California screwed as Bill 357 & 352 march on
- Thread starter shield20
- Start date
railroader
New member
SB 357 the serial number on the bullets bill was taken off the calender on 7/20/05,it's dead for now. AB 352 the bill for handguns that stamp identifying marks is still alive. Here's more info on cali legislation: http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml Mark
Thanks for the update on the the status of 357.
BTW, the other bill (guns with microstamp technology) as far as I can understand - allows for existing weapons on the safe gun list to be legal, only new guns not already submitted for testing need to be so equipped.
****************
(7) Commencing January 1, 2007, 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 into the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol,...
BTW, the other bill (guns with microstamp technology) as far as I can understand - allows for existing weapons on the safe gun list to be legal, only new guns not already submitted for testing need to be so equipped.
****************
(7) Commencing January 1, 2007, 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 into the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol,...
So, ammo makers that stand the most to lose by this, say that it is not possible, and I am just supposed to believe them?
Machines already exist for printing very small things. The problem comes in making every single round in a box bears the same number, and that the number on the box is the same as the number on the rounds. Also, in setting up the tools. This just takes time and money.
Just saying it can't be done, is just a way of ignoring a threat. It can be done, just not at a reasonable rate.
Machines already exist for printing very small things. The problem comes in making every single round in a box bears the same number, and that the number on the box is the same as the number on the rounds. Also, in setting up the tools. This just takes time and money.
Just saying it can't be done, is just a way of ignoring a threat. It can be done, just not at a reasonable rate.
There's already a manufacturer with patented equipment capable of serializing each bullet. Why do you think this law was introduced in the first place? Obviously these police-state-loving tools from Seattle pushed friendly legislators.
Needless to say, passage of this law would be a bonanza for them, assuming the ammunition manufacturers roll over, pee on their bellies, and cooperate instead of refusing to ship any ammunition at all into the state of California, including to police officers.
My friend Dan Niemi was killed in the line of duty by a thug who was worried about the drugs and guns hidden in his car. He was identified by three eye-witnesses. What would have been the point of a serialized bullet there, I wonder? It's a question the legislature refused to entertain.
Needless to say, passage of this law would be a bonanza for them, assuming the ammunition manufacturers roll over, pee on their bellies, and cooperate instead of refusing to ship any ammunition at all into the state of California, including to police officers.
My friend Dan Niemi was killed in the line of duty by a thug who was worried about the drugs and guns hidden in his car. He was identified by three eye-witnesses. What would have been the point of a serialized bullet there, I wonder? It's a question the legislature refused to entertain.
Look, let's say that instead of leaving bullets/cartridges at the crime scene the criminal left the actual gun. Wouldnt that make things easier? The gun already has a unique serial number that can be traced from the factory to the end retail buyer.
So they do that and call Mr. Smith, the end retail buyer to ask him where he was on the night of the 21st. Mr. Smith answers "if you're calling about my gun, I reported it stolen two weeks ago."
End of trail.
How will this work any better with ammo, which is small, easily exchanged with other ammo of similar type and caliber, and easily lost without having to report it stolen or missing? It wont.
Again, no one has produced ammo using any of the systems mentioned here. I tend to think SAAMI, which has a century of experience collectively in ammunition manufacture, knows what it is talking about. Certainly more so than a company that makes skateboards.
Further, the amount of numbers necessary will be staggering. I do not know how many cartridges are produced per day but I would bet the yearly production is in the billions or more. What are the logistics of assigning a unique number in the billions or trillions?
And finally, even if CA passes such a bill, would ammo makers really see such a bonanza and rush to retool to untried, unproven, and expensive technology to satisfy the whim of one state legislature, knowing that the idea is a turkey from the start? No, I dont think so.
But it is heartening that so many on this board are perfectly prepared to believe the California State Legislature's assertions in this matter.
So they do that and call Mr. Smith, the end retail buyer to ask him where he was on the night of the 21st. Mr. Smith answers "if you're calling about my gun, I reported it stolen two weeks ago."
End of trail.
How will this work any better with ammo, which is small, easily exchanged with other ammo of similar type and caliber, and easily lost without having to report it stolen or missing? It wont.
Again, no one has produced ammo using any of the systems mentioned here. I tend to think SAAMI, which has a century of experience collectively in ammunition manufacture, knows what it is talking about. Certainly more so than a company that makes skateboards.
Further, the amount of numbers necessary will be staggering. I do not know how many cartridges are produced per day but I would bet the yearly production is in the billions or more. What are the logistics of assigning a unique number in the billions or trillions?
And finally, even if CA passes such a bill, would ammo makers really see such a bonanza and rush to retool to untried, unproven, and expensive technology to satisfy the whim of one state legislature, knowing that the idea is a turkey from the start? No, I dont think so.
But it is heartening that so many on this board are perfectly prepared to believe the California State Legislature's assertions in this matter.
Master Blaster
New member
They could just arrest the crimminals and punnish them since most are repeat offenders, and under federal law get a mandatory 5-10 years just for being a felon in possession of a gun.
NAHHHHHHHHH that makes too much sense.
And so when a crimminal steals a gun or uses an older one this legislation will be worthless. An if they file off the numbers with a 10 cent piece of sandpaper, or they pick up their brass, worthless.
A satellite uplink and a TV camera with a generator on a tractor trailer that you pull behind you when you fire the gun. I sure someone is working on a hanger, I mean a holster to carry one in.
NAHHHHHHHHH that makes too much sense.
And so when a crimminal steals a gun or uses an older one this legislation will be worthless. An if they file off the numbers with a 10 cent piece of sandpaper, or they pick up their brass, worthless.
A satellite uplink and a TV camera with a generator on a tractor trailer that you pull behind you when you fire the gun. I sure someone is working on a hanger, I mean a holster to carry one in.
Did you no read mvpel's page? And BTW, the company maked products to prevent skateboarders from ripping up rails and curbs.
And wouldn't it be in SAAMI's best interest to say this can't happen? They sure don't want it to happen, they probably aren't going to say that it can.
No, but all it takes is one company to say they will provide ammo for the police.
Hey! Who let you use common sense
There are 2 different bills - 2 different issues.
I do not think serializing ammo is a big deal - either the case of a cartridge, or a loose bullet for reloading. There WILL be a cost involved of course. Who pays for that? WE do! Now, each serialized box of bullets or cartridges has to be tracked from manufacturer to "ammo seller" to end-user. Who pays for that? WE do! Who has to keep the records? The manufacturer. The seller. The government. Who pays for that? WE do! Government inspects the records? The seller gets charged $50 a year? A tax on every round? Who pays for that? WE do!
The other bill wants semi-autos to stamp make, model and serial number on the fired brass. IF it can even be done by the manufactures, and they agree to bother, who pays for it? WE do!
OK, so we live in CA, and for some stupid reason refuse to move. We have coughed up the big bucks to get a new microstamping gun, and/or a few boxes of serialized ammo. EVERY round YOU fire had better be kept track of - because that case, and that bullet if you reload, has YOUR ID on it. NO public ranges - would not take the chance of someone grabbing my brass. NO outdoor shooting, what if you loose a few cases in the grass? NO throwing away brass, too much risk. NO reloads, except with your own brass, and your new numbered bullets. Police ranges? Now they spend time policing their brass for EVERY shot of their $75/box ammo, so it does not fall into anyone else's hands (who knows what they might do with it)!
WHAT A DUMB A$$ nightmare!!!
I do not think serializing ammo is a big deal - either the case of a cartridge, or a loose bullet for reloading. There WILL be a cost involved of course. Who pays for that? WE do! Now, each serialized box of bullets or cartridges has to be tracked from manufacturer to "ammo seller" to end-user. Who pays for that? WE do! Who has to keep the records? The manufacturer. The seller. The government. Who pays for that? WE do! Government inspects the records? The seller gets charged $50 a year? A tax on every round? Who pays for that? WE do!
The other bill wants semi-autos to stamp make, model and serial number on the fired brass. IF it can even be done by the manufactures, and they agree to bother, who pays for it? WE do!
OK, so we live in CA, and for some stupid reason refuse to move. We have coughed up the big bucks to get a new microstamping gun, and/or a few boxes of serialized ammo. EVERY round YOU fire had better be kept track of - because that case, and that bullet if you reload, has YOUR ID on it. NO public ranges - would not take the chance of someone grabbing my brass. NO outdoor shooting, what if you loose a few cases in the grass? NO throwing away brass, too much risk. NO reloads, except with your own brass, and your new numbered bullets. Police ranges? Now they spend time policing their brass for EVERY shot of their $75/box ammo, so it does not fall into anyone else's hands (who knows what they might do with it)!
WHAT A DUMB A$$ nightmare!!!
Maybe you didnt read the page. I sure did. I did not see anywhere even a model of the company's process that was capable of producing loaded, live ammunition. Everything was "it will".
Whatever the other company maked or didnt maked, it had nothing to do with ammo.
Wouldnt it also be in the company's best interest to claim they had such a process? Would you rather believe a respected trade association that has been setting standards for years or an upstart company that has a serious financial stake in success?
Read the last sentence in the paragraph 'Bullet Identification Technonogy'. It won't copy and paste, but it does say that in tests, there is a 99% identification rate of bullets stamped by these people.
Obviously, there has to be some machine out there to stamp those rounds, to do the testing.
Sayng that just because the macine isn't out in circulation, being used, means that it doesn't exist doesn't mean that they don't have them already. It means that they aren't out in use yet. Big difference. And SAAMI isn't saying it is impossible. Some quotes:
Maybe the big ammo compaines can't justify doing this for CA only. But maybe some small companies can do it, if guaranteed the police contract.
Again, to just say this is not possible, is not a smart thing to do. It is possible. Costly, but possible. If this is passed, the police will find someone to provide them ammo. They will raise taxes if necessary, to cover the cost. Nothing like spending other's money. Yet the average guy won't be able to buy a box of .45.
Obviously, there has to be some machine out there to stamp those rounds, to do the testing.
Sayng that just because the macine isn't out in circulation, being used, means that it doesn't exist doesn't mean that they don't have them already. It means that they aren't out in use yet. Big difference. And SAAMI isn't saying it is impossible. Some quotes:
They are not saying it is impossible. They are saying that they cannot afford to do so. That they could not remain competittive if they had to charge for this.
Maybe the big ammo compaines can't justify doing this for CA only. But maybe some small companies can do it, if guaranteed the police contract.
Again, to just say this is not possible, is not a smart thing to do. It is possible. Costly, but possible. If this is passed, the police will find someone to provide them ammo. They will raise taxes if necessary, to cover the cost. Nothing like spending other's money. Yet the average guy won't be able to buy a box of .45.
"Simple," says the brain-dead California legislature, "we'll just pass a law imposing felony penalties for failure to report ammunition lost or stolen."
California, during WW-II, faced a very real threat of invasion by Japan, and yet the California legislature seems bound and determined to eviscerate the ability of Californians to repel such an invasion.
"I didn't think any of the nonsense started till the 60's or 70's? I've been told Cali was once a nice place to be."
That is absolutely correct. When I was a kid (let's just say "pre-60s") one would see pickups with guns in their gun racks, and no one paid any attention. If you did that now, you not only would be stopped by every cop who saw you, they probably would drag you out the car at gunpoint.
Beginning in the 60s, every left-leaning dropout in the country made at least one appearance here. Some stayed, and eventually became old enough to vote. Some of those eventually ran for office. You already know the rest of the story...
Tim
That is absolutely correct. When I was a kid (let's just say "pre-60s") one would see pickups with guns in their gun racks, and no one paid any attention. If you did that now, you not only would be stopped by every cop who saw you, they probably would drag you out the car at gunpoint.
Beginning in the 60s, every left-leaning dropout in the country made at least one appearance here. Some stayed, and eventually became old enough to vote. Some of those eventually ran for office. You already know the rest of the story...
Tim