Will you buy a CA micro-stamp pistol in 2010?

[frankie_the_yankee]

This was the goal all along and mark my words, it won't be long afterward that all pistols that can't microstamp will be banned and required to be turned in (ala AW's banned, SKS buybacks, etc.)

Given the Heller case and expected SCOTUS decision, I think something like that could be successfully challanged on 2A grounds.

 

[bulgron]

They can't implement this law because there's no patent-free technology available to manufacture these guns. Methinks this whole bill is beyond stupid.

This is how the first bit of the law reads:

Commencing January 1, 2010, for all semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it is not designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters that identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol, etched or otherwise imprinted in two or more places on 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, provided that the Department of Justice certifies that the technology used to create the imprint is available to more than one manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions.

ID Dynamics holds patents 7111423 and 6886284, which means they occupy the patent space for this technology. Which means that unless ID Dynamics abandons their own patents (fat chance), the California Department of Justice can never certify this technology.

Game over for microstamping, unless the CA state legislature revisits this particular language in this bill.

Or everyone can just wait for ID Dynamic's patents to expire in 15 years.

 

[TexasRifleman]

ID Dynamics said they will license this to anyone that wants it, so that kills that. If they offer it to anyone then makers are not "encumbered by a patent restriction".

I was thinking the same thing til I read some statements from ID Dynamics.

 

[Green Lantern]

:banghead: I've lost count of how many generic medicines were yanked off the market because the innovator company drilled them for "patent infringement" in court.....

And IDD is just gonna go along with it? Though any company that would invest the $$$$ into R&D for a project like this must be no friend of gun owners in the first place....

ure, I'll buy one if I want it, and then take the 1-2 minutes to remove the microstamping. This is not illegal, according to the wording of the bill.

OOOOooooOOOOOoooo.....a terrible "oversight," or proof that this "crime control" bill is REALLY about putting the screws to gun owners and manufacturers???

 

[Thain]

Personally, I'm not only unwilling to ever buy a microstamped pistol, I am of half-a-mind to flat out refuse to do business with any firearms manufacturer that decides to produce the benighted things.

When Barrett decided to "take their ball and go home" after California passed their equally asinine .50 caliber ban, my gut instinct was to appauld the move. California isn't that big of a market, everybody should just stop selling firearms to the state... including to the police forces.

I feel bad for those poor huddled masses stuck in California and yearning to breathe free, but given the sheer piles of crap that the state government there pumps out year after year (and not just about guns), I can't really figure out why anyone would stay...

 

[Nil]

California isn't that big of a market, everybody should just stop selling firearms to the state.

California is a huge market. It is the most populous state in the US and if it were a separate country, it'd have the 8th largest economy in the world.

 

[fletcher]

California is a huge market. It is the most populous state in the US and if it were a separate country, it'd have the 8th largest economy in the world.

That does not necessarily mean they are the largest gun market (LEAs exempt). I wouldn't be surprised if they are, though, even given the state of affairs there. But still, I would like to see state-by-state numbers to gauge what kind of interest the manufacturers have in retooling.

 

[Thain]

I read somewhere that California has about a 21% ownership rate, well below the national average. California might have a huge population, and a giant economy... But if no one is buying firearms there, then there isn't a market.

True, it is the government's wacky policies that make it so hard for Californians to buy firearms that has this chillign effect on sales. But in the end, I don't think that manufacturers stand to lose too much if they stop sales in that state... It'll suck for the people of California, but they'll just need to clean house in Sacramento.

 

[Green Lantern]

I read somewhere that California has about a 21% ownership rate, well below the national average. California might have a huge population, and a giant economy... But if no one is buying firearms there, then there isn't a market.

True that. It's like if someone wanted ME to do something, and they threatened to make everyone stop selling me tofu. I'd yawn. But if you change tofu to 'chocolate,' and the situation changes!

Could the threat of the end of gun sales to California be enough for them (and US, as much as we can help) to lobby hard enough to "take out the trash" in their government?

 

[TexasRifleman]

When Barrett decided to "take their ball and go home" after California passed their equally asinine .50 caliber ban, my gut instinct was to appauld the move. California isn't that big of a market, everybody should just stop selling firearms to the state... including to the police forces.

You do understand that no LEA in California went without a Barrett rifle or parts right? All that happened was they had to pay a higher price to buy them from a distributor rather than direct with an LEA discount.

 

[Thain]

Yeah, I was aware of the fact that distributors stepped into the gap created by Barrett (and that they turn a tiddy profit by doing it). Doesn't make me think anything less of Barrett itself.

Heck, kinda makes me admire the distributors' creativity too!

I realize, in the end, that most of the manufacturers will continue to do business with California. (I'd wager a lot of smaller comanies won't retool, but the Big Guys will collectivly stay in.)

But I won't buy a microstamped pistol myself. Not only because I object to the principal of the technology, but also as a matter of safety... I don't trust the idea of carving microscopic cracks into the firing pin.

I wish the people of California luck, but plan to stick to my vow to never again set foot in that land so long as I live.

 

[amper]

The manufacturers will comply with the California law, because there's simply too much money involved for them to ignore. Many people will buy the guns, because they believe they will never be involved in a situation where identification of their ammunition will be a liability for them. These laws will migrate to the rest of the country, because Americans have become complacent about their liberty and its means of defense. These laws will also include making the alteration or removal of such identifiying mechanisms a felony crime.

The great experiment of American democracy is not long for this world, mark my words.

 

[Librarian]

I read somewhere that California has about a 21% ownership rate, well below the national average. California might have a huge population, and a giant economy... But if no one is buying firearms there, then there isn't a market.

As usual it's hard to discover how many guns anyone or any group owns, but California is pretty much holding up its end in buying guns.

California has had about 12% of the US population for a while. The CA Atty Gen published reports on how many guns were purchased (that CA knows about) yearly from 2000 - 2004. The ATF publishes manufacturing data, import and export data each year. Based on the AG's numbers over the ATF's numbers, California bought 10%, 12%, 11%, 11%, and 10% of the ATF number those years. (Around 350K/year).

Maybe the 10,000 of us who buy guns monopolize the field. But I won't be buying a microstamping gun.

 

[trbon8r]

I have no idea what costs are involved for a manufacturer to comply with the microstamping law.

If the cost is at all feasible for manufacturers to implement this technology, there will be plenty of guns sold in California. The guns may cost more money, but they will be on the shelves. With 35 million people, and millions of illegal aliens the market is just too big to ignore.

 

[DnPRK]

Anyone who thinks micro stamping won't happen in their state is fooling them self. Remember the Federal AW bill? It started as the Roberti-Roos AW bill in California in 1989.

When Hillary is coronated in January 2009, micro stamping will become the law of the land. The fact that it is a fictitious, unworkable technology means that no more guns will ever be produced for American civilians.

 

[trbon8r]

Anyone who thinks micro stamping won't happen in their state is fooling them self. Remember the Federal AW bill? It started as the Roberti-Roos AW bill in California in 1989.

Absolutely correct sir. My wife and I moved from California last year, not because of guns but because of the cost of living and overcrowding.

We barely fought off an "assault weapon" ban here in Maryland this year. They tried the ammo tax BS here too, but couldn't get it through. The big difference between California and Maryland is that the pro-gun side here is more organized and proactive.

 

[trbon8r]

delete, double post

 

[RonC]

I am concerned, but not overly so, about the California stamp foolishness. Americans have shown the capability to rise to the occasion when it has to do with RKBA.
I just did a little analysis. From the time Clinton came into office in 1993 and the so-called 'assault weapons ban' in 1994, up to Clinton's final year as president, more states approved concealed carry than at any other time. Shall issue went from 16 states to 31 states, the largest jump than any other period. For example, in a 6 year period under Reagan and Bush I, 1986 to 1992, shall issue went from 8 to 16 states.
During Clinton's time in office, 'may issue' dropped from 19 to 11 and 'no issue' went from 14 to 7. During the '86 to '92 period, 'may issue' dropped from 26 to 19 and 'no issue' from 15 to 14.
I interpret that as suggesting that people respond aggressively when they perceive that RKBA is threatened. With the passage of the 'assault weapons ban' (quotes to suggest how ridiculous the ban was), state legislatures jumped to protect our gun rights.
So, I can't ignore the CA idiocy, I do have some faith in the American population as a whole.

Ron

 

[Thernlund]

I do have some faith in the American population as a whole.

And those are the very folks that are going to put Mrs. Clinton in office.

Maybe you're right about the RKBA, strictly speaking. But as a whole, the American population scares me with their short-sightedness.


-T.

 

[Green Lantern]

Anyone know what the cost will be?

Pro-2A groups estimate it adding $150-$300 per gun. Brady says it'll be $0.50. Some say $8.00.

The Company that invented it won't charge other companies what they'd normally pay to use new patented technology, so maybe it really won't cost a lot?

 

[Blackbeard]

I predict that during the first ten years this law is in effect it will result in exactly zero crimes being solved.

 

[eflatminor]

To the original question, there is no way in hell I'd ever buy a microstamped gun.

 

[strat81]

Fortunately I live in a free state, so PRK's silly laws don't effect me.

Sky is falling again eh

Sorry but, what is micro stamping? Is it likely to happen in Wyoming?

These remarks illustrate why gun owners will lose the battle. The apathy and ignorance of gun owners astonishes me everyday. From hunters that don't care about hi-cap mags to tactical shooters that don't care about lead shot bans, the idea that "it can't happen to me" will end up getting you smacked in the face. Then you have the folks that say "I had no idea there was an AWB", "I didn't know the AWB ended", or "Who the heck is Heller and why should I care?".

Stand together or hang separately. Join the 2A rights group of your choice. Sign up for their newsletter. Read it. Respect and support your fellow shooter and don't dismiss his form of shooting and gun ownership as stupid, silly, or worthless.

Everyone would be well served by reading (or re-reading) the Rev. Martin Niemoller's quote about the Holocaust:

In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up.

 

[glockman19]

Will I buy CA micro-stamp pistol? NO.

If ever at national level would I buy said gun? NO.

I will be buying from Private Parties, out of stae & as many as are on the list as I can afford.

 

[glockman19]

. Dupe