California Senate approves bill to 'microstamp' pistol cartridges

Status
Not open for further replies.
What is his stance on gun rights?
He is a Gun Owner, PRO 2A, PRO RKBA

YES I was refering to Arnold. His Glock was personally given to him by Gaston. I called earlier today urging him to call his friend. I hope he does.

liberals, Democrats generally live in cities or large population areas.

BTW Good Map
 
So what happens when some criminal picks up your expent brass at the range and decides to plant your brass at a crime scene you take the heat? Or am I missing something?

You're not missing anything. This is precisely the danger if microstamping becomes law. And it's trivially easy for criminals to do. :mad:

-Jack
 
This is a silly feel-good measure designed for soccer moms. I would be suprised if it passes the governator.
I am suprised that this bill is mentioned on all the local radio stations today.
 
You're not missing anything. This is precisely the danger if microstamping becomes law. And it's trivially easy for criminals to do.

That's what I mean when I say that I don't mind, in principle, if my gun is microstamped. I don't plan to shoot anyone unless I'm morally and legally justified in doing so. I never meant to suggest that I was "apathetic" about this law.

What I object to are these things:

1. Criminals using my brass to cover up their crimes and get me in serious trouble.

2. Added price and diminished availability of pistols, including defensive guns I have the right to own, as well as purely recreational guns with little potential for criminal use, for the sake of a technology that the Legislature's own study showed to be ineffective.

3. Money FORCED from my pockets to a NH company that bought this law from the Legislature, for something that is ineffective or worse. This chaps my hide as a citizen, not just a gun owner.

4. More laws added to an already ridiculous number of state regulations in California. Cumulatively, these are chasing businesses out of the state. They led to a recession here in the late '80s through early '90s, and right now, given the price of energy combined with the real estate bust and its impact on California, we can't AFFORD to chase more businesses and high-earning taxpayers away.
 
Just thought I'd take a moment here to point out that this is simply an addition to the requirements list that determines a pistol's safety status. Without the existing law this would have been much harder I imagine.

A similar tactic was used with the .50BMG ban in California. They just added on more requirements to the "assault weapons" ban so that even single-shot .50BMG weapons were now "assault weapons".

So, when folks call you nuts for bringing up the old slippery-slope argument, use these to show just how it has actually happened.
 
I also just noticed that there's a section in the law (old one I presume) that allows for up to 5% of the firearms on the list to be randomly retested, or tested if the DOJ has any reason to suspect that they'd fail the safety test.

Seems like a provision that could be used to knock every pistol currently on the list off by the year 2030.
Theoretically,no.

That's there to be sure the models 'as sold' are the same as the models 'as tested' - no substitution of cheaper materials in the production guns, for example. There's no provision to make guns already on the list meet restrictions created after the guns were approved.

At least, there's no such provision today.

This bill is written to apply to guns tested after 1 Jan 2010.

The problem is the legislative acceptance of the idea that there are 'good' guns and 'bad' guns. Once they got that into law, then sorting into one pile or another became easier. First we had 'assault weapons', then 'safe guns', then more 'assault weapons', then more features to be thought 'not unsafe' and now there are yet more features proposed.

BTW, paper today says
Similar legislation was introduced in Massachusetts and Rhode Island this year, according to the bill's author, Assemblyman Mike Feuer, D-Los Angeles.

A federal bill, modeled on California's, is being considered by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Los Angeles.
Better stop this here.
 
BTW, if it is signed (doubtful, actually, given Arnie's track record), there's another route.

It is possible that this won't stand up to a court challenge.

According to existing law, the guns are drop-tested, and must have certain safety features (LCI, magazine disconnect). I don't agree with the law or how it is administered, but it IS a product-safety regulation, similar to those required of other products like automobiles.

Unlike previous requirements, this has nothing to do with product safety, and it is possible that the wording and intent of the original legislation will not allow non-safety-related requirements to be added to the "safe" gun list.

That's where manufacturers ought to put their efforts: challenging this in court, if it's signed.
 
1. Criminals using my brass to cover up their crimes and get me in serious trouble.

The fallacy I see with this argument is that what criminal is going to go to the trouble of obtaining your brass, taking the time to spread it at the crime scene AND pick up their own brass that is strewn around?:scrutiny:
 
^^ i think the theory (at least mine) is that they will use illegal guns that dont stamp and throw stamped brass from other people out at the scene to at least buy them some time and the byproduct will be hassling legal gun owners whose only crime was shooting at the range 2 days earlier.

criminals are ignorant, but not completely stupid. if they can figure a way to buy themselves some time, they will do it.
 
This bill is written to apply to guns tested after 1 Jan 2010.

Personally, this is why I do not care about microstamping.

We're already screwed over in Cali with the Magazine Disconnect and Chamber Loaded Indicator requirement. Most new pistols dont have both of these features, so they cant be certified for sale. Microstamping just adds another worthless requirement for new models.

I doubt any gun makers will even make any guns that have microstamping technology. They will be content to continue selling the models that are already certified for sale.

There were be virtually zero guns in circulation with microstamping.. as such, it will do jack to solve crimes.
 
Imagine the kind of story it would make if a guy committed a crime with a .357 revolver, then dropped a few spent .357 sig (or 9mm) casings on the ground...


"OMG WE HAVE TO BAN REVOLVERS! THEY MAKE IT TOO EASY TO POLICE (lol) BRASS!"
 
It would actually be better for the criminal to scatter stamped Brass leading the LEO's on a wild goose chase. Even if there were multiple casings with different markings. a single shooter could make the scene look like a multiple criminal crime.
 
It's time for ALL gun and ammo makers to STOP selling in California...ESPECIALLY to ANY California state government agency. If they really want to get rid of guns that badly, then the ENTIRE state can do without.
 
They don't have to. Just use one of the millions of guns without the stamp.

EXACTLY..

Jesus, it seems like we're the only ones who understand this bill. :)

I think everyone thinks all gun news will have to including microstamping.
 
Contact information

Governor's Office:

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-445-4633

e mail him here... http://gov.ca.gov/interact
and I sent this
Dear Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
I usually remain quiet on many things but I felt that this needs addressing. The California State legislature has just passed AB1471 for your consideration, I feel a few very important issues need to be addressed.
The piratically of such Technology is just not feasible, micro stamping is in the realm of SCIFI and not the real world, this is which is what this bill is based upon. Not reality but simply something that just does not exist and is neither feasible or build able irregardless of how many engineering dollars you may wish to throw at it. This is more along the line of what someone hopes will be possible someday, yeah and I want faster than light star ships too.
As we all know Criminals do not obey the law nor is it in their nature. They are in a continuous effort to avoid compliance with any law. It is a fact that they are due to their nature not required to obey the law, this is a fact as well as a judicial decision.
Allowing such a bill to become law would not only some day in the future remove the sale of all semi automatic firearms to the private law abiding citizen but all state police and security agency's as well. As their service weapons wear out and become due for replacement, and the technology still not in existence the police would either be forced to go without the proper tools to do their job or forced to use obsolete or faulty equipment.
I therefore request prior to any action on this bill for you to do some research and not with the people who want this, but give a call the to the manufactures and ask them if this will ever be feasible (which is highly unlikely). Put me down as Opposing AB1471 and would request you to veto this piece of Science fiction legislation.

So now stop complaining about it and do something, contact him, I don't even live there and I did
 
crazed ss,

We're already screwed over in Cali with the Magazine Disconnect and Chamber Loaded Indicator requirement. Most new pistols dont have both of these features, so they cant be certified for sale

I have a question regarding this. My P89 that i bought has neither of those features that i am aware of. how was i able to buy it in PRK?

not stirring the pot, i am genuinely curious.

Jamie
 
I Just bought a 1911 and it doesnt have those features either.

The reason you were able to buy your Ruger is because it is already certified for sale. There are thousands of pistols already certified for sale. Once a pistol is certified, it stays on the list as long as the manufacturer pays a yearly fee to keep it on the list.

*IF* a manufacturer fails to pay the fee, the pistol falls off the list and then it can only be re-added if the manufacturer adds the new required feature. So far manufacturers have been pretty good about keeping models on the list. Sometimes speciality models fall off, so if there is a special pistol you want, it might be smart to get it now before it falls of the list.

This is why I say Im not too concerned with Microstamping. We already cant get guns like the Taurus 1911 because Taurus isnt gonna bother adding the CLI or magazine disconnect requirement.. oh well, guess we'll have have to choose from 1911 from other manufacturers already certified.

Microstamping is just another feature that manufacturers wont bother with. They already have 1000+ models certified for sale in Cali, so there is absolutely no reason to spend money in tooling up for microstamping. They can simply opt to continue selling older models. This whole bill is a complete waste of time and effort.

Basically the Microstamping, CLI, and Magazine Disconnect requirements keeps new models from being certified.... unless the manufacturer decides to add the BS to the guns which I'm guessing they wont.

EDIT: Here is the list of guns certified for sale already.. http://certguns.doj.ca.gov/ .. If you're buying a gun from out of state, you need to check the list to make sure your pistol is listed. Interestingly enough, LEOs are exempt from this requirement. They can buy guns that arent on the list.
 
Thank you...

Just wanted to say...

Thank you...:)

to everyone who contacted a CA legislator, the Gov. or a Manufacturer today. Let's keep it up Arnold has until October 14th to sign the bill into law.

G19

"Don't go down without a fight"
 
This law has only one intent; To deprive law abiding citizens from owning semi-auto pistols. It will do absolutely nothing to stop criminals from owning them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top