California Bill to Identify Gun Traffickers Brings Brady Campaign to San Pablo Tomorrow on Anniversary of Martin Luther King Speech

Why are Law Enforcement weapons exempt?

Why are statewide law enforcemnt organizations still staying away from this bil/issue?

Inexpensive and proven technology? Are you out of your mind? Any idiot can remove a firing pin and scrape it on some concrete to remove the identifying information. Said idiot could also go to ANY SHOOTING RANGE and pick up a number of spent casings, and distribute them around the scene of a crime to thward the investigation.

I forgot to add - I guess I will be using a revolver in all of my crime sprees after 2010!

I really wish it was this simple. In discussing this issue one legislator complained that criminals were filing off identification numbers from guns and said this was a better way. My gosh, if they can file down ID numbers, why not firing pins? The UC Davis report discussed the wearing down of the ID after only 2500 rounds. This is smokescreen to hide that our courts do little to lock up REAL gun criminals. It makes no sense to burden the 99.9% of guns NEVER used in a crime.

I think it's also significant that not a peep in support of this has been heard from the Calif. Dept of Justice & Attorney General's office.

The Attorney General knows a better way to fight crime: statewide coordinate violent criminal apprehension, backed by a modernized, high-capacity DNA laboratory.

Microstamping will NOT help LEs solve any crimes.

This is why no law enforcement organization supports it (unless you maybe drag up a letterhead group of a few Police Chiefs trying to get cred for their next gig.)

What's interesting is this is a sole-source matter. Only one vendor provides the purported technology - kinda like our wonderful voting machines!

This law has massive side effects too. How will this effect repair of firearms? Will folks hesitate from repairing guns that wear? How does this law interact with the Federal Magnusson-Moss warranty act relating to repair parts? As the marking device(s) wears, does the gun owner become subject to Federal law for defacement of firearms identification markings?

This is what happens when you get technically incompetent folks carrying baggage for a sole-provider proprietary technology.

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

The purpose of this bill has nothing to do with "solving gun crimes" and the politicians know it. Unfortunately, politicians are incapable of telling the truth.

Here are the facts:

1. Microstamping technology is unreliable. (See UC Davis study.)

2. Microstamping technology is easy to defeat. Anybody with a rudimentary knowledge of guns and a 25 cent nail file can neutralize it in less than a minute.

3. Microstamping gives criminals a simple way to divert attention away from themselves and have others falsly accused of their crimes. All a criminal has to do is stop by the local shooting range, pick up spent cases with other people's microstamps and drop them at the scene of his crime. While the police are busy chasing down false leads, the real perpetrator happily continues with his life of crime.

4. Microstamping technology is extremely expensive because it's unreliable. Warranty/repair costs will go through the roof making it cost prohibitive.

Those are all the arguments aginst it, but here's what what microstamping is REALLY about-- If the bill passes, not a single gun manfacturer will support the technology. That means that no new model guns will ever be introduced into the state of California again. (Though previously approved models will continue to be sold without microstamping.)

That's all this is about -- stopping maufacturers from introducing new models of guns. And the politicians know it. But if they told you the truth, that would make it more difficult to get it passed -- so, instead, they lie.

Here's the bottom line: NOT A SINGLE GUN CRIME WILL EVER BE SOLVED WITH THIS TECHNOLOGY BECAUSE IT WILL NEVER BE USED ON EVEN ONE SINGLE GUN.

Now you know the truth that the politicians are incapable of telling you.

This is NOT proven technology, despite what the politicians and liberal bedwetters have claimed. To wit;

1. No independent labs have verified the long-term viability of this proposal.

2. There is ONE potential supplier of this technology - aside from the sole-sourcing issue, can you depend on one supplier's claim?

3. As others have noted, it's a simple matter to file the markings on the firing pin.

4. Defacing of one or two characters in the markings would invalidate the markings as evidence.

5. Identification of the markings would only identify the one-time owner - not the shooter. You can't arrest anyone based on this (lack of) evidence - let alone solve a crime.

6. While the cost to etch a firing pin may be only $1.00 or so, that doesn't address replacement of broken components. Replacement of a serialized component would then make a felon out of ANY person who attempted basic maintenance. If the internal markings are etched in several locations, how will the existing databases handle multiple markings? Who will supply the replacement components?

7. How does this address pistols brought in from out-of-state?

8. Firing pin wear as noted by the UC Davis report occurred after as little as 2500 rounds being fired. I go through that easily in 9-12 months at the range and during qualification.

9. Despite the claims that "the vast majority of police chiefs support this bill", only around 60 of the approximately 600 agencies have signed on - this equates to about 10%.... hardly a "vast majority..."

10. Related to the above - how many agency heads undeerstand the technical implications and issues involved in manufacturing; or how many have engineering backgrounds? None - this is another "feel-good" piece of legislation that doesn't solve a damn thing.

11. Related also to the above - nearly all agency heads supporitng the bill are politically-appointed chiefs of police.... appointed by their city councils. If they don't "toe the line", they're out of a job.

12. The Winter 2006 Journal of the Association of Firearms and Toolmarks Examiners (AFTE) does NOT support the bill - after extensive reviews and test.

I went into a number of other reasons in the letter I sent to the politicians - as expected, all I got back was a bunch of fluff that addressed nothing.

PORAC has recently decided to support the bill - after the bill's sponsor had a special session with the executive committee. In other words, they've not been given the full story.

Don't be swayed by the handwringing and ineffectual proposals.

Fred P.

I lost a son violently with a firearm and I was personally shot 14 years ago by a criminal with a stolen handgun.

Nothing in this stupid law would have prevented either act, nor would it have solved the case.

It was explained to me once that BS stands for Bull S* *t, MS for more of the same and Phd is piled higher and deeper. Just because Griffin Dix has a degree or that he lost his child (I know of what I speak) that he has a greater wisdom that the rest of us.

I can tell you right now that this would be a prohibitively expensive process and would very likely not solve very many crimes, if at all.

Do not blame the gun anymore than you would blame a car for a death. It is the shooter/driver who bears responsibility. Hoplophobia is unbecoming of someone so well educated.

Many Pro-Gun supporters have posted in here and have brought up great arguments.

How effective can this new technology be?

What will the long term effects be on the gun-industry should legislation like this pass?

We also know that simple tricks like erasing the micro-stamping will void the evidence found at crime scenes. Criminals can also disperse "dummy" shells at the sceme to confuse cops.

But i would like to bring one benefit into the picture that many people are not picking up on. The benefit im talking of is deterance. Right now most crime guns are obtained illegally through licensed gun dealers. So what if we were some how able to trace even a small handful of crime guns back to one gun dealer. What if we could, with the help of microstamping, prove that this person is a danger to society for supplying murder weapons? What if through this legislation we could save ONE single, simple little life? Are we so caught up over a little series of numbers that we cant see the main point here? Lets get together and try to save ONE life, ITS WORTH IT!

This legislation is not soley meant to deter the crime of murder, but more effectively deter the sale of guns to felons, the mentally ill and minors. If even one rougue gun dealer decides it's too risky to keep supplying the streets with crime guns because of new methods to trace the crime gun back to him then the legislation is effective. This is NOT, i repeat, NOT an attack on law-abiding gun owners. It is however an attack on those who supply guns to criminals.

PS> We currently hold bar-tenders resonsible for letting severely intoxicated patrons leave and drive home.

Matt,

There is no deterrence whatsoever.

Barrels are readily replaceable. Files are 99 cents at OSH. Gun is now untraceable - gangbangers are already removing serial #s in ways that aren't recoverable. Also, this can well continue the tilt toward misuse of revolvers and shotguns which are not covered.

All this does is hassle regular folks and is an internal expressed Brady incremental goal into shutting down the market for legal handguns.

"Fingerprint" is a misnomer here, there's no such uniqueness or permanence.

If it's such a deterrent, why is no one beyond two or three political police chiefs and some gun control yayhoos supporting it?

And why is proprietary sole-source technology that lasts *maybe* only a few hundred rounds' lifespan something that should be codified into law?

Let's stop wasting money - AG Jerry Brown wants violent criminal apprehension team and a modern statewide DNA lab built. Far far better payoff.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

Geez, and I just saw this:

"The Attorney General may also approve a method of equal or greater reliability and effectiveness in identifying the specific serial number of a firearm from spent cartridge casings discharged by that firearm than that which is set forth in this paragraph, to be thereafter required as otherwise set forth by this paragraph where the Attorney General certifies that this new method is also unencumbered by
any patent restrictions."

Did the sponsors talk to the AG and see if there's any funding for this?

I doubt it.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

Is it my tinfoil hat

"Are we so caught up over a little series of numbers that we cant see the main point here? Lets get together and try to save ONE life, ITS WORTH IT!" -- Matt Doylemason

Okay, Matt, if saving ONE life makes it a good idea then you must agree that we should make swimming illegal. Over 500 people drown in swimming pools every year. Nobody NEEDS a swimming pool. Right? While we're at it, lets make bathtubs illegal. That would save another 300 lives. We can all take showers. (Scratch that, 70 people died in showers last year.) And what about stairs? Did you know that over 1000 people die every year falling down stairs? We can live without stairs, can't we?

Now here's the point you're missing: Microstamping will not save even ONE life. Not a single gun manufacturer will install the technology because it's unreliable, too hard to maintain and too easy to defeat. They'll just go on selling guns in California that are already on the CADOJ approved list and they won't introduce any new models.(Since there are over 1300 handgun models already approved, it's not like it's going to make any difference.)

The microstamping law won't reduce crime, it won't reduce gun sales, and it won't save even ONE life because it will never be installed on even ONE gun.

If the politicians were honest and told the truth -- that the proposed Microstamping law is to make life more difficult for gun manufacturers and gun owners -- I wouldn't agree with what they're doing, but at least I could respect them for telling the truth. Unfortunately, telling the truth is not something politicians know how to do.

No incremental erosion of any my (or your) civil rights is worth "ONE single, simple little life".

Ever.

Do you even have any comprehension how many millions of lives were cut short so you could HAVE those civil rights? (whether or not you choose to exercise them) Laws and the particular stupidity you espouse nullify such sacrifices.

Deterrence??! Riiight. Gas chamber much?

How about we actually lock up violent criminals instead of letting them out? Or prosecute idiots who call 911 for nonsensical reasons so police can do real police work?

Have fun back in la-la land Mr. Simple-little-life.

in january of this year i left california temporarily for nevada. i had originally planned to live in nevada for only a couple of years to advance myself in my trade as a crane operator.

i have to say that that nevada has become much more attractive to me because here you can own just about any gun you can think of. KEEP IT UP CALIFORNIA! KEEP IT UP!

your state income tax and assault on gun owners rights have just about run me off for good.

here in nevada you can actually protect yourself and your property with a gun. criminals aren't protected here. wow, i feel like i've just moved to AMERICA.

as for the topic at hand i can say only this. CALIFORNIA you are looking in the wrong direction if you want to deter gun crime.

criminals in california aren't affraid of the consequences when it comes to committing their crimes. california criminals have more protections in place than their victims. here in nevada the victim has the gun. in california the victims are SHEEP.

Sorry, comments are temporarily disabled. We're doing a bit of server maintenance on the commenting area. We'll be back up and running shortly. Thank you for your patience.