Ca microstamp bill passes Assembly.


PDA






bg
May 30, 2007, 02:46 PM
Any Ca folks here who haven't contacted your Senator asking that
they vote NO on AB 1471 should take just a few minutes and do so.
This is a terrible bill and is aimed at a back door ban on firearms
here in Ca. For those in other states, many times what happens in
Ca flows east. From Calguns.net
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=59385

CALNRA: MICROSTAMPING (AB 1471) Passes Assembly
4:15 PM, 5/29/2007 - PLEASE DISTRIBUTE WIDELY

AB 1471 today passed the Assembly Floor, 41-29. Please stay tuned for AB 1471's first committee assignment in the Senate.

This bill would, commencing January 1, 2010, expand the definition of unsafe handgun to include semiautomatic pistols that are not 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 that are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is fired.

Please visit this site to get first hand info on Ca's firearms bills.
http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml

If you enjoyed reading about "Ca microstamp bill passes Assembly." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
foghornl
May 30, 2007, 02:52 PM
I'm nowhere near an 'expert' on this micro-stamping stuff, but it sounds like about 5 or 10 minutes with a Dremel Tool and a container of 'jeweler's rouge' would pretty much remove the micro-stamp capability.

Or did they {The Legis-sneakers} write in some felony provision about removing micro-stamp capability?

SkiLune
May 30, 2007, 02:56 PM
Simply another baby step in the gun grabbers attempts to dismantle 2A, bit by bit. They know that guns have serial numbers stamped all over them, and they are now test fired to provide a ballistics signature.

This is another attempt to regulate 2A to death. Death by a thousand cuts is a good analogy, I think..

PotatoJudge
May 30, 2007, 02:56 PM
I think the point is to make it too much of a hassle for the firearms companies to bother with that market.

The idea of microstamping has so many problems it could never become a deterrent to crime, and politcians know it.

simpleguy
May 30, 2007, 02:59 PM
I think if they pass it, they should be the ones to come up with the method to implement it.......make them figure it out.......of course with the catch that it cannot add weight or change the design whatsoever.

Waitone
May 30, 2007, 03:15 PM
. . . .and in related news the senate passed legislation which would outlaw friction. "In a time of energy shortage we can not continue to allow rapacious auto manufacturers to sell cars that require significant amounts of energy to overcome friction" said an unidentified legislator. A spokesperson for California University Union apologize to media representatives for not having an official comment as anyone with two brain cells to rub together was laughing until they puked.

SoCalShooter
May 30, 2007, 03:49 PM
This bill would, commencing January 1, 2010, expand the definition of unsafe handgun to include

***? How does the rest of the country have the same guns without the mods and they are considered safe but here in cali its unsafe? WTH does it pass over a magical line that all of a sudden that makes the gun unsafe? ARGGHHH

Librarian
May 30, 2007, 05:08 PM
***? How does the rest of the country have the same guns without the mods and they are considered safe but here in cali its unsafe? WTH does it pass over a magical line that all of a sudden that makes the gun unsafe? ARGGHHHC'mon, SoCalShooter. You know that 'safety' is not the point. 'unsafe' is their euphemism for 'we do not like it, and we do not want you to have it, and we have the votes'. Control is what they're after, always and every time.

kcmarine
May 30, 2007, 05:38 PM
Californians, the Midwest is calling...

SoCalShooter
May 30, 2007, 05:57 PM
re: librarian...I know I know its just so damn frustrating.

re: kcmarine... I was thinking AZ any other suggestions?

kcmarine
May 30, 2007, 06:10 PM
re: kcmarine... I was thinking AZ any other suggestions?



Hey, whatever works. I just said the Midwest because Missouri's gun laws are pretty lax.

Seriously, you couldn't pay me enough to live in CA.

glockman19
May 30, 2007, 06:11 PM
I called Michael Feuer and invited him to the range today. Let's see if he accepts. I don't think he's ever fired a gun or owns one. I explained to his people that microstamping doesn't deter criminals and that a simple nail file will remove any stamp.

Also microstamping will not mean anthing to anyone with a revolver.

azredhawk44
May 30, 2007, 06:17 PM
Adding yet another reason to be sure you pick up your range brass. Can you imagine all the "false positives" you would have for weapons identification if some murderer scooped up some range brass and left it at the scene of his crimes?

Talk about "guilty until proven innocent." That's not a situation I would want to be involved with, especially in California.

Me? I'd be sure to scrape off any firing pin, extractor or breech markings from my gun just to protect myself from such a situation.

ArmedBear
May 30, 2007, 06:20 PM
Adding yet another reason to be sure you pick up your range brass. Can you imagine all the "false positives" you would have for weapons identification if some murderer scooped up some range brass and left it at the scene of his crimes?

Exactly.

Honestly, that's my greatest concern with this stupid idea, and if I ever buy a "microstamped" gun, the first thing I'd do is get rid of the stamp. I don't want my "fingerprints" all over a murder scene, because some perp picked up my brass at the range.

BTW, this is being pushed by an entrepeneur who has developed and patented the process. He wants the CA state legislature to make it mandatory that we purchase his product, even though we don't want it.

That's not only a violation of RKBA, it's the worst sort of rent-seeking.

In fact, that's mainly what it IS about. The stamp has already been shown to be very easy to defeat by even a dumb criminal. Some guy just wants to create a forced market for his business.

gbran
May 30, 2007, 06:35 PM
Hey, this is a great law if you're too dishonest a politician to admit that all you really want to do is kill off RKBA.

Mahnmut
May 30, 2007, 06:41 PM
There was an article written that showed that the microstamping "peened" off with regular use anyway. So it's like most other legislation, rather pointless.

Jorg Nysgerrig
May 30, 2007, 06:42 PM
I think if they pass it, they should be the ones to come up with the method to implement it.......make them figure it out.......of course with the catch that it cannot add weight or change the design whatsoever.

Someone has already done that. http://www.nanomark.com/ This idea isn't exactly new.

But, it doesn't seem to work as well as claimed:
http://www.nssf.org/share/legal/docs/AFTEVol38No1KrivostaNanoTag.pdf

Im283
May 30, 2007, 06:46 PM
between earthquakes and ridiculous amounts of gun control I really do not understand why anyone chooses to live there.

ArmedBear
May 30, 2007, 07:14 PM
Nanomark is the company that wants to have the legislature make a mandatory market for its deeply-flawed product.

AFAIK they donate to campaigns.

If you write a letter, I'd say write that it's a flawed process, and that this law won't solve any crimes. It will just enrich a private business at the expense of California voters.

This will be a better argument than RKBA, because a lot of California legislators don't see any problem with extreme regulations of everything, not just guns. Unintended consequences don't exist in their world. They pass law after law, and most are ridiculous to harmful.

Some are anti-gun, but many are not anti-gun extremists. They're just pro-regulation, of everything. "If we can think of a law, then we should make one!" They would respond, "How does a stamped firing pin keep you from having a gun?"

The rent-seeking argument has more immediate merit. Trust me on that one, as a life-long Californian.

never_retreat
May 30, 2007, 07:23 PM
I call it another stupid idea by **********, but the PRNJ was playing around with smart guns. I don't even know how far that got. :barf:

Caimlas
May 30, 2007, 07:27 PM
How, exactly, would such microstamping work? It would, as near as I can tell, make any gun with such an 'ability' undesirable for technical reasons: increased complexity, decreased reliability and possibly durability, higher cost, and the likely inability to reuse your brass.

Of course, with nobody buying these CA-compliant guns, and with the inevitable increased cost of production, the likelihood that anyone would buy them is slim to nil, meaning the gun manufacturers wouldn't bother making them. Thus, this will, as far as I can tell, result in a complete, but gradual, handgun ban within California. Over time, there will be less guns available and in possession due to gun owners leaving the state, amongst other reasons (theft, sale, confiscation, etc.)

ArmedBear
May 30, 2007, 07:28 PM
Caimlas-

They don't CARE if it works. And even if it does, stats say that most crime guns are stolen. That means they can't be traced to anyone anyway. Even if the stamping worked perfectly, contrary to third-party tests, all that a detective would find out when he punched the serial number into a computer would be "Reported stolen by registered owner, 11-20-06".

The CA legislators like to make new laws (4 per day) and Nanomark donates to campaigns.

bg
May 30, 2007, 07:40 PM
Here is what one Assembly Member who voted for this said.
" I am not concerned with science... pass the bill it will work itself out.."

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=59378

I'll stop posting links to other sites that are gun related forums, but
I just wanted you out there in Free America to see what is going on here
in Ca. Careful, you could be NEXT. The elections in 08 are more important
than many realize. One of the "targets" is going to be stricter anti-gun
legislation being signed into law if one of the two most popular
Dems get in at 1600 Penn Ave. :uhoh:

R.H. Lee
May 30, 2007, 07:42 PM
They keep coming back with this crap over and over and over again. Pretty soon all of us California gunowners will be criminals, after the fact.

ArmedBear
May 30, 2007, 07:46 PM
bg-

That's what I'm talking about. They're downright STUPID, and if there's a law they can pass, they'll pass it.

That's why the "it's just a way to funnel money into a greedy businessman's pocket" is a better argument against it than all the rational points you can make. Furthermore, it's true.

Standing Wolf
May 30, 2007, 08:17 PM
I find myself missing the temperate climate and beaches less and less.

Draven32
May 31, 2007, 03:33 AM
Four months and I'm done with college. time to get out of Wackyville. Anyone see any multimedia instructor jobs in their local papers?

eric_t12
May 31, 2007, 05:33 AM
:what:







:scrutiny:







:barf:

Draven32
May 31, 2007, 06:06 AM
A quick read of the UC study that says microstamps can be removed in 30 seconds with a file reveals: The company that invented the process will gladly sell gun manufacturers a $250-$500k machine to microstamp their firing pins.

(Like it takes a UC study to figure that out....)

railroader
May 31, 2007, 09:37 AM
http://www.ucop.edu/cprc/documents/howitt_manuscript_5407.pdf

Study from UC Davis showing it's flaws. Mark

gunsmith
May 31, 2007, 10:36 AM
he has been pretty good at not signing this stuff...well...except for that .50 ban

CountGlockula
May 31, 2007, 11:49 AM
The bill does suck, but I love it here in CA. Where else can you get the beaches, sun, snow, mountains, Lakers, Clippers, Warriors, Dodgers, Angels, Ducks and bikinis all in one place. Anyways, I'll be fighting this bill and I'd recommend other Cal natives to do the same.

madmike
May 31, 2007, 03:35 PM
http://www.nanomark.com/Ballistic-id-tagging/ballisticindex.htm

I don't believe it for a second.

Sure, you can engrave that small.

Make it hard enough to work on brass, on two locations, every time, without wearing out within a dozen rounds?

I imagine they have a couple of "samples" for the morons, I mean legistraitors to look at, and hope that the manufacturers will underwrite the R&D.

Reloaded brass will be a thing of the past--would YOU let someone resell your brass? Will you leave brass on the range to be picked up?

How hard will it be to deface that "microstamp" with a stone or nail?

It's time for every mfr to follow Barrett's lead and tell ************ to go screw. No guns to any gov't agency from any mfr.

Or just boycott the state entirely. Show them what happens when only the criminals have guns.

Reddbecca
May 31, 2007, 03:38 PM
I vote we declare California to be non-America territory, have it relisted as Terrorist soil, invade it, conquer it, and replace the dictatorship with a republic that supports gun ownership.

The damn microstamping bill isn't gonna make it. The Governator vetoed the last one, it'll die again this year.

Everybody knows the only point of this bill is to outlaw all semi-automatic firearms. Microstamping technology is impossible and more flawed than ballistics databases, and since it can't be implimented, new semi-autos can't be sold in California, that's the whole point.

WeThePeople
May 31, 2007, 03:40 PM
How does a lack of microstamping make a firearm unsafe? Loads and loads of BS. I appreciate that many on this board are from California and are reasonable people. However, with all DUE respect, many in California have lost their minds!

Mannix
May 31, 2007, 03:42 PM
Seems like a basis for a de facto ban to me.

crazed_ss
May 31, 2007, 05:08 PM
Here is what I see as the major flaws with Microstamping.

CA has a safe pistol roster. All guns that are on the roster get to stay there as long as the gun companies continue to pay the yearly extortion fee to the CA DOJ.

That means, even if Microstamping is implemented, we will still be able to purchase guns that were certified prior to requirement of the microstamping technology.

Im guessing most gun companies wont even bother with making any microstamp'd models since they can continue to sell the old models without it. I'm also guessing whatever gun company decides to make a gun with microstamping technology wont sell very many of them as most self-respecting gun owners will opt for older models without it.

Additionally, microstamping will do nothing to help solve crime because it's not like all the crooks are gonna walk into a gun store and buy all new guns with microstamping technology. Basically, there will virtually be no guns with microstamping capability in circulation, so it will have ZERO effect on crime.

Librarian
May 31, 2007, 05:27 PM
Just to add some perspective.... I wrote to Mark DeSaulnier, co-sponsor of the bill, and incidentally the Assembly member from my district. I gave him gun sales data from the DOJ for the last couple of years, the comparable manufacturing data for the US from BATF, and some summary data from BATF via Gary Kleck on the number of guns in the country.

As a back-of-the-envelope calculation, I told him To summarize: by 2010, California will have about 40 million long guns and 13 million handguns, none of which are subject to microstamping, and in 2010 this law might have an effect on 122,000 new guns 0.23% of the legal civilian gun stock. You cannot seriously believe the odds are in favor of the law having any measurable effect. California politicians are not interested in laws that affect crimes; they like laws that will diminish gun ownership.

ArmedBear
May 31, 2007, 05:38 PM
...and enrich campaign contributors.

Don't forget that.

Leanwolf
May 31, 2007, 05:55 PM
RH Lee - "Pretty soon all of us California gunowners will be criminals, after the fact."

That is precisely the eventual goal of the communistnazis who control California.

L.W.

Draven32
May 31, 2007, 06:30 PM
railroader, thanks for the link, I didn't have it handy.

Yeah, it is a company trying to get the state to underwrite their technological development, and then get the state of CA to force gun manufacturers to buy their microstamping machines.

Even though the UC Davis study shows it takes a whole thirty seconds with a file to get rid of the stamping.

If I could get my mitts on a stamped firing pin, I'd make an instructional video on removing the stamping and post it on YouTube or something. Spiteful, ain't I?

gezzer
May 31, 2007, 09:40 PM
Easy solution is NO GUNS to CA, civilian, police, National Guard, sheriffs etc.

I feel bad the company pushing this from my state NanoMark Technologies of Londonderry NH, But a search cannot find the company other than a barely non-professional under construction web site and no registration of the name with the secretary of state.

I am doing further research on them

obxned
May 31, 2007, 09:57 PM
This bill is nothing more than a sleazy attempt to flush the 2nd Amendment down the toilet. Since micro-stamping won't work in the real world, Kalifornica would make every gun illegal.

madmike
May 31, 2007, 10:37 PM
Makes me wonder if it's a front company set up by some ************ legislator.

Anyone find out the whois on site owner?

And so you have a fired case from the scene. So what? PROVE the bullet came from that case. PROVE the owner of the weapon was there.

And if the stamp isn't an exact match? "But this is state of the art technology. It's stamped with a number. If the Persecution can't definitely show it came from my client's gun, then obviously it's an invalid technology."

Serve them right when it bites them in the butt.

If they couldn't nail OJ with DNA that is exact and unique, they ain't gonna nail Jose Gangbanger with this.

kcmarine
May 31, 2007, 11:13 PM
Jeeez. How could you live there? Seriously. Someone explain. I need help in getting this.

bg
June 1, 2007, 12:06 AM
I saw something on Gun News Daily that there are plans to introduce this
on a Federal level..If so all of us are right smack dab in the middle of it,
just not here Corruptfornia..

Bezoar
June 1, 2007, 12:40 AM
THis is creation of a national database. As the wording at the company site infers that the whole stamping bull**** would be mandatory for every gun made in america. Possibly for any gun sold in america, regardless of where it was made(in or outside america.).

The process would most likely become a retroactive law mandating that all semi auto handguns in california to be upgraded to the microstamp requirements. This would create a problem as it would mean:
gun goes to original maker or to the nanomark place to be stamped.

As alot of collector guns in california are amde by now nonexistent companies, that would mean sending those guns to the nanomark company.

And whos going to send a 25,00 + Borchardt/bergman/etc, to a company to that a hamhanded drugged up 18 year old can destroy it with a hydraulic press and a dremel tool?

"sorry mr billy bob, its not our fault that your irreplacable borchardt worth 200,000 had its chamber ruined by someone with a hang over and a dremel cutting disk."

and of course, it would be a deadline to convert, followed by confiscation if you dont convert.

madmike
June 1, 2007, 02:30 AM
Bezoar, I'd call you paranoid...

Except requiring muskets for "registration" and losing or breaking them is what the Brits did to the Zulus...

obxned
June 1, 2007, 03:05 AM
When dealing with our government these days, paranoia is 'condition yellow'.

JP1954
June 1, 2007, 04:30 AM
What we need here in California is an end run around our disgracefull Democratically controlled State government......I would like to see an initiative proposed which would amend the State constitution (thereby disarming AG Jerry "moonbeam" Brown and the other fascist leftists who are either in or have close ties to our judiciary.) I would like the initiative to be titled, "The Citizens Right to Self Defense Act." It will repeal the assault weapon ban, the high cap mag ban, the 10 day waiting period, and all the other sections of the California Penal Code dealing with gun control that have had 0000 effect on crime. Furthermore, it will state that any CITIZEN in the state age 25 or older who has no criminal record or mental health record SHALL be issued a CCW license on demand after completing a written test and a range test demonstrating the knowledge of the law as it pertains to defense and the knowledge of and skilled use of the firearm which is the subject of the CCW license. I believe a proposition like this has a chance to pass. There are democrat citizens here that are opposed to gun control even though they keep voting gun control democrats into office - go figure- can you spell D-I-S-C-O-N-N-E-C-T?)).
I believe this is going to be the only way we will keep our state from eventually confiscating every firearm from every law abiding citizen which I firmly believe is the end goal of the leftist fascists. If anybody out there knows how to get something like this started, I think now is the right time. Perhaps the NRA can help us with a grassroots campaign.

kcmarine
June 1, 2007, 10:24 PM
Sounds like an excellent idea, JP.

I have two uncles that live there. One could probably get the hookups for such a bill.

madmike
June 1, 2007, 11:41 PM
Furthermore, it will state that any CITIZEN in the state age 25 or older who has no criminal record or mental health record SHALL be issued a CCW

You mean 21, right?

vta33
June 1, 2007, 11:52 PM
Let's hope that the Governator vetoes this bill as he has vetoed other anti-gun bills in the past.

Geno
June 1, 2007, 11:52 PM
Just when other states are understanding the fact that no crime has ever been solved based on the police possessing a sample fired brass, here comes the left with a new, and imporved stupid idea.

:rolleyes:

jselvy
June 2, 2007, 06:46 AM
It might be interesting if you could get custom stamps.
Like one that stamped "Your Name" on every round
Then you really could say "That bullet had your name on it!"

HAHAHAHAHAHAH:neener:

Turkey Creek
June 2, 2007, 07:58 AM
They're downright STUPID

Yeah, stupid like a fox- They know exactly what they are doing- It's not about crime it's about getting rid of all privately owned firearms-

Jake in TX
June 2, 2007, 03:10 PM
Here is the whois information about nanomark.com, courtesy of Internic:

Domain Name: NANOMARK.COM
Registrar: ENOM, INC.
Whois Server: whois.enom.com
Referral URL: http://www.enom.com
Name Server: NS1.JUSTDNS.NET
Name Server: NS2.JUSTDNS.NET
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Updated Date: 16-feb-2007
Creation Date: 31-aug-2002
Expiration Date: 31-aug-2007

Jake in TX

Snake Eyes
June 2, 2007, 03:16 PM
Standing Wolf will always miss the temperate climate and beaches.

I will too. I won't even visit.

glockman19
June 2, 2007, 04:18 PM
Not to worry. This bill AB362 will NEVER get signed by Gov. Schwarzenegger.

I also called every Assembly member yesterday and even spoke with DeLeon's Legislative aid. He will eventually drop any purchase limit to his legislation. They have been getting alot of calls/cpomment on the 50 round a month limit.

Keep up the good work and keep contacting anyone and everyone you can. Aslso call to thank the ones who voted against it. It was voted right down party lines all Dems YES all Repubs NO.

The microstamping bill won't matter either. Gov. Won't sign

SoCalShooter
June 2, 2007, 04:36 PM
^ 50 rounds a month? what is that?

kcmarine
June 2, 2007, 06:15 PM
Well, I'm taking an uninformed guess here, but I think that it means you can only buy 50 rounds a month.

trueblue1776
June 2, 2007, 06:20 PM
My Californian friends:
There are a few nice homes in my neighborhood in Mobile, Alabama, priced reasonably in the $90-120K range....

ha ha ha:D

obxned
June 2, 2007, 10:30 PM
Micro-stamping will not work, not in the real world. Therefore all guns will be illegal in Kalifornica.

See below:

madmike
June 2, 2007, 10:52 PM
Suburban Indy. 1500 Sq Ft, $115,000, taxes $600/yr. McDogfood's starts at $8/hr. Skilled labor commensurately better. Carry just about any weapon you wish, no training required.

MarkDido
June 2, 2007, 11:52 PM
I think the point is to make it too much of a hassle for the firearms companies to bother with that market.

The idea of microstamping has so many problems it could never become a deterrent to crime, and politcians know it.


Maybe gun manufacturers should follow Ronnie Barrett's lead and just quit selling guns to CA.

If no one sells guns in CA, they can't be held liable for any gun death brought by a specious lawsuit.

SoCalShooter
June 3, 2007, 12:04 AM
RE:markdido....thats what they want and that is why we must defeat them

madmike
June 3, 2007, 12:37 AM
RE:markdido....thats what they want and that is why we must defeat them

It's called a "White mutiny." Give them EXACTLY what they want.

LA cops need new guns? Too freaking bad. San Diego cops outgunned? Let them use slingshots. Some state gestapo can't kick in doors because they have nothing to shoot with? I'm all tears.

Utter, total, boycott of CA.

Of course, it will take a lot of pressure on the mfrs. It only takes one to be short-sighted and think they can work an end around in exchange for favors. But with the Snitch and Wussy example, it may not be impossible. Lean on the Mfrs: Stop shipping to CA gov't agencies, or we buy from your competitors. Several companies don't sell to them at all, and Taurus is already amenable to the idea.

So I guess I get a Taurus before I get a GLOCK. I can live with that.

Jorg Nysgerrig
June 3, 2007, 01:27 AM
Here is the whois information about nanomark.com, courtesy of Internic:
<snip>


That information is pretty much worthless, aside from referring you to the proper whois server. The complete information is here (http://www.enom.com/domains/whois.asp?DomainName=nanomark.com).

Organization Name: NanoMark
First Name: Waters
Last Name: Lester
Address 1: 954 Broadway East #101
Address 2:
City: Seattle
StateProvince: Washington
PostalCode: 98102
Country: United Sta
Phone: 2063298989
Fax:
EmailAddress:

kungfuhippie
June 3, 2007, 02:11 AM
Simple solution if it were to pass-it won't
Say Springfield Armory makes a CA-microstamp 1911, Buy it, then take a short drive to Oregon, Nevada, or Arizona and buy a new firing pin and barrel-problem solved. Or go ahead and file it off, I bet you will still be able to get replacement parts, barrels, firing pins. And I bet neighbor states would have smiths that would offer the service as well for those who want it.

IMHO wolf ammo would probably remove the microstamping effect quicker, being steel cased and all.

This will make us soooo much safer :rolleyes:

Loucks
June 3, 2007, 02:37 AM
Suburban Indy. 1500 Sq Ft, $115,000, taxes $600/yr. McDogfood's starts at $8/hr. Skilled labor commensurately better. Carry just about any weapon you wish, no training required.

Ha! I'm currently searching for exactly that (suburban Indy, 1500ft^2, 3bed/2bath), but to get that price one has to move to the South side. No thanks! Unless you have a lead I've missed? (Here's hoping!)

Still, 130k gets a decent spread, if not property suitable for shooting. The lifetime HCL is a nice perk. I just received my permanent renewal in Feb.

gunsmith
June 3, 2007, 08:54 AM
collect brass from the range when cops are shooting, use it for your crime and leave the cops brass at your crime scene!:evil:

kungfuhippie
June 3, 2007, 10:23 AM
don't you think cops will be exempt? They can have hi-cap mags.

Almost forgot, that would be hard since cops don't go to the range often.

trueblue1776
June 3, 2007, 10:27 AM
50 round a month limit? Hardcore proof that these people are clueless and don't even try to understand us, so much for the man of the people. I have magazines that would take two months to fill.

kungfuhippie
June 3, 2007, 10:46 AM
Don't worry trueblue1776 it will last us much longer in our low capacity mags:fire::fire::fire:

If you enjoyed reading about "Ca microstamp bill passes Assembly." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!