-Failures of the microstamping parts of a firearm makes it "unsafe" under the California law, which then becomes illegal to sell, give or lend under existing law.[8]

[merl]

-Firearms sold to law-enforcement are exempt. Problems could arise if a police officer's firearm is used in a crime or stolen, and the fact that a firearm is "unsafe" if not provided with stamping technology exposes the police to liability.[7]

Why would police want to be exempt from microstamping? It doesn't actually detract from the function of the gun, just adds to cost (leaving all the other issues aside).

Could it be because it was expected that manufacturers would not implement it and it could leave LEO without modern firearms? hmmmm...

[HoneyBadger]

Why would police want to be exempt from microstamping? It doesn't actually detract from the function of the gun, just adds to cost (leaving all the other issues aside).

Could it be because it was expected that manufacturers would not implement it and it could leave LEO without modern firearms? hmmmm...

Because in a police state, the state makes the rules.

[trlcavscout]

I read somewhere that Glock said no more Cali sales also. Hopefully the manufacturers don't sell to Cali LE either. They grew the alligator let them raise it.

[KestrelBike]

I read somewhere that Glock said no more Cali sales also. Hopefully the manufacturers don't sell to Cali LE either. They grew the alligator let them raise it.

That would be wonderful if Glock joined the defacto CA boycott. (and yeah, it'd be pretty worthless if they didn't also deny LE)

Get Sig and Springfield on board, and attitudes could change real quick in CA.