pro-gun AND pro-microstamping?

[ClickClickD'oh]

If the criminal obtained the brass from someone who obtained the brass from the the place where I fired it, that still may limit the pool of suspects.

Would this not require tracking of the brass?

Yes, it would or you couldn't have the pool of suspects who handled the brass. That's where your logic falls apart. The person who places the brass need not be the person who collected the brass, therefore a chain of custody of the brass would have to be established to prove that the brass was not placed at the scene of the crime by the most simple and logical method... it was discharged there.

You better believe 100% that if stamped brass is ever to serve as evidence in a crime then a chain of custody of brass needs to be established. Ergo, brass tracking.

Armed robbery is a dangerous business

So is murder. Make no mistake, if the police are coming for your gun because it's marked brass is tied to a crime, you are a murder suspect. Just like that kid was an armed robbery suspect. They will come for you armored up and guns hot.

Her death was a tragic mistake.

I'm sure that's what people will write about yours too.

Presumably they will find someway to open the safe, take the weapon, and they will move on.

No, you are a murder suspect. They will take the safe and all it's contests as well as everything in your house, maybe even the house, into custody as evidence until such time as they want to give it back to you. Which may be never if the case isn't closed.

 

[buzz_knox]

Is there a reasonable argument that shows that the down side of micro-stamping outweighs the advantages? Excluding wacko paranoia ...

How about the ones you are ignoring?

1. The technology introduces additional points of failure into the mechanism, thereby reducing reliability.

2. Implementation will further drive up costs, putting firearms out of the reach of many.

3. Those hired by California to review this technology recommended against requiring its inclusion in firearms.

These aren't "tin foil" arguments. They are the reality you are ignoring.

 

[Mannix]

Microstamping will just be a big waste of time and money, kinda like the gun registration and other ballistic matching databases that already exist. If I'm going to foot the bill as a consumer and a tax payer, I want RESULTS. MA already has a ballistics database comprising every new handgun bought in MA, and it has resulted in a whopping total of ZERO arrests. Now, how is this going to be any different? Even if criminals don't file off the markings, which we know they will, since they regularly do it to serial numbers already, and it will take 5 minutes with a 5 dollar tool to do so, the guns they use in crimes are usually stolen, so all the police will find is the original owner, or they could just switch to using revolvers, since they aren't included in the legislation.

All this worthless piece of legislation will do is make guns more expensive for law abiding owners.

 

[Im283]

Mike, I think you live in some fantasy land about this thing.

If the police find a shell casing from your weapon at a crime scene you are going to, at minimum need an attorney to clear yourself. I don't know your financial situation but I work hard for my income and I would rather not have to spend it to defend myself from something I did not do. You will need an attorney also to regain possession of your weapon once they clear you, if they do clear you. I am pretty sure they do not just hand a gun back to its owner once they have posession of it. Probably going to take a court order to release it. Anyway that is how it works here in Knoxville.

As for coming to see you at your convenience, not likely. You will be arrested and detained. This could happen in the middle of your workplace or your home in the middle of the night. It surely happens at "the mans" convenience. Search warrant to be served while you are in a police station. Surely they will toss your house and break into your safe. Maybe they will allow you to give them the combination, but I would not count on it.

And you better hope you have a good alibi.

You might think it will be a good story to entertain your grandkids, I see it as an invasion on my life, and nothing to be entertained with. Have you ever been arrested for something you did not do?? Speaking from first hand experience it is no fun and fairly traumatizing.

I believe you are being naive about this stuff.

Microstamping is simply another way for the man to keep his foot on your neck.

 

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

Who doth thou directest this at?

If it was me, I suggest you read my post from earlier. I am more pro-gun than most people here. I support felons having firearms ownership upon release from prison. I want 4473s to go away. I am for no background checks and the abolition of NICS. I am for being able to buy firearms at the local hardware store without so much as an ID check. The only gun law needed is the 2nd Amendment. Laws regulating the possession, transfer, and/or ownership of firearms should not exist. Laws should only exist to regulate the USE of them - such as shooting your neighbor becasue you don't like him. Oh wait. That's covered by murder/assault laws.

You talk of all of these great things yet support legislation that will effectively choke-hold the supply of new firearms to market - arguably moreoso than any other gun control legislation in years past. Notwithstanding this, it's a piece of legislation that is faulty in principal since it only hurts law-abiding gun owners and even based on this erroneous principal does not work as intended. It's like saying that you're pro-gun yet shutting down most of the gun industry at the same time.

I didn't realize that I had ask permission to think for myself. Sorry sir, should I report to the re-education camp now sire. I will never think for myself sir!

Mike

Where did I post about you not being allowed to speak your mind? I can only point out your double entendres, not control them.

 

[K3]

You talk of all of these great things yet support legislation that will effectively choke-hold the supply of new firearms to market - arguably moreoso than any other gun control legislation in years past. Notwithstanding this, it's a piece of legislation that is faulty in principal since it only hurts law-abiding gun owners and even based on this erroneous principal does not work as intended. It's like saying that you're pro-gun yet shutting down most of the gun industry at the same time.

Can you not read?

I HIT THE WRONG SELECTION ON THE POLL. I DO NOT SUPPORT MICROSTAMPING.

Clear?

Here is my post again so that you are absolutely clear:

They may very well have a lurker here, but it wasn't a Brady who voted anti-gun. It was a goof on my part. I meant to click the one above it.

 

[Heavy Metal Hero]

Apology expected....

 

[RPCVYemen]

You better believe 100% that if stamped brass is ever to serve as evidence in a crime then a chain of custody of brass needs to be established. Ergo, brass tracking.

You are confusing two very different ideas. "Chain of custody" is a concept related to the way that police are required to handle evidence once they have obtained it. Every piece of evidence admitted at trial is subject to claims about a chain of custody. "Chain of custody" has nothing to do with what happens to evidence before it comes into police custody.

My only point is this.

Suppose they find a cartridge micro-stamped by my gun at the scene of a crime, and can determine that my weapon was not fired at the scene. If I tell them I shoot mostly at Foobar Range, they could look in their pool of suspects for people who scrounge brass from Foobar Range, or for people who buy brass from Foobar Range, if Foobar range sells brass.

If they did find that one of their suspects scrounges brass from Foobar Range that would be helpful. If they found that one of their suspects buys used brass from Foobar Range, that might be helpful.

None of that requires tracking every piece of brass sold in the US.

Just like that kid was an armed robbery suspect.

No - he was an armed robber. He used the threat of a lethal weapon to steal a PS3 from someone - read the news reports. Now it's clear that under the law at that point, he was only a suspect, but in fact he was an armed robber.

My point is that if you are in fact and armed robber, you have chosen a dangerous profession.

If the police acted incorrectly in his case, they should be reprimanded, but that doesn't change the probability very much.

Look at it this way.

Assume that if you are in fact an armed robber, your chance of being shot by a SWAT team w/o cause is 1 in 1,000. That seems high to me, but let's assume that.

Assume that if have no criminal record, your chances of being mistaken for an armed robber is 1/100,000. That also seems high.

What is the probability that a person with no criminal record will be mistaken to be an armed robber by the police and shot improperly?

1/1000 * 1/100,000 = 1/100,000,000

How many police shootings are there in the US in a year? I don't really know but I am guessing a minute fraction of 100 million.

They will take the safe and all it's contests as well as everything in your house, maybe even the house, into custody as evidence until such time as they want to give it back to you.

Oh, so now we're out in the "suppose a bad guy steals a cartridge you've fired, and suppose he leaves it at a crime scene, and suppose the SWAT team comes and takes your weapons and suppose the case is never closed" territory. We are pretty far out past the tin foil border now.

Suppose aliens from an advanced civilization teleports my hairbrush to their planet and clone me and send the clone back in time to November 22nd, 1963 on a grassy knoll near the Texas Book Depository, what will I do then?

Mike

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

"Chain of custody" has nothing to do with what happens to evidence before it comes into police custody.

Beacuse the phrase has one meaning in one application doesn't mean it doesn't have another elsewhere.

There will need to be a solid chain of custody of the brass. They know the brass was fired from your gun. They know the brass was found at the crime scene. The only way to keep from going to jail on that evidence is to prove who owned that brass in between. Hey, that's a chain of custody.

Suppose they find a cartridge micro-stamped by my gun at the scene of a crime, and can determine that my weapon was not fired at the scene.

You don't seem to like elaborating on how step two is accomplished.

Exactly how are they eliminating your weapon from being the possible murder weapon without coming and arresting you and seizing your weapon? I'm sorry, I think you've seen way too much CSI where they can just look at the body and instantly know what firearm was used to commit the crime.

If I tell them I shoot mostly at Foobar Range, they could look in their pool of suspects for people who scrounge brass from Foobar Range, or for people who buy brass from Foobar Range, if Foobar range sells brass.

And you think they're just going to take your word for it? Remember, you're a murder suspect. They aren't believing a thing coming out of your mouth.

Seriously, think about this next thing for one second if you consider nothing else. If the police weren't going to come and arrest you because of brass they found at the scene of a crime that implicates you, what is the point of the law? The point of the law is to specifically implicate people by marking the brass so the police can go arrest them.

No - he was an armed robber.

Until you are convicted, everyone is a suspect. Just like you would be when they break in your door.

He used the threat of a lethal weapon to steal a PS3 from someone

And brass from your gun was found at a murder scene.

Oh, so now we're out in the "suppose a bad guy steals a cartridge you've fired, and suppose he leaves it at a crime scene, and suppose the SWAT team comes and takes your weapons and suppose the case is never closed" territory. We are pretty far out past the tin foil border now.

There's no suppose about it. If the police find your brass they are coming for you.

How long do you think it will take criminals to figure this one out? I bet they already know. How hard is it to get brass? Well, last sunday I came home with about 500 cases. Thing is, I only shot 200 rounds. Everything that isn't .45 or .40 is going to get sold wholesale when my buckets get full. I figure that's about 150 or the cases I brought home. Thank god Tx isn't stupid enough to pass a stamping law, that would be a lot of innocent folks being put in danger.

 

[RPCVYemen]

How about the ones you are ignoring?

1. The technology introduces additional points of failure into the mechanism, thereby reducing reliability.

2. Implementation will further drive up costs, putting firearms out of the reach of many.

3. Those hired by California to review this technology recommended against requiring its inclusion in firearms.

These aren't "tin foil" arguments. They are the reality you are ignoring.

I did not understand the topic to be about any specific technology. From the comments posted before I posted, it looked to me as though people were arguing that somehow the principal of micro-stamping, as opposed to any particular implementation.

The technological implementation may be problematic. I don't buy #1 and #2 are true for all forms of micro-stamping. If it means etching a number into the head of a firing pin, that doesn't appear to me to require a new part. I have seen estimates that there are forms of micro-stamping that would cost .25 to .50 per new weapon. Suppose 10x that cost $2.50 to $5.00. I don't think that will place firearms out of the reach of many.

In principal I support micro-stamping.

Mike

 

[buzz_knox]

The technological implementation may be problematic. I don't buy #1 and #2 are true for all forms of micro-stamping. If it means etching a number into the head of a firing pin, that doesn't appear to me to require a new part. I have seen estimates that there are forms of micro-stamping that would cost .25 to .50 per new weapon. Suppose 10x that cost $2.50 to $5.00. I don't think that will place firearms out of the reach of many

Using your model, in order to get a unique serial number for each weapon imprinted on each casing, you would have to have unique firing pins. Do you think that would really on cost such a minimal amount, or are you just relying on the estimates offered up by the gun banners?

 

[RPCVYemen]

Until you are convicted, everyone is a suspect. Just like you would be when they break in your door.

I thought we already talked about those two points.

People who are in fact armed robbers have a higher chance of being shot than people who are not armed robbers. Legally, every one is innocent of a crime until found guilty. That has no bearing on the likelihood that a person who is in fact an armed robber will be shot by the police.

Having my door kicked down would not be a very big deal. I would prefer that it not happen, but it's not all that big a deal.

Mike

 

[Gunnerpalace]

Having my door kicked down would not be a very big deal. I would prefer that it not happen, but it's not all that big a deal.


Did I read that right, It would be a HUGE deal if it happened to me, I am against this all the way.

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

That has no bearing on the likelihood that a person who is in fact an armed robber will be shot by the police.

And the officer coming through the door with an automatic weapon knows the differance how?

Having my door kicked down would not be a very big deal. I would prefer that it not happen, but it's not all that big a deal.

Excuse me, what? It's not a big deal to you to have the police raid your house, seize your property and haul you off to jail as a suspect in a crime you didn't commit?... Possibly killing you in the process.

Really?

Are there any Constitutional rights you feel like standing up for today?

 

[RPCVYemen]

Notwithstanding this, it's a piece of legislation that is faulty in principal since it only hurts law-abiding gun owners and even based on this erroneous principal does not work as intended.

I would argue that most of the time it's used, it will be very helpful to law abiding citizens, because it will exclude most weapons. If a readable micro-stamp is found on a cartridge at a crime, it will exclude huge number of weapons pretty reliably. Yeah, I know secret agents commonly switch firing pins with common citizens - I saw it in a movie.

But more seriously, if someone is shot with a caliber of weapon that I own, 99.9999% of the time micro-stamping will be my friend, by excluding my weapon as the murder weapon.

Mike

 

[Mannix]

This legislation will do nothing to catch criminals.


Here are my reasons for asserting this:
1.) Criminals routinely file off serial numbers, which is a federal felony, so they're unlikely to think twice about filing the microstamping surface.

2.) Almost always a gun used in a crime either isn't in the system or was stolen, so all tracing it does is give you the original, law abiding owner.

3.) Even if they don't steal them or deface them, they can always just use a revolver or a long gun, which are exempt under the legislation.

In principle it isn't a bad idea, just a misguided one, much like the ballistic database in Massachusetts, or the mandatory registration of all guns in Canada, both of which by all accounts have been a massive waste of tax money.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Do you think that would really on cost such a minimal amount, or are you just relying on the estimates offered up by the gun banners?

What is your estimate of the cost to etch a number on the head of a firing pin?

Just curious.

Mike

 

[carpediem]

Seeing as how the practical effects of the CA microstamping legislation are as follows:

1) Indefinite but likely minimal effect vis-a-vis promised, positive crime-fighting effects because -

(a) As long as handgun models stay on the the roster, they are exempt from microstamping requirements

(b) Large number of preexisting handguns

(c) Doesn't pertain to revolvers at all

(d) Is incredibly easy to circumvent

(e) Has not been successfully introduced by a manufacturer​

2) Long-term restriction of new handgun availability in CA because all new models not meeting microstamping requirements are effectively banned

3) Placing a burden of firearm manufacturers by forcing them to either forgo the CA civilian market or integrate dubious new licensed technology into handguns.

I think any pro-RTKBA individual who supports microstamping has not thought it through very well.

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

If a readable micro-stamp is found on a cartridge at a crime, it will exclude huge number of weapons pretty reliably.

No it won't

The presence of a microstamp does not mean the weapon that created the stamp was the weapon that commite the crime. The pressence of the stamp only includes the weapon that created the stamp as a suspect and doesn't eliminate any other weapons from a suspect pool since the absence of a stamp from the offending weapon is a possibility.

Consider: Next time you go to a gun show wander around until you find the inevitable table of reloaded ammunition. In a stamping world, all these cases would have been stamped by the original gun that fired them. Now, purchase that ammunition and fire it through a "clean" gun. No new stamps, only the original ones. If the police find that case, your gun isn't eliminated or included in a suspect pool, but the guy who originally fired the brass way back when... yeah, he's a suspect now.

Now you really want to confuse the police..... find a case that's been fired out of five or six guns.

 

[RobMoore]

I think the arguments about microstamping, as many as there are, really only boil down the two

#1 The likelyhood that it will solve crime is very low (just like spent casings)
#2 The biggest reason against it. The cost is passed on to law abiding gun owners who don't want it.

If you can't see those two reasons clearly, there is no other debate to be had, because your eyes don't work the same as mine.

 

[cracked butt]

What is your estimate of the cost to etch a number on the head of a firing pin?

About 100x as much as it would for me to take 5 minutes of my time and 10 cents worth of sandpaper to remove it, hence I don't want to pay for it.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Are there any Constitutional rights you feel like standing up for today?

Are we taking about the Constitution of the United Sates?

Nothing that I read in there ever prevents you from being arrested by mistake - it mostly guarantees you due process and a means of redress.

Where does the Constitution (of the United States) guarantee that you cannot be arrested by mistake (and later released).

Please be specific - I can't find that anywhere in the Constitution hanging on my wall.

Mike

 

[RPCVYemen]

About 100x as much as it would for me to take 5 minutes of my time and 10 cents worth of sandpaper to remove it, hence I don't want to pay for it.

What is your estimate of the cost to etch a number on the head of a firing pin?

If you don't want to answer this question, why not?

Mike

 

[NeoSpud]

I didn't realize that I had ask permission to think for myself. Sorry sir, should I report to the re-education camp now sire. I will never think for myself sir!

He meant "one cannot," meaning "one cannot rationally hold position x as well as position y when position y negates position x"

Simple logic. Even kids can grasp it.

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

Nothing that I read in there ever prevents you from being arrested by mistake

It sure does when that mistake is perpetrated by the grosse negligence of the law that has granted probable cause.


Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Give it one test in the courts and I gaurantee you that any right minded court finds that a marked piece of brass is not grounds for probable cause when there is no security on the custody of the brass. Of course, someone has to be violated before a law can be reviewed by the courts. Of course, that ruling completely negates the purpose of the law in the first place since the brass could no longer be considered as evidence. Are you willing to take that fall for us?