microstamping for crime solving?
 

or an effort to drive california handgun manufacturers out of the state?

Gov arnold signed the microstamping bill over the weekend, making it mandatory for all handguns sold in california to stamp make, model, and serial number in two places on every shell casing when its fired.

one company holds the patent for this technology and claims it will only cost pennies on the dollar to implement. critics claim it will do nothing to solve crime since the technology can be easily defeated.

gun manufacturers have threatened to move manufacturing outside of cali to avoid changing over their entire manufacturing process which would cost millions.

Is this how the california legislature intends on disarming it's people? by making it so that no handguns would be sold in the state?

what will the legislature do when law enforcement can no longer buy handguns for their force as well?

all around, this is not a tool for law enforcement as much as it is an anti-gun measure.

I mean, no one would figure out of way to file off something like that.

Rock on, Arnold!

Last year, the The Global Warming Solutions Act and now this. Thats what I call a progressive Republican!

As I understand it, the microstamping is not visible to the naked eye and nearly as hard as diamond....so its highly unlikely that most people (eg common thugs who shoot a clerk while robbing a 7-11) would have the tools to file it off.

And to suggest that "law enforcement can no longer buy handguns" is ludicrous. It has the support of many police chiefs, sheriffs and district attorneys in Cali who do see it as a law enforcement tool.

If you are a law-abiding citizen and your handgun is not used in the commission of a crime, why does this law scare you so much?

Is the issue about handguns being sold in the state, or manufactured in the state. Two completely different things.

to be hard as diamond, the costs would be way more than suggested, which really means that the price of any handguns sold in cali are going to skyrocket. This is the true intent of the law, not to aid in crime solving, but to make it too expensive for california residents to buy new handguns. sales based gun ban.

Again, there are way too many 'workarounds' to defeat this technology. It is ludicrous to suggest that 'common thugs' are too stupid to defeat this microstamping and then to turn around and say these same thugs are smarter than the average citizen so it doesn't pay to resist/fight back, etc.
It has the support of upper law enforcement because it effectively will prevent citizens from obtaining new handguns. Notice that this law exempts LEO's, meaning they can buy guns that don't require microstamping. why are they exempt from the same laws as us?

it is NOT a crime fighting tool anymore than the gun database is. This is just another regulatory scheme to ban guns. This law currently does not affect cali handguns that are already on the 'safe' roster. What will happen then is that this will be called a loophole and there will be callse to amend the law to close the 'loophole'. This is a gun ban, pure and simple.

I stand corrected, it is indeed 'sold'. not manufactured. thank you for pointing that out to me BoR

The Police Officers Association of California puts the cost at a dollar or two. The director of forensics at U Cal-Davis put the cost the $8 the first year and $2 in subsequent years. He also said the technology may not be ready for prime time - but they have two years to improve it before it is implemented.
http://www.gilroydispatch.com/news/c...w.asp?c=225172

Is it correct that if somehow the common thug has the tools to file it off that the firing pin will no longer work? If so, either it cant be filed off because it is too hard or it can and the firing pin will no longer work -- win win

Law enforcement wants to prevent and solve crimes, not take your guns away, but I know you will never be convince you of that.

There was no discussion of grandfathering the legislation to include existing handguns at any time during the legislative hearings....so you really have nothing to substantiate your oft-suggested claims of plots to ban guns.

Will it help in solving crimes? Too soon to tell but if the technology meets its promise, it will.

Will it hurt law abiding citizens? I dont see how, other than adding a very small % increase to the cost of handguns after Jan 1, 2010.

This is an excellent tool for law enforcement. I look forward to it's success.

and when it doesn't prove useful? will the law be repealed?

doubtful. they will move to close 'loopholes'. history is my substantiation.

Yes but you want to live in a socialist dystopia, some of us enjoy freedoms from the state :thumbsup:

Yes, and brand new guns are the ones used to commit crimes. There are thousands upon thousands of guns out there WITHOUT stamping. Are they going to require retroactive stamping, next?

Law enforcement in California does not want their civilians armed as evidenced by most county sheriffs and their outright denial of concealed weapons permits.

LA county sheriff has issued less than 5 permits in the last 5 years and those to people like sean penn, sylvester stallone, and other stars or wealthy individuals.

Most other sheriffs follow suit, except for those in counties further away from large metropolis'. Their standard reasoning is that 'self defense' is not a valid reason to carry a concealed weapon, meaning that you don't have money, so your life isn't worth defending. You must rely on the big bad sheriffs men for protection.

And when it does prove useful? Will you take this one of many tiraids back?
...says the man that uses plenty of government programs.

Also, you're not using the word dystopia correctly. Dystopia is totalitarian. Socialism can be in an utopian or dystopian construct.

To quote Princess Bride, "I do not think that word means what you think it means". His usage is correct.

Fortunately, there are dictionaries for such matters.
Sounds totalitarian to me, and nowhere do I see any mention of socialism.

Having been defending socialism for going on 3 years, I've become good at deflecting things like this.

I'll break it down for you.

Dystopia is what happens when Utopia goes bad. (Read your definition)

Ustwo (implies) that you believe your Socialist society will be a utopia, whereas he (implies) it will be a dystopia.

His usage is correct. Dystopia is an noun, so it does not need to include "any mention of socialism." Adjectives are used for that purpose, like his use of "a socialist dystopia."

If this technology solves more than 10% of the crimes on the street involving guns, i might actually support it. I just don't think it will because of the ease of bypassing said technology.

and it's tirades, not tiraids. just and FYI

I've not seen anything to suggest that DC's ascertain that the micro-stamping is extremely durable is incorrect. There might be some work arounds, but even if there are it will take time. In that time, assuming there is a workaround, this could help to stop criminals. I support that.

I believe that it's a slippery slope to assume that this will somehow lead to anything anti-gun. Remember, gun control and anti-gun are two different things. One does not necessarily lead to the other.
I deserve that for relying on the Safari spellcheck....