These people keep saying that the cost of providing this "service" won't drive the cost of ammo up (all quotes are form the OP link):
We estimate that the entire ammunition coding process can be implemented without dramatically increasing the purchase price to the end user while maintaining an effective crime fighting system paid for almost exclusively by user fees.
Let's take a close look at this, shall we?
There are several manufacturers who can design and build this equipment. Reliable estimates for a complete set of engraving/material handling equipment range from $300,000 to $500,000 each. A licensing fee for each bullet sold would also be required.
However, since approximately 10 billion bullets are sold in the United States alone each year, equipment costs, once amortized over the number of bullets produced and sold are not significant.
Sounds good, on the surface, yes? However, the immediate paragraph just before this says:
There are several well known manufacturers currently producing a significant portion of the current commercially available ammunition in the United States. Each ammunition producer would be required to purchase at least one, if not more, laser engraving machines and ammunition material handlers to produce ACS coded ammunition.
... If not more... So. How many individual lines does each major manufacturer have? I would suspect that there are at least two. One for bottleneck cartridges and one for straight walled cartridges. But that's just for the cases. How about for the bullets themselves? And remember, each bullet will have to be matched to each case. Since this is all pretty much computer operated anyway, shouldn't that mean we just need new software? Assuming arguendo, have you ever priced the cost of custom software? It ain't cheap, Bubba!
So, besides the minimum of $600K to $1 million (assuming a single line and engraving equipment - 1 for cases and 1 for bullets), Add in another $1 million to $2 million (conservative est.) in equipment to adjust the flow to match case to bullets (done by hardware and software). That's an estimated 2-3 million in revamping your production line. We haven't even touched the issue of down-time in order to change batches; The cost of wasted product, should a mistake occur in the process; Admin costs in recording and tracking the information... This is just at the point of manufacture. Last, but certainly not least, the manufacturer will then need to pay a royalty for each cartridge actually sold.
Side Note: For us reloaders, it will mean a nightmare. How do we match bullet to case? Do you think reloading will even survive this type of legislation?
Now add in the admin costs of the distributors and the retailers, and we get this little statement from the website:
We estimate that the entire ammunition coding process can be implemented without dramatically increasing the purchase price to the end user while maintaining an effective crime fighting system paid for almost exclusively by user fees.
Do you think the manufacturers, after incurring these costs, will produce one line of ammo for military/police use (non-encoded ammo) and another for civilian use (encoded)? The company that has the patents on this, knows this. That's how they get the figure that 10 billion rounds are produced each year. They include what the police and military use.
Finally, such legislation will produce a profit. A profit for the only company that is endorsing this legislation. It will do absolutely nothing in combating crime. The sole purpose of pushing this legislation is to increase the cost of ammo, in order to get it out of the hands of us civilians.
Want to know more? Go to the source:
http://www.ammocoding.com/
Three investors from Seattle formed this group. Patents were filed in 2004 and issued in 2005. The websites main page hasn't been updated since 2007.
To be fair, the current "model legislation" only requires handgun and assault weapons ammunition to be encoded. The bullets, not the brass. How long will it be before the brass must be encoded (yes, the patents on this have been issued) also? Should we ask what calibers are assault ammunition?
One more thing. Over and above whatever the costs might be from the manufacturers (et al) end, the model legislation will also charge an end user fee, so that the State can implement and fund its databases.
If you are at all worried about this, don't wait for such legislation to be introduced in your State. Contact your legislators now, and pass on this information. This will affect the availability of ammo, not just for civilians, but all State agencies that must procure ammunition... And this assumes that the manufacturers will even sale to your State.
They just won't spend the funds to upgrade their lines unless they absolutely have to, in order to stay in business. The cost will be absorbed by everyone, not just civilians. That's the point that really needs to be made.