• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Microstamping in CA = FAIL!

Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
18,157
Likes
9,230
Feedback: 1 / 0 / 0
Geee.... what a shame!... [smile]


Casing-code issues snag handgun law

By James P. Sweeney

U-T SACRAMENTO BUREAU

2:00 a.m. August 10, 2009

SACRAMENTO – Two years after California passed a novel law requiring the next generation of semiautomatic handguns to leave a microscopic identifying code on shell casings, the controversial technology appears no closer to being introduced here or anywhere else.

California Attorney General Jerry Brown has not certified the law, which is required before it can take effect as scheduled on Jan. 1, and his aides could not say when that may happen.

Other states expected to follow California's lead instead have pulled back, waiting in some cases to see what happens here. Similar federal legislation has failed to find any political traction.

Gun manufacturers continue to question the readiness and potential cost of the technology, known as microstamping or ballistic tagging. Regardless, they say, other safety standards unique to California are stopping most companies from introducing handgun models here.

“I have no reason to believe there is any major manufacturer that is going to incur the millions and millions of dollars in costs to implement microstamping for new models introduced in California,” said Larry Keane, senior vice president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, an industry trade association.

“They will simply sell the models that are on the (approved) list now. New models going forward will be barred from the California market, which is already happening,” he said.

The inventor of the microstamping technology and those who pushed the California law say any impediments to implementing the first-in-the-nation statute will be resolved soon.

“This is going to be implemented in January, and there won't be any bumps in the road,” said Assemblyman Mike Feuer, a Los Angeles Democrat who carried the legislation for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

“I remain confident,” Feuer continued, “that it is in fact going to become not only the law in other states, but the law of the land.”

Feuer's bill, AB 1471 of 2007, requires all new models of semiautomatic handguns sold in California after Jan. 1 to be equipped with a microscopic array of characters that identify the gun's make, model and serial number.

The tiny characters must be etched in at least two places – the tip of the firing pin and one other location – within the firearm and positioned so that they transfer onto each cartridge as it is fired.

Gun-control advocates say the technology could have a profound impact on fighting crime. Most homicides in California are committed with handguns and most handguns sold in the state are semiautomatics.

But the limited application of the law, even if everything goes smoothly, does not figure to be felt for years.

The statute covers only new models of semiautomatic handguns approved for sale after its effective date. That excludes 1,326 different types of handguns legal for sale in California. Revolvers, which do not discharge shell casings, also are not covered.

The microstamping process was invented 15 years ago by Todd Lizotte, a New Hampshire engineer who patented the process under the trademark NanoMark Technologies. Because the technology was available nowhere else, the Legislature required the attorney general to certify that it was available “to more than one (gun) manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions.”

That hasn't happened yet.

“We're continuing to review the legislation, but the certification requirements have not yet been met,” Christine Gasparac, the attorney general's press secretary, said last week.

The relevant patents are not yet in the public domain, Gasparac explained.

“Nothing can move forward until the patent issue has been resolved,” she said.

Lizotte, the inventor, said from the outset that he was willing to provide a royalty-free license for gun manufacturers. Such a license would have allowed him to retain the patent rights for other applications.

But that did not satisfy the firearms industry nor apparently the state's attorneys.

In an interview last week, Lizotte said he recently decided to abandon at least four of the patents involved.

“We worked with the (state's) attorneys,” he said. “They told us exactly what we needed to do to meet the guidelines and we've done that.”

The patents may have been abandoned, said Gasparac, the attorney general's press secretary, “but our office is not aware of that.”

Feuer, the assemblyman who carried the bill, requested and was granted a meeting with the attorney general last month. Afterward, he said he believes the certification process will be done soon.

That came as a surprise to representatives of the firearms industry, who said they have not been invited to any stakeholder sessions, as they normally are when the state develops regulations for major new gun laws.

In the two years since California embraced microstamping, seven other states have considered similar legislation. A proposed national law also was introduced in Congress. But only the District of Columbia has passed a microstamping law.

But even if the attorney general certifies the measure, gun makers say it's uncertain when the internal coding may be added to firearms, if ever.

Many firearms companies are struggling to comply with California's 2006 mandate that all new handgun models include a loaded chamber indicator and a mechanism that prevents firing when a magazine is removed.

In the more than three years since, just one new semiautomatic model has been approved by the state. Two others are pending, Gasparac said.

Sturm, Ruger & Co. Inc. is the only gun maker to date that has overcome that hurdle. The company's general counsel said he has “grave concerns” about whether microstamping is feasible.

“The problem I have with this is it can't be done,” said Kevin Reid, Ruger's general counsel. “The legislation says it has to work 100 percent of the time and there is nobody, nobody including Todd Lizotte himself, who would say it will always work.”

Several studies, including one done by the University of California Davis, have concluded the process needs further review, that it appears to work better on some guns than others.

But Lizotte, the inventor, argued that even in situations where only a partial code may be legible, it could still be invaluable – much like a partial fingerprint or license plate number – in cracking a crime.

For Feuer, the time has come to move past the debate and implement the law.

“The bottom line is this technology is going to help put criminals behind bars,” he said. “We should do it.”

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stor...22-casing-code-issues-snag-handgun/?uniontrib
 
“The bottom line is this technology is going to help put criminals behind bars,” he said. “We should do it.”
They don't put the criminals they catch today behind bars for long. Why would this law change anything?
 
I like how they act as if putting it on the firing pin is the solution. How long will it last before it isn't stamping properly? And what happens if someone throws a quick light grind to the firing pin to get rid of the stamping?

This falls under the nice thought, but impractical category. Wouldn't it be great if all cars had sensors that wouldn't let folks drive drunk? I mean how many people die each year in drunk driving accidents. Oh but wait, you can get a 4 year old in the car to breath into the tube thing and it will still start.

If you want to introduce something to prevent handgun violence why not focus on the criminal element instead of working to make it so that legal owners who act properly aren't the ones who always wind up having to shoulder the load of moronic legislation.
 
Perhaps I'm missing something ... what criminal buys brand new guns through legal channels? Are they going to force the illegal guns or guns from neighboring states to implement microstamping as well?
 
The whole microstamping thing was a joke from the beginning. It won't do anything to prevent crime. It is really just a way to get gun imports to stop in that state, and make it harder for gun manufacturers to do business. That is their end goal.
 
What???????? Government can't get its act together? I'm at a loss for words.

A) To the OP, microstamping and CA haven't failed yet. B) This is not an issue of government not getting their crap together. This is an issue of the owner of patents not doing what he needed to in order to make the law become effective. There was a certification process which required all of the IP encumbering the whole microstamping technology (it was a series of essential patents) to be certified as licensed royalty free in perpetuity. The owner has not done this. He is claiming he has abandoned 4 elements of the IP (out of much more) in order to comply with the law but that could be a ploy. ie; abandon some rights which ultimately require someone to license the rest if they wish to exploit those abandoned. Let's hope AG moonbeam does not fall for it and requires the proper documentation to certify ALL parts of the IP are licensable royalty free.

This is the problem with idiots who try and force legislation through that requires their patents. They are doing it for the money. They will never wipe their hands of the IP or they wouldn't have started the process in the first place.
 
Last edited:
I hope the industry mans up here and tells CA to ESAD. That is the only
way to stop this crap, ultimately.

-Mike
 
It amazes me that lawmakers have nothing better to do than write laws that are avoided by simply picking up your brass. Are we not in the middle of the second great depression? There's nothing else more important to focus on?

How long after this becomes law will hardened steel "snap caps" become available to properly "break in" your firing pin? No gunsmithing required.
 
Perhaps all handgun manufacturers should follow Barrett's lead and refuse to sell firearms to any government agency in California.
 
After micro-stamping passes, you will be forced to bring in your gun at certain intervals to have the gun tested. The Gov't will need to be assured that the firing pin and whatever are not worn and that the gun will stamp the case as required by law.

I'm gonna invest all my money into a company that manufactures replacement firing pins with the secret codes on them. Every cloud has a silver lining.[wink]
 
Maybe everyone would buy a firing pin from you that has their NES handle on it. When they fail to clean up their brass we can create a "litterbug" thread to put shame on them [smile]

I'm gonna invest all my money into a company that manufactures replacement firing pins with the secret codes on them. Every cloud has a silver lining.[wink]
 
Perhaps all handgun manufacturers should follow Barrett's lead and refuse to sell firearms to any government agency in California.
That would be nice, but I'm not counting on it...

At some point it would be in their long term best interest to use such tactics to prevent UK style confiscation, but history shows the profit motive often prevents enough people from seeing the forest for the trees when it comes to government regulation... (which of course is why it is so awful to have government messing with markets).
 
This sh@t pisses me off so much. I'm not sure who is worse; the a**h*** who invented microstamping who wants to screw over our 2A rights to make a quick buck, or the douche bag politicians who think it'll have any effect on crime. All that for a tecnology that'll never work!!!! Ugh!!!!
 
The only "crime" microstamping will fight is the "crime" of having the gall to defend yourself or your loved ones when threatened with grave danger, or the "crime" of exercising your civil rights...
 
Hold on, how do these people think that they will be able to trace a microstamped shell casing back to the CRIMINAL who committed the crime? They get guns illegally, the casings will only be traced back to the person who was 'registered' the firing pin?

Plus, I wonder what % of crimes are committed with wheelguns? I wonder how long it will be before criminals in CA trade their autos for wheelguns in AZ, or Mexico?

And, even if litigation could ever prevent criminals from commiting crimes with guns, (which would never happen) is the CA DA's office going to require microstamping of louisville sluggers and kitchen knives when those become the new weapon of choice?

I have a solution for you. Stop putting repeat offenders back on the street. You ever think of that, you knuckleheads?
 
...and at the national level

AFTE: Study Needed on Microstamping
The Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners (AFTE) has submitted a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder stating its position that prior to further legislation being passed, a federally funded study on firearms microstamping must be conducted.
====
One of the very few federally funded studies that I'm in favor of. This throws out the old boat anchor on further legislation.

Of course, the whole micro-stamping biz (as regards firearms) is BS IMO in any case.
 
That would be nice, but I'm not counting on it...

At some point it would be in their long term best interest to use such tactics to prevent UK style confiscation, but history shows the profit motive often prevents enough people from seeing the forest for the trees when it comes to government regulation... (which of course is why it is so awful to have government messing with markets).

There won't be any UK style confiscation of my firearms as long as my heart still beats.
 
The whole microstamping thing was a joke from the beginning. It won't do anything to prevent crime. It is really just a way to get gun imports to stop in that state, and make it harder for gun manufacturers to do business. That is their end goal.

We have a winner.

The goal is to make it impossible to legally buy a firearm in California within 20 years.
 
“The bottom line is this technology is going to help put criminals behind bars,” he said. “We should do it.”

Somewhere other than the perpetrator's home, SWAT and JBT are kicking in the door of a lawful firearm owner who had their stolen gun (which they properly reported stolen) used in a crime.

To me, the rub here is the ultimate goal: We know that no mastermind in crime will use a gun they legally purchased in a crime. More than likely, they are Federally F*cked anyhow, and cannot own a firearm LEGALLY. Thus, you end up having the microstamp trail lead to the door of the former owner who had it stolen.

To me, this is a way to have a State go after law abiding gun owners who had their collection stolen, only to be f*cked in the end. Yea, this is a law abiding bust-your-b@lls law.

I hope EVERY gun manufacturer tells LEOS to ESAD because...you cannot have a non-microstamped LEO having their gun used for illegal means... NO... They are ABOVE the fray. Also (and why in God's name would you do this) what would happen if you moved into the state: I bet all of those non-microstamped semiautos are NFG.

SO, in the words the firearm industry to the POS "Golden Shower" State:

home-esad1.gif
 
Back
Top Bottom