Sad Day for California

S

sigcurious

New member
Microstamping

It seems the California microstamping law has finally gone into effect for semi-auto handguns. While I wish for Californians to be able to get handguns, I hope none of the manufacturers tool up for it showing they will not concede to such backwards laws.
 
Everything that's on the roster now gets to stay on the roster as long as the manufacturer pays the annual registration fee. Only new firearms sought to be registered must have microstamping. We are still mystified as to the basis the DOJ used to say that there are at least two microstamping technologies available unencumbered by patent rights. The only one we know about has a patent that would have expired but CalGuns paid to extend the patent to 2023. On top of that, I don't think there is a single manufacturer that makes firearms that leave the required imprint, although it probably is not all that difficult to make compliant firing pins through laser etching. I estimate that it'll take a year to sort this out to see if the requirement was validly imposed.
 
This is ironic, because the sister programs in New York and Maryland were defunded after years of cost over-runs and a lack of any measurable benefit.

In the face of that evidence, the only reason to pass such a measure would be to make gun ownership more difficult. It's awfully disingenuous to argue that one can expect a drop in violent crime when the same program has been proven a resounding failure elsewhere.
 
That is ridiculous.

The state is broke but yet when it comes to grabbing guns and violating peoples rights they have all the money in the world.

Title should read sad day for everyone because they are the guinea pig testing ground state, and we all know what their end game agenda is.
 
Last edited:
So is the micro stamp going to be placed on the primer or the case itself?

I foresee lawsuits stating people were set up...which to be honest someone visiting the range and its easy to miss ONE piece of brass for someone to pick up.
 
In the face of that evidence, the only reason to pass such a measure would be to make gun ownership more difficult.
Click to expand...
That's the goal of California's legislature and Kamila Harris and the news media that are really the ones driving this frenzy.
 
Sadly, once again California's lawmakers has demonstrated once again their utter disdain for law-abiding citizen gun-owners.
 
Tom Servo said:
This is ironic, because the sister programs in New York and Maryland were defunded after years of cost over-runs and a lack of any measurable benefit.

In the face of that evidence, the only reason to pass such a measure would be to make gun ownership more difficult. It's awfully disingenuous to argue that one can expect a drop in violent crime when the same program has been proven a resounding failure elsewhere.
Click to expand...
The New York and Maryland programs did not involve micro-stamping. They simply required a fired shell casing to compare against shell casings found at crime scenes. However, I can't imagine a more costly and a more difficult micro-stamping technology would fare any better.
 
Warning: We've had to delete a couple of posts suggesting that this law could easily be circumvented. It's a serious violation of the rules here to discuss ways of breaking the law, and there will be consequences for any more posts along these lines.
 
We've had to delete a couple of posts suggesting that this law could easily be circumvented
Click to expand...

One should indeed obey the rules here.

However, the inefficacy of the law has been amply documented to the CA legislature, in writing and in testimony before the legislative committees.

They were well aware of the 'work-arounds', and they passed the bill into law anyway. None of those 'work-arounds' are, themselves, illegal acts. But the Legislature heard them all, and did not care. Repeating the deficiencies at this point serves no purpose.
 
The Cal rule requires at least two imprints, one on the firing pin, and another on an internal working surface of the pistol. No one I know understands exactly what this entails, but the idea is that there will be a second imprint left by the extractor or the inner surface of the firing chamber. This tech is supposed to be superior to the shell casing test. Other posters are correct that the shell case data base was finally terminated because it was useless for tracking firearms from microscopic scratches left on shell casings at crime scenes. Plus the fact that simply because you can identify the firearm (assuming a successful trace) doesn't mean that the original purchaser still owns the gun at the time of the crime.
 
doesn't mean that the original purchaser still owns the gun at the time of the crime.
Click to expand...
While true, we need to remember that handguns are registered in California. If the gun was transferred, then it should have gone through an FFL and the paperwork filed.
Provided it was a legally owned/possessed handgun.
 
From what little I understand about the technology (Dammit, Jim! I'm a lawyer, not a mettalurgist!), even a few hundred rounds will put enough wear on the end of the firing pin as to make the microstamp illegible.

(Metallurgists, please correct me if I'm wrong.)
 
While true, we need to remember that handguns are registered in California. If the gun was transferred, then it should have gone through an FFL and the paperwork filed.
Provided it was a legally owned/possessed handgun
Click to expand...

Which then creates the question. How often are legally owned guns used in crime and absent from the crime scene while no other readily available information indicates a suspect, vs. being present at a crime scene and/or other readily available information indicates a suspect?
 
ven a few hundred rounds will put enough wear on the end of the firing pin as to make the microstamp illegible.
Click to expand...
I'd imagine not, as the primer is usually much softer than the firing pin. That said, spent powder, oil, and other junk will make their way in there, and that can obscure things. Then there's the legal issue of replacing worn or broken pins. Will I have to go to the manufacturer to get one that's serialized?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top