Lawmakers Consider Stamps on Bullets


PDA






rick_reno
August 3, 2005, 01:53 AM
Old topic - new article.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,164550,00.html

Lawmakers Consider Stamps on Bullets
Tuesday, August 02, 2005

LOS ANGELES — Lawmakers in California now have two bills on the table that could aid in the search for gun-firing assailants.

Forensics investigators currently have the ability to match the unique signature on every bullet to the gun it was fired from. The problem then becomes, for detectives and law enforcement, finding the gun itself and the person who fired it.

California Senate Bill 357 and its sister bill Assembly Bill 352 would have all new guns stamp an I.D. number on shell casings as they fire, and require every semi-automatic handgun sold after Jan. 1, 2009, to be equipped with the new microstamping technology that assigns traceable serial numbers to individual bullets.

According to these proposals, any semi-automatic not on California's Section 12131 roster —the list of weapons that do not possess the ability to create microstamps — will be defined as an "unsafe" handgun.

California state Assemblyman Paul Koretz (search), D-West Hollywood, is one of the bill's authors.

"Imagine how much easier it would be, in the case of my bill microstamping, if there was just a number and you call it into a database and you know exactly who it is in five or 10 minutes," Koretz said.

Critics argue the laws will punish law-abiding citizens and sportsmen by raising costs. Those in the gun and ammo manufacturing business add that they're tired of bearing the brunt of gun crime and accuse lawmakers of targeting their livelihood.

"I will stop selling ammo the day after. So if that's what the lawmakers want, is that guys like me to get out of the ammunition business, then all they have to do is tell me I have to spend 15, 20 minutes to paperwork a $2 box of ammo and I'm out," says Ted Szajer, owner of L.A. Guns.

Opponents insist these laws are just anti-gun politics that penalize law-abiding citizens who do not abuse guns.

Sam Paredes, the Executive Director of the organization Gun Owners of California (search), said recreational use will be adversely affected.

"Small .22 caliber ammunition — that people use to play with and for target practice — the cost of that will be $50, $60, $70 a box if this bill were to go into effect. That isn't going to solve any crimes," he said.

But members of law enforcement and lawmakers and who support the bills call traceable bullets an obvious next step in connecting criminals to their crimes.

The bill proposed by Attorney General Bill Lockyer (search) and supported by the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence has already passed the Assembly and one Senate panel. It is up for further review in August.

If you enjoyed reading about "Lawmakers Consider Stamps on Bullets" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
beerslurpy
August 3, 2005, 02:01 AM
California continues to suck.
Also, violence in Iraq.
Africans clash.
News at 11.

TCW
August 3, 2005, 02:17 AM
Of course criminals would never think to drive across the border to AZ or NV and stock up on unmarked ammo.

Nor would they just stock up before the ban.

Nor would they get ahold of someone elses casings from a shooting range and throw it down at a crime scene to leave a false trail. NOPE!!

They're just gonna pick up thier registered box of ammo (for $50) and go shoot someone during a crime and leave all the evidence behind.

Boy, Crime is gonna be a sinch to solve now! Eutopia is just around the corner everyone! The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence and the libs told me so!

:barf: :barf: :barf:

Alex45ACP
August 3, 2005, 02:22 AM
Nor would they just use a revolver or pick up the shell casings after the shootings :rolleyes:

"Imagine how much easier it would be, in the case of my bill microstamping, if there was just a number and you call it into a database and you know exactly who it is in five or 10 minutes," Koretz said.

:what:

beerslurpy
August 3, 2005, 02:46 AM
Cops finds unmarked shell casings all over murder scene.
"Now we have 2 crimes to solve!!!!"

chaim
August 3, 2005, 04:36 AM
I spoke with my anti-gun dad about these attempts in CA and even he knows it is stupid. Just try to imagine the record keeping logistics alone (how many millions or even billions of rounds are sold and fired in this country every year?). Just think of what the cost of such a system will do to the cost of ammo :eek:

c_yeager
August 3, 2005, 04:48 AM
Just think of what the cost of such a system will do to the cost of ammo

And now we arrive at the entire point of the bill. Its "accidental" gun control. Ammunition rises to $3 a round, and guess how many people are involved in the hobby or how many gunshops/ranges go out of business.

Bartholomew Roberts
August 3, 2005, 10:02 AM
I like how there isn't one single word in the article questioning whether such a system would even work. The only complaint they print from our side (in the interest of "balance" no doubt) is the fact that it will raise costs for law-abiding gun users tremendously.

R.H. Lee
August 3, 2005, 10:14 AM
"Imagine how much easier it would be, in the case of my bill microstamping, if there was just a number and you call it into a database and you know exactly who it is in five or 10 minutes," Koretz said.
http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/db/issues/00/03.07/images/news.assembly.koretz.picC.jpg
He can't really believe that, can he? Is that level of blissninnyism possible?

shermacman
August 3, 2005, 10:14 AM
A regulation like this is not intended to work. It is intended to fail. It will be catastrophically expensive, impossible to administer, the legal issues will be insurmountable.

Therefore, the only sensible thing left to do is to ban all guns.

Waitone
August 3, 2005, 11:18 AM
<teletype sound effects>

This just in from WWTF in Downtown Los Angeles:
Assembly Person Bocephus NumbNuts expressed concern about the amount of energy being used in the state. In response to unsustainable energy usage AP NumbNuts is introducing legislation which would greatly reduce the state's reliance on gravity. To avoid causing undue hardship on oil companies, curbs on gravity will be phased in over a 5 year period.

Stay tuned to WWTF on this developing story.

</teletype sound effects>

Idiots are everywhere. :D

armoredman
August 3, 2005, 11:29 AM
I wondered what had happened to these dumb bills. To all Cali gunowners - plenty of room across the Wall here in Free AZ. Come over before we man the cactus throwers and coyote launchers to stop the Gucci mobs.

Bartholomew Roberts
August 3, 2005, 12:34 PM
A regulation like this is not intended to work. It is intended to fail. It will be catastrophically expensive, impossible to administer, the legal issues will be insurmountable.

Therefore, the only sensible thing left to do is to ban all guns.

Actually, in this particular instance the legislation does not exempt law enforcement from the requirement. Whatever else the antis may imply, they certainly don't mean that they should be the ones with no guns. So in this case I think it is more a case of actual stupidity/graft then it is anti-gun sentiment.

Frankly this is going to be such a catasrophe for gun control legislation if it does pass that I am almost hoping they do go forward with it.

Kurush
August 3, 2005, 01:00 PM
California Senate Bill 357 and its sister bill Assembly Bill 352 would have all new guns stamp an I.D. number on shell casings as they fire, and require every semi-automatic handgun sold after Jan. 1, 2009, to be equipped with the new microstamping technology that assigns traceable serial numbers to individual bullets.This is even dumber than the original proposal. How exactly do they think the gun is going to stamp the brass? They are going to incorporate a machine press into the action? It is amazing to me how people who are completely ignorant of a subject and don't want to learn anything about it can be so passionate about it.

rick_reno
August 3, 2005, 01:01 PM
Frankly this is going to be such a catasrophe for gun control legislation if it does pass that I am almost hoping they do go forward with it.

I'll second that.

DelayedReaction
August 3, 2005, 01:05 PM
This bill won't change the cost of ammunition, as it's the gun that does the stamping. The only way I could see this working is if they developed a way to have the firing pin stamp onto the primer.

Nevermind that changing out the firing pin is one of the easiest things to do in many guns. Assuming this goes through, most manufacturers would probably just replace the part. Springfield Armory did the same thing with my 1911 and MD's stupid ILS law; they created an internal lock safety in the mainspring housing. $30 later and my gun was lawyer free.

TrybalRage
August 3, 2005, 01:06 PM
Wait, this doesn't make sense...

This article is trying to say that ammunition that is pre-stamped and a gun that makes the stamp is the same thing....

Kurush
August 3, 2005, 01:39 PM
Nevermind that changing out the firing pin is one of the easiest things to do in many guns. Assuming this goes through, most manufacturers would probably just replace the part. Springfield Armory did the same thing with my 1911 and MD's stupid ILS law; they created an internal lock safety in the mainspring housing. $30 later and my gun was lawyer free.I don't think stamping with the firing pin would work. I believe the brass will just dent more-or-less around the edges of the numbers without forming around them. I think you'd need a lot of force and some kind of bucking bar inside the brass to actually stamp it.

shield20
August 3, 2005, 01:40 PM
No doubt, California is screwed. Read both these bills, which may both pass - and that will be it for handgun owners.

The one (357) requires all handgun cartridges, and bullets (for reload) in possession outside of someone's dwelling to be serialized. It requires a complete registration process of all transactions from manufacturer to the end user. It allows NO transfer of serialized ammo w/o being a 'licensed seller'. It allows NO possession of unserialized ammo 'in public places' (any place from your dwelling doorway out.) It allows fees to be collected from end users (.005 /rnd) and from sellers ($50 /yr).

The other (352) states: Existing law requires the submission of handguns by manufacturers for determining if the handguns are unsafe, as specified. This bill would provide that, commencing on January 1, 2007, no
handgun may be submitted for that testing unless the handgun is designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters, that identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol, etched into the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and which are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when
the firearm is fired.


Add this along with the existing wording saying any new gun submitted for testing needs a loaded chamber indicator and magazine disconnect safety (in 2006).


As of 2007 - it is pretty much over for legal handgun ownership in California. I do not think there is any way manufacturers of ammo or pistols will bother with such bull, nor will ammo 'sellers'. Just not worth it.

I would not expect them to either. The people of Ca get what they voted for - only when criminals with their unregistered guns and unregistered ammo start running rampant over the unarmed public; or fired police brass is collected by some low-life to be left behind at crime scenes will all this anti-gun bull be seen for what it is.

Luchtaine
August 3, 2005, 01:46 PM
And then they will hold to it like they do in DC. They'll never admit that their anti gun policies created the problem.

Old Dog
August 3, 2005, 01:52 PM
Gun issues aside, doesn't it scare anyone else that California has so many incredibly stupid state legislators? What have these folks been smoking?

I'm so happy that I left when I did, and that we just sold our house in SD County ...

BenW
August 3, 2005, 01:52 PM
"Imagine how much easier it would be, in the case of my bill microstamping,
First he wants to microstamp bullets, now he want's to microstamp bills as well. Is there no stopping this madman???

Gewehr98
August 3, 2005, 02:05 PM
For their incredible foresight in setting me up for my next business venture - a reloading shop in Reno that sells unmarked brass, bullets, dies, presses, wheelweights, moulds, electric lead pots, and so forth. A perfectly legal business there on the Nevada side of the wall. I'm considering giving ********** residents a discount. :evil:

El Tejon
August 3, 2005, 02:24 PM
What a completely feckless disaster! :uhoh:

My dad always said that the guys who design cars should be required to fix them. Same should apply to government, those that pass laws should be required to administer them. :D

R.H. Lee
August 3, 2005, 02:38 PM
EVEN IF this contemptible proposal passes and becomes law (which is highly doubtful), the compliance rate will be so low as to be meaningless. What it will do is make felons out of everyone caught with unserialzed ammo. California will suddenly contain millions of armed felons the first day this becomes law.

I suspect it has an anti-Schwarzenegger political purpose; he will probably veto it. That would give the statists something to whine about; a ‘wedge’ issue come next election.

Candiru
August 3, 2005, 03:07 PM
My guess is that this is simple ignorance more than anything else. I had a conversation with a guy at work the other day who was asking my advice for things he could do with his visiting parents from New Jersey. He's a smart guy with a masters from Princeton, but the conversation went something like this:

Me: You could take them to the range to experience the illicit joy of shooting hollowpoints.

Him: Yeah, but we don't have any cops we want killed.

Me: Hollowpoints aren't cop-killers. They suck against armor.

Him: Oh, I must be thinking of those teflon-coated bullets.

Me: Nah, those aren't any more effective. The teflon makes it easier on the gun barrel.

Him: Oh.

Me: If you wanted to penetrate armor, you'd just use a rifle.

Him: You shouldn't be talking so cavalierly about this sort of thing.

-------------------------------------

You can't hold it against him or others who support certain legislation based off ignorance. We know this is stupid legislation because we understand how guns work, whereas people who have no interest in guns have no motivation to learn the technical details; consequently, they'll accept an authoritative-sounding statement at face value. Those who have technical knowledge of a field can instantly spot legislation from ignorance; the more one understands the field, the less one can comprehend how someone can't know the things he knows, and the easier it becomes to assume that the legislation is malicious.

The real problem is endemic willingness to spout BS and universal aversion to confronting people when they spout it. Consequently, stupid gun legislation won't be defeated by arguing against it on the grounds of its effects; those who proposed or support the legislation will just take that as encouragement that their ideas are valid. Instead, attack the source of the legislation: It's stupid, it won't work, and the only organization who says the technology is feasible is the company that makes it.

Corrollary: When arguing gun control with people, don't argue against their ideas, because many will take it personally. Argue against what they've been told. Expose lies and common misconceptions without sounding like a conspiracy theorist. People hate having positions shoved down their throat, but given correct data will happily take the correct decision based on their own reasoning.

Daniel T
August 3, 2005, 03:17 PM
Him: You shouldn't be talking so cavalierly about this sort of thing.

You (well, what I would have said): You brought up the whole cop-killing thing.

MechAg94
August 3, 2005, 03:18 PM
I don't know why it won't work? Illegal guns are not available, what makes you think illegal ammo would be available? :rolleyes:

:D

Fletchette
August 3, 2005, 03:27 PM
If this is like all the other anti-gun bills, it will have a provision exempting "peace" officers and other government officials because we serfs are not as worthy as them. That means when they get a homicide with unmarked casings on the ground, they must assume that the murderer is a cop or government official, right?

Bartholomew Roberts
August 3, 2005, 03:56 PM
If this is like all the other anti-gun bills, it will have a provision exempting "peace" officers and other government officials because we serfs are not as worthy as them.

It isn't like that - as the thread indicates if you read it. So this will effect law enforcement and state government as well...

Although that does bring up a good point... is there any exemption for federal government written into the bill? If not then what happens to the FBI, military and various other federal LEOs working in California when the bill passes?

R.H. Lee
August 3, 2005, 04:12 PM
The technology for bullet and case serialization doesn’t even exist. They can’t create it with legislation, ammo manufacturers have to develop it, and they’ve already said it’s prohibitively expensive. They will simply lose the California market. No ammo sold in California. End of story.

mzmtg
August 3, 2005, 04:16 PM
They will simply lose the California market. No ammo sold in California. End of story.

...and thus the end of gun crime in CA...

Brilliant!

shield20
August 3, 2005, 04:38 PM
Candiru,

I don't think you give these 'legislatures' enough credit - I think they know EXACTLY what they are doing - these clever ba$***** came up with a way (2 ways actually) to enact an anti-gun agenda, without banning guns directly.

They will have made it so expensive ammo-wise , and so expensive - & maybe technically impossible - gun-wise, to do handgun business in their state that no one will bother.

They KNOW that with no one to make or sell you legal ammunition, you can't/won't carry. End of story.


Lets see what they do about LE though, when no manufacturer or dealer will provide them with ammo, or charges $100 a box for it; or when they won't be able to purchase new semi-autos.

Thank God I am leaving that dumb-a$$ state - 1 year was enough.

Hawkmoon
August 3, 2005, 04:51 PM
A lot of you are confusing this bill with the "other" (ammo) bill -- as was the gun shop guy cited in the article.

According to these proposals, any semi-automatic not on California's Section 12131 roster —the list of weapons that do not possess the ability to create microstamps — will be defined as an "unsafe" handgun.
This bill is about GUNS. Somehow, they believe (or claim to believe) that the technology exists to have the gun stamp a unique identifier onto each casing as the gun fires.

Doesn't matter what the device is, it can be changed or defeated. Firing pin? Brownells catalog. Raised numbers in the chamer or on the face of the breech? Nothing a few seconds with a Dremel won't cure -- or a second barrel or slide. Change to the "spares" before doing your drive-by shooting, switch back while your wheel man is rounding the corner, and by the time you're back in the lot at Burger King you have a legal handgun (probably not legal to YOU, but legal as a handgun) stuck in your waistband, and the unmarked parts are nowhere to be seen. There is nothing about this that's going to catch any bad guys, but a lot to raise the aggravation quotient for law-abding citizens by several notches.

CAnnoneer
August 3, 2005, 06:50 PM
There must be a way to argue successfully that such restrictions on guns are unconstitutional. It must be the equivalent of fathers of the nation requiring minutemen to defend against the Brits with gold miniballs :mad:

Wouldn't it be grotesquely funny to hear about CA lawmakers mugged with cap-n-ball revolvers in L.A. in the 3rd millenium? The stopping power of a Remington or a Colt Navy at mugging range would be comparable, as well as the accuracy :evil:

R.H. Lee
August 3, 2005, 07:07 PM
Which raises a question? What kind of security do those bozos have around them? I should know (but I don't). :o I have seen them being chauffered in limos, usually with an entourage. Plainclothes security, CHP's or what?

Kjervin
August 3, 2005, 07:29 PM
So you get caught with unserialized ammo (and there's no serialized ammo) and you become a felon and therefore unable to own guns anymore. or... you get caught with a gun that does not mark the cases (and there's no guns that mark the cases) and become a felon and therefore unable to own guns anymore. So even if the laws is later repealed, those caught under the laws will be forever removed from the ranks of gun owners (even if they move). Seems like they're trying to get to the point that even if you are allowed to own the guns you already have, you can't ever take them out of your house. Hmmm.... almost sounds like they want to get rid of all the gun owners, huh?
Kj

Pilgrim
August 3, 2005, 07:54 PM
Which raises a question? What kind of security do those bozos have around them? I should know (but I don't). I have seen them being chauffered in limos, usually with an entourage. Plainclothes security, CHP's or what?
Normally, only the top state officials have a security detail provided by the California Highway Patrol.

Back before Cruz Bustamonte was elected lieutenant governor, I ran into him at the Fresno-Yosemite International airport. He had no security detail with him.

Anti-gun state senator Perata (D-Alemeda) says he needs one of the few Alameda Sheriff-issued CCW permits because he receives death threats from gun nuts and he doesn't rate a state funded security detail. Strangely, I have never heard of anyone being prosecuted for issuing a death threat to Perata.

Pilgrim

Standing Wolf
August 3, 2005, 08:03 PM
Imagine how much easier it would be, in the case of my bill microstamping, if there was just a number and you call it into a database and you know exactly who it is in five or 10 minutes...

I wonder how long it will that that self-inflicted genius to think up the positively brilliant idea of having a serial number tattooed on everyone's left forearm.

longeyes
August 3, 2005, 08:37 PM
The reasons to move just keep on comin'.

I expect Schwarzenegger to veto these but the Mo' is clear enough given the leftist clowns in the Kali legislature.

Bruce H
August 3, 2005, 08:48 PM
I would love to stamp imbecile in the foreheads of these great legislators with a sledgehammer.

alan
August 3, 2005, 08:52 PM
In case you might have forgotten, I don't offhand see how you could have, but without doubt some have, this is the same mentality that would have your Social Security Number emblazoned on the horizon, mine too.

Now then while, for purely selfish motives, I might not care much about you, I do care a whole lot about me, and then I seem to remember a wiser head than I observing that No Man Is An Island. It likely isn't California that sucks, as I remember, having once lived for a time in The Bay Area, it was a nice place, in a number of respects.

Unfortunately, The State Legislature does present something of a problem, as do some elected officals. Then, one tends to wonder as to exactly why the electorate sends such boobs to public office, but that's grist for another mill.

Fletchette
August 3, 2005, 10:14 PM
I recommend that Kali gun owners retreat to a defensible position, and then fight hard to hold the Socialists back. Retreat to NM or Nevada, where you are free and have much less taxes, but don't relax- become VERY politically active to prevent the Socialist advance.

Seriously, I am not joking! A policy of containment might work just like it did with the Soviets - ********** is bankrupting itself just like the Kremlin did.

If there were vociferous protests in NM and Nevada anytime some **********-style law was proposed, you would even get volunteers from other states to come in and protest. Witness all the interstate Minutemen that showed up!

You could call it "Project Bunker Hill"... :D

jazurell
August 3, 2005, 10:37 PM
Hmmm....now when they pass this legislation, since gun companies can be sued for crimes, let's allow the congresspersons be charges with the gun crimes that are not solved by these laws. It would be a big cure-all. Most crimes would be solved, one way or another, and Kali would have more income from the fines....yea, that's it. :banghead:
As my pappy-in-law used to say, "The older I get, the more I'm amazed at the ignorance that reigns in high places." :)

Doctor Suarez
August 4, 2005, 12:14 AM
In regards to police exemption:

AB 352, the one that makes semi-autos stamp the casings, exempts cops.

My question about this one is: The guy at LA Guns (great store) said that any handguns currently certified can still be re-certified so long as they don't change. That means the Glock 17, as it exists now, can keep passing its safety tests forever, but if they make the frame green, it has to be introduced as a new gun, and then it will fail the mag disconnect law and the microstamp law should it pass. Is this true? (Either way, I'm getting my XD-40 in a month or so.)

SB 357, the one that mandates all handgun ammo is stamped at the factory, currently DOES NOT exempt cops. It only allows police officers to carry unserialized ammo if they are taking it from a person, taking it to a lab, or disposing of it. Out-of-state cops may carry unserialized ammo in the state so long as they are engaged in their duties.

In regards to destroying gun owners, currently, if they catch you with it in your home after 2016, it's a misdemeanor that doesn't place you in the prohibited class. (That is, of course, subject to change.)

My guess is that they will amend the bill to exempt cops when it goes to the Assembly Appropriations Cmte. If they don't then the non-exemption of cops is the poison pill designed to ensure Arnie will veto it. Then, in 2006, they paint him as an NRA shill. If a Democrat wins that election, we're totally screwed.

However, one encouraging trend is the fact that the red counties in CA are growing far faster than the blue ones. This doesn't help the assembly unless we can redistrict (and a judge just struck that from the October ballot :cuss: ) but it could help to keep the Governor's mansion Red.

If California goes red due to this growth, and if we get redistricting, it's entirely possible that we could see some reversals in the slide towards gun control. And since California Republicans aren't terribly into oppressing gays and creationism, I'd be okay with that.

Librarian
August 4, 2005, 12:31 AM
My question about this one is: The guy at LA Guns (great store) said that any handguns currently certified can still be re-certified so long as they don't change. That means the Glock 17, as it exists now, can keep passing its safety tests forever, but if they make the frame green, it has to be introduced as a new gun, and then it will fail the mag disconnect law and the microstamp law should it pass. Is this true? Substantially, yes. The DOJ can retest up to 5% of the guns on the roster every year, for any reason or no reason. So long as the annual fee is paid by the manufacturer, and the sample handgun does not fail the test when picked, it can stay on the roster.

'Green' isn't supposed to be a change enough to require treating a gun as 'new' if another representative of the same thing in, say, 'black' is already on the list - 12131.5. (a) A firearm shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements
of subdivision (a) of Section 12131 if another firearm made by the
same manufacturer is already listed and the unlisted firearm differs
from the listed firearm only in one or more of the following
features:
(1) Finish, including, but not limited to, bluing, chrome-plating,
oiling, or engraving.
(2) The material from which the grips are made.
(3) The shape or texture of the grips, so long as the difference
in grip shape or texture does not in any way alter the dimensions,
material, linkage, or functioning of the magazine well, the barrel,
the chamber, or any of the components of the firing mechanism of the
firearm.
(4) Any other purely cosmetic feature that does not in any way
alter the dimensions, material, linkage, or functioning of the
magazine well, the barrel, the chamber, or any of the components of
the firing mechanism of the firearm. At least, I think the color is just a finish, as bluing or chrome, and meets the requirements of (4). It seems DOJ is at least sometimes inclined to disagree.

R.H. Lee
August 4, 2005, 01:00 AM
Ya know, I read 12131.5. (a) and other crap like it and ask myself "who in the hell do they think they are"?

maybe I have antiauthoritarian 'issues' :evil:

DelayedReaction
August 4, 2005, 07:05 PM
I don't think stamping with the firing pin would work. I believe the brass will just dent more-or-less around the edges of the numbers without forming around them. I think you'd need a lot of force and some kind of bucking bar inside the brass to actually stamp it.

Primers get dented by the firing pin very easily. How hard would it be to create a firing pin that has a specific pattern along the exterior of it? You could use a binary numbering system.

Doctor Suarez
August 4, 2005, 07:17 PM
Yes, but with that kind of intricacy, how long before that pattern wears smooth? Then, the cops find this, and convict you of "modifying" your weapon so that it doesn't imprint, which after all is something only a drug-crazed criminal would do.

Waitone
August 4, 2005, 07:47 PM
The proposal is the latest variant of ballistic fingerprinting. BF was determined to be impractical but that didn't stop NY, NJ, and MD IIRC from implementing.

alan
August 4, 2005, 07:48 PM
At the possible risk of boreing readers, permit me to rephrase an earlier question.

Even if they are anti gun or non gun owners, or simply, as most people are, not concerned/interested, how does it come to pass that the electorate in California, where I once upon a time I lived, sends such boobs to the state legislature, for when all is said and done, the proposing of such legislation is tantamount to proclaiming that 2 + 2 = 15. Everyone, after all, knows that it adds up to 12.875. You mean to tell me that it doesn't?? Strange thing that.

DRZinn
August 6, 2005, 03:00 PM
Imagine how much easier it would be, in the case of my bill microstamping, if there was just a number and you call it into a database and you know exactly who it is in five or 10 minutesImagine how much easier it would be if Sacramento ceased to exist.

R.H. Lee
August 6, 2005, 03:06 PM
Imagine how much easier it would be, in the case of my bill microstamping, if there was just a number and you call it into a database and you know exactly who it is in five or 10 minutes

Imagine

Imagine there's no heaven,
It's easy if you try,
No hell below us,
Above us only sky,
Imagine all the people
living for today...

Imagine there's no countries,
It isnt hard to do,
Nothing to kill or die for,
No religion too,
Imagine all the people
living life in peace...

Imagine no possesions,
I wonder if you can,
No need for greed or hunger,
A brotherhood of man,
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...

You may say Im a dreamer,
but Im not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
And the world will live as one.

There was a time in this country when the people (that's us) would have publically tarred and feathered such a blissninny and sent him home in complete and utter disgrace.

Waitone
August 6, 2005, 03:57 PM
There was a time in this country when the people (that's us) would have publically tarred and feathered such a blissninny and sent him home in complete and utter disgrace. As there will be again.

If you enjoyed reading about "Lawmakers Consider Stamps on Bullets" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!