If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(PJ Media)   Why gun microstamping won't work. But who cares about expensive regulations that lose jobs, jail innocent people, and can be thwarted with a $12 part, if we can look like we DID something   (pjmedia.com) divider line 322
    More: Obvious, semiautomatic firearms, PJM, shell casings, Remington Arms  
•       •       •

1964 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Oct 2012 at 11:35 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



322 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-09 08:42:39 AM  
A well regulated militia would not mind if their guns had laser markings.

An angry gun wielding mob, or a gang of thugs just might though.
 
2012-10-09 08:51:56 AM  
Ah, security theater.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-10-09 09:04:25 AM  
So in other words, we need to make micro stamping mandatory nationwide and then the problem is solved? Another example of why sensible regulations are a good idea.

It isn't surprising that "Pajamas Media" would give it the pro-gang-banger spin though.
 
2012-10-09 09:07:30 AM  
My Lawgiver already stamps every round with my DNA code.
 
2012-10-09 09:16:51 AM  

Generation_D: A well regulated militia would not mind if their guns had laser markings.


Well regulated in what sense? Do you mean regulated in the sense of subject to a multitude of regulations, or do you mean regulated in the sense of working properly?

Because I can see your point for case 1, but not case 2.
 
2012-10-09 09:17:20 AM  
"But who cares about expensive regulations that lose jobs, jail innocent people, and can be thwarted [ridiculously easily], if we can look like we DID something "

Hey look, it's the war on drugs.
 
2012-10-09 09:17:26 AM  

Sybarite: My Lawgiver already stamps every round chick with my DNA code.


FTFY.
 
2012-10-09 09:18:47 AM  
OK, I need someone to make me smart on this subject. I'm not a hunter myself, because as Ron white says "it's too cold, it's too early, and I don't wanna f'ing go", but I do enjoy fresh game. And, while I don't at this time own a firearm for home defense, I definitely understand the value there. What I'm getting at is that I'm pro-gun. I like shooting. It's fun to put holes in things.

So why on Earth doesn't the NRA or a similar group (really, I think it would have to be Heston's Kids) propose a legislative framework for a law or two that would not harm sportsmen, collectors, or enthusiasts, but that would have some real teeth in going after criminals and gangbangers? It seems to me- and maybe I'm just nuts- that this would be better for their constituents than letting a panicked legislature write scared law in the wake of Aurora or similar.
 
2012-10-09 09:20:18 AM  
Since when are conservatives worried about sending the wrong people to jail?

I mean, take a look at how Texas reacts to the notion of new DNA testing for evidence from old convictions. Prosecutors resist like mad, and the local citizenry hardly blink, despite more than half the cases where testing is done showing the wrong person was convicted.
 
2012-10-09 09:25:38 AM  
FTFA:
Cops will enter the microstamping code into a computer, which will check it against a database, and the police will know who the shooter is within minutes.

I'm surprised that the author didn't explicitly mention the problem with this theory: Even setting aside the spoofing that he does mention, just entering the code will tell you who the last person who bought it from a licensed firearms dealer is, not who the current owner is.

New York State actually tried a form of this with their CoBIS database, which instead of using actual numbers stamped or engraved just used the unique marks that each firearm makes on the cartridge cases. In 10 years, for the price of over $33 million dollars, they solved precisely 0 crimes with it. It was actually shut down last year by governor Andrew Cuomo because it was a big waste of money.
 
2012-10-09 09:36:49 AM  
All guns should have a function that automatically takes a picture of the shooter, the target and calls 911 every time the trigger is pulled. Why would any law abiding citizen object to this?
 
2012-10-09 09:46:15 AM  

Gonz: So why on Earth doesn't the NRA or a similar group (really, I think it would have to be Heston's Kids) propose a legislative framework for a law or two that would not harm sportsmen, collectors, or enthusiasts, but that would have some real teeth in going after criminals and gangbangers? It seems to me- and maybe I'm just nuts- that this would be better for their constituents than letting a panicked legislature write scared law in the wake of Aurora or similar.


Because it will increase costs, and it *WON'T* have any real effect. Let me lay out why.

First, for guns that don't automatically eject casings when fired, this would be useless as a tool for law enforcement. That means that guns like revolvers that are manually reloaded, like revolvers, bolt actions, pump actions, lever actions, single shots (including break-open, rolling block, falling block, etc.) and even guns like multiple barrel derringers wouldn't necessarily leave any evidence at the scene.

Obviously, the police can't check a cartridge casing that isn't left at the scene. The only guns this would likely work consistently with are semi-auto guns.

Secondly, because the markings will of necessity be shallow, you can either abrade them off intentionally, or eventually normal wear-and-tear will do it. Remember that a gun is probably one of the few things you can buy with the full expectation that it will outlive you. Most of the guns I've owned in my life are older than I am. Which is another problem: With an installed user base of around 300 million guns, it would take, at current sales levels, something like 30 years to replace those guns with microstamped ones*, and you'll never come close to that number.

Not to mention the fact that you can just replace the damned part for a pittance.

Then too, any federal system might actually violate federal law, which forbids a centralized gun registry. A central registry be necessary for something like this to work, and it would have to encompass all guns stamped. Ergo, it would be a blanket registration, something prohibited at the federal level. Doing it only at the state level would be pointless, as New York State found out with their miserably failed CoBIS system.

*That's assuming the 10.8 million guns sold in 2011 were all new, which I find hard to believe. That number is based on NICS checks, which are done for all new guns sold, and for all used guns sold by an FFL. The real number is probably more like 6 million new guns
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-10-09 09:48:58 AM  

dittybopper: Generation_D: A well regulated militia would not mind if their guns had laser markings.

Well regulated in what sense? Do you mean regulated in the sense of subject to a multitude of regulations, or do you mean regulated in the sense of working properly?

Because I can see your point for case 1, but not case 2.


I think he means "not criminal".
 
2012-10-09 09:59:55 AM  
That was actually a pretty good article. No "er freedoms" ranting, just explaining the facts, very convincingly.

I'm as anti-right-wing as they come and think the NRA has become an arm of the GOP, but the hand-wringing anti-gun types come up with some pretty stupid stuff sometimes.
 
2012-10-09 10:00:05 AM  
Dittybopper, I don't mean "tell me why this law WON'T work." I mean "what WILL work?", and how do we implement it?
 
2012-10-09 10:14:53 AM  

vpb: So in other words, we need to make micro stamping mandatory nationwide and then the problem is solved?


Uh, yeah.
 
2012-10-09 10:19:56 AM  

Gonz: Dittybopper, I don't mean "tell me why this law WON'T work." I mean "what WILL work?", and how do we implement it?


Almost nothing. Remember that laws only apply to the law-abiding. There will always be end runs around gun laws because they don't encompass the entire world. Moving guns from one state or country to another is extremely profitable for a reason.
 
2012-10-09 10:26:45 AM  

Gonz: Dittybopper, I don't mean "tell me why this law WON'T work." I mean "what WILL work?", and how do we implement it?


I'm going to turn your assumption around that we need to do something, and ask why do we need something more? Gun violence isn't a significant problem for the vast majority of people in the United States. Currently, homicides are the lowest they've been since the mid 1960's:

bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov

That chart only goes to 2005, but the last number the BJS has is for 2010, a homicide rate of 4.8 per 100,000. That's 1950's homicide levels, and we don't consider the 1950's to be a particularly violent decade. Homicide is now lower than it has ever been in my lifetime, and I'm 45 years old.

What is the urgency? Why do we *NEED* to do something?
 
2012-10-09 10:27:37 AM  
Supporters of the technology say it will be a "game changer," allowing authorities to quickly identify the registered guns used in crimes.

Problem 1

Removal of firing pin

Problem 2 (it takes seconds and can be thwarted with a nail-file)

This will be useless for revolvers.

Problem 3

This will be useless for rimfire.

Problem 4

Actual law-abiding gun owners will have to police their brass whenever they go to the range, as they could unwittingly become implicated in crimes by leaving their personally identifiable cartridge casings behind for criminals to plant at crime scenes.

Problem 5
 
2012-10-09 10:32:06 AM  

ArkAngel: Gonz: Dittybopper, I don't mean "tell me why this law WON'T work." I mean "what WILL work?", and how do we implement it?

Almost nothing. Remember that laws only apply to the law-abiding. There will always be end runs around gun laws because they don't encompass the entire world. Moving guns from one state or country to another is extremely profitable for a reason.


Or just making them. Guns are a 600 year old technology that can be made using the tools and materials you can find at your local Home Depot.
 
2012-10-09 10:34:28 AM  

Gonz: Dittybopper, I don't mean "tell me why this law WON'T work." I mean "what WILL work?", and how do we implement it?


Outlaw murder.
 
2012-10-09 10:47:29 AM  

Gonz: Dittybopper, I don't mean "tell me why this law WON'T work." I mean "what WILL work?", and how do we implement it?


End the drug war. Improve NICS reporting.
 
2012-10-09 10:53:55 AM  

Fark It: Supporters of the technology say it will be a "game changer," allowing authorities to quickly identify the registered guns used in crimes.

Problem 1

Removal of firing pin

Problem 2 (it takes seconds and can be thwarted with a nail-file)

This will be useless for revolvers.

Problem 3

This will be useless for rimfire.

Problem 4

Actual law-abiding gun owners will have to police their brass whenever they go to the range, as they could unwittingly become implicated in crimes by leaving their personally identifiable cartridge casings behind for criminals to plant at crime scenes.

Problem 5


I like how one currently existing gun where removing the firing pin is easy proves that engraving the firing pin on all FUTURE guns wouldn't work. That's some fantastic logic there. And your flat refusal to even consider other options for guns like revolvers really proves that you do in fact care about fixing an issue that your beloved NRA has told you should be killed at all costs. And why exactly shouldn't you police your brass? Do people actually just leave shell casing everywhere when you go to a gun range?
 
2012-10-09 10:55:53 AM  

GAT_00: Do people actually just leave shell casing everywhere when you go to a gun range?


Uh, yes?
 
2012-10-09 10:59:44 AM  
Nice to see *anyone* on PJM finally get something correct.
 
2012-10-09 11:03:33 AM  

GAT_00: I like how one currently existing gun where removing the firing pin is easy proves that engraving the firing pin on all FUTURE guns wouldn't work.


So, you think future guns will have non-user accessible firing pins? Who would make such a thing? Apple?

And your flat refusal to even consider other options for guns like revolvers really proves that you do in fact care about fixing an issue that your beloved NRA has told you should be killed at all costs.

Never been a member of the NRA, they're a chickenshiat Republican shill-organization that rolled over for gun confiscation victims in New Orleans and didn't support Heller or McDonald, instead they rode the coattails of the defendants. Your complete failure to realize my point (that it would not work on revolvers because they don't eject spent casings) demonstrates your complete ignorance on the subject yet again.

And why exactly shouldn't you police your brass? Do people actually just leave shell casing everywhere when you go to a gun range?

If you're at an indoor range you'd get kicked out in a hurry if you started crawling around on your hands and knees looking for your spent brass. A lot of it will eject/ricochet forward beyond the firing line too. If you've ever handled a gun or know somebody who has a gun you'd know this.

Not that I expect you to be ashamed of your ignorance and educate yourself, but still, that was derpy, even by your standards.....
 
2012-10-09 11:03:48 AM  

GAT_00: I like how one currently existing gun where removing the firing pin is easy proves that engraving the firing pin on all FUTURE guns wouldn't work.


It's not one gun. The firing pin is a serviceable part.
 
2012-10-09 11:04:51 AM  

dittybopper: Gonz: Dittybopper, I don't mean "tell me why this law WON'T work." I mean "what WILL work?", and how do we implement it?

I'm going to turn your assumption around that we need to do something, and ask why do we need something more? Gun violence isn't a significant problem for the vast majority of people in the United States. Currently, homicides are the lowest they've been since the mid 1960's:

[bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov image 270x218]

That chart only goes to 2005, but the last number the BJS has is for 2010, a homicide rate of 4.8 per 100,000. That's 1950's homicide levels, and we don't consider the 1950's to be a particularly violent decade. Homicide is now lower than it has ever been in my lifetime, and I'm 45 years old.

What is the urgency? Why do we *NEED* to do something?


In Canada is 1.9 per 100,000.

From Wiki:

Gun-related death rates in the United States are eight times higher than they are in countries that are economically and politically similar to it. Higher rates are found in developing countries and those with political instability.


It is one thing to argue the solution but to propose their is no problem is not cool.
 
2012-10-09 11:05:42 AM  
Seriously, there are practical reasons why firing pin microstamping won't work, and they have nothing to do with the NRA..
 
2012-10-09 11:06:40 AM  

itsdan: GAT_00: I like how one currently existing gun where removing the firing pin is easy proves that engraving the firing pin on all FUTURE guns wouldn't work.

It's not one gun. The firing pin is a serviceable part.


This. *ALL* guns that I know of have a removable firing pin*, and generally, for most, removing that firing pin is part of normal cleaning procedure.


*Not including open-bolt submachine guns with a fixed firing pin, but none has been legally manufactured for sale to civilians in the US since 1986.
 
2012-10-09 11:07:45 AM  

Jackson Herring: practical


"Practical" isn't in the Brady Campaign's vocabulary.....
 
2012-10-09 11:17:36 AM  

dittybopper: itsdan: GAT_00: I like how one currently existing gun where removing the firing pin is easy proves that engraving the firing pin on all FUTURE guns wouldn't work.

It's not one gun. The firing pin is a serviceable part.

This. *ALL* guns that I know of have a removable firing pin*, and generally, for most, removing that firing pin is part of normal cleaning procedure.


*Not including open-bolt submachine guns with a fixed firing pin, but none has been legally manufactured for sale to civilians in the US since 1986.


And I'm aware of that, and that they do need replaced as they can wear down. The fact that in one gun they can be removed by a ballpoint pen doesn't come close to proving why microstamping is bad.

Jackson Herring: GAT_00: Do people actually just leave shell casing everywhere when you go to a gun range?

Uh, yes?


That seems incredibly impolite. I mean, walking downrange is obviously out, but why would you not pick up shells at your feet?
 
2012-10-09 11:22:16 AM  

mrshowrules: It is one thing to argue the solution but to propose their is no problem is not cool.


Was there a problem with gun violence in the 1950s? We look back on those days as halcyon days of peace and prosperity in the US. And we have the same exact homicide rate they had back then.

Why do we feel the need to do something?

That's precisely the sort of feeling that makes "Slippery Slopes" a reality. Even though they are logical fallacy, we don't live on the Planet Vulcan, and the "irresistible urge to legislate" is a very real problem.

So, you are saying it's not cool to propose that homicide rates are low enough that more gun control would be silly. Fine. Why don't you show me how you could lower it even further with some further form of gun control. Bonus points if it doesn't add any cost in time or money to acquiring and owning a gun.

In other words, show me what you got. I will warn you though: Whatever you come up with has likely been tried, and it likely failed, because gun control doesn't address the underlying causes of violence. It's attempting to treat the symptom, not the condition itself. It's the ice pack on the forehead of someone with a flu-induced fever.
 
2012-10-09 11:24:32 AM  

GAT_00: That seems incredibly impolite. I mean, walking downrange is obviously out, but why would you not pick up shells at your feet?


Every range has different rules I guess.
 
2012-10-09 11:24:54 AM  

GAT_00: And I'm aware of that, and that they do need replaced as they can wear down. The fact that in one gun they can be removed by a ballpoint pen doesn't come close to proving why microstamping is bad.


In *ALL* guns they can be replaced quickly and cheaply. Stop saying "one gun", because it's making you look like an idiot.
 
2012-10-09 11:30:15 AM  
American jails are FULL of innocent people.
 
2012-10-09 11:32:50 AM  

dittybopper: mrshowrules: It is one thing to argue the solution but to propose their is no problem is not cool.

Was there a problem with gun violence in the 1950s? We look back on those days as halcyon days of peace and prosperity in the US. And we have the same exact homicide rate they had back then.

Why do we feel the need to do something?

That's precisely the sort of feeling that makes "Slippery Slopes" a reality. Even though they are logical fallacy, we don't live on the Planet Vulcan, and the "irresistible urge to legislate" is a very real problem.

So, you are saying it's not cool to propose that homicide rates are low enough that more gun control would be silly. Fine. Why don't you show me how you could lower it even further with some further form of gun control. Bonus points if it doesn't add any cost in time or money to acquiring and owning a gun.

In other words, show me what you got. I will warn you though: Whatever you come up with has likely been tried, and it likely failed, because gun control doesn't address the underlying causes of violence. It's attempting to treat the symptom, not the condition itself. It's the ice pack on the forehead of someone with a flu-induced fever.


It is all relative. If the person killed is someone you know, it is significant.

If homicide or gun related deaths (even at the 1950's rates) is not a big problem than terrorism is a non-existent problem. If you think deaths equivalent to 9/11 happening every month is not a big deal that you must consider 9/11 itself to be meaningless.
 
2012-10-09 11:35:36 AM  

dittybopper: GAT_00: And I'm aware of that, and that they do need replaced as they can wear down. The fact that in one gun they can be removed by a ballpoint pen doesn't come close to proving why microstamping is bad.

In *ALL* guns they can be replaced quickly and cheaply. Stop saying "one gun", because it's making you look like an idiot.


And what I'm saying is his argument makes no sense. It's a standard NRA argument: "Well, this solution won't fix every single problem right away, so let's not do it! We are fundamentally opposed to it!" or "Hey, this doesn't work exactly the same for all of the vast assortment of guns. Let's not even consider doing it!" It's a childish argument.

Things like microstamping are incremental solutions. Nobody who is trying to reduce gun violence thinks there is a single solution to fix everything. Nobody is that stupid, and if someone is that stupid, nobody listens to them. But the NRA and their lackeys are opposed to any kind of solution. They can't grasp the concept of incrementalism, because all they can do is think of everything or nothing solutions, and nothing in the world works like that.
 
2012-10-09 11:39:54 AM  
PJ media? Smells like bullshait.
 
2012-10-09 11:40:54 AM  

GAT_00: dittybopper: itsdan: GAT_00: I like how one currently existing gun where removing the firing pin is easy proves that engraving the firing pin on all FUTURE guns wouldn't work.

It's not one gun. The firing pin is a serviceable part.

This. *ALL* guns that I know of have a removable firing pin*, and generally, for most, removing that firing pin is part of normal cleaning procedure.


*Not including open-bolt submachine guns with a fixed firing pin, but none has been legally manufactured for sale to civilians in the US since 1986.

And I'm aware of that, and that they do need replaced as they can wear down. The fact that in one gun they can be removed by a ballpoint pen doesn't come close to proving why microstamping is bad.

Jackson Herring: GAT_00: Do people actually just leave shell casing everywhere when you go to a gun range?

Uh, yes?

That seems incredibly impolite. I mean, walking downrange is obviously out, but why would you not pick up shells at your feet?


why should your ideas on the issue be considered when you have a fundamental lack of gun knowledge?
 
2012-10-09 11:42:42 AM  
Hey, can someone tell me how a program that would require developing a completely new technology, deploying that in new machines in every firearm factory, staffing each of those machines, and maintaining them when they fail would lose jobs?
 
2012-10-09 11:42:53 AM  
Until someone, ANYONE from the pro-gun side (meaning those in power, not the everyman) suggests solutions to help reduce gun crime that is sensible and isn't "give everyone else guns," I kind of don't want to hear it.
 
2012-10-09 11:42:55 AM  

GAT_00: It's a standard NRA argument: "Well, this solution won't fix every single problem right away, so let's not do it is incredibly easy to circumvent, and therefore an expensive waste of time! We are fundamentally opposed to it!"


FTFY
 
2012-10-09 11:44:30 AM  

Mrbogey: why should your ideas on the issue be considered when you have a fundamental lack of gun knowledge?


I like you and respect you as an opponent, GAT, but this far from one of your strongest subjects.
 
2012-10-09 11:44:41 AM  

GoldSpider: GAT_00: It's a standard NRA argument: "Well, this solution won't fix every single problem right away, so let's not do it is incredibly easy to circumvent, and therefore an expensive waste of time! We are fundamentally opposed to it!"

FTFY


Case in point.
 
2012-10-09 11:44:49 AM  
Consider guns as an elephant at a children's birthday party. Potentially dangerous but properly managed it will make one of the best birthday parties ever.

Now who has a greater obligation to come up with a strategy and steps to keep the children safe, the parent who didn't want the elephant there to begin with or the one who pushed for the idea of the elephant in fact made it a precondition of the party?
 
2012-10-09 11:45:56 AM  
Of course. You expected different from the government?

Opponents claim the process is costly, unreliable, and may ultimately impact the local economies that heavily depend on the gun industry, including Ilion, N.Y., where Remington Arms maintains a factory, and Hartford, Conn., where Colt's manufacturing is headquartered.

On the other hand, we could shut down the entire gun industry tomorrow and there would still be enough guns in the world to kill everyone several times over, so boo-hoo-hoo.
 
2012-10-09 11:45:58 AM  
I'm on a mobile, so I'm not going to quote you, but here's why we- and by "we", I mean "people whose idea of gun control is a dime-sized group at 25 meters"- *need* to do something.

It's because perception IS reality, period. And right now, there's a growing perception that American gun owners really don't care if mentally unstable individuals can amass arsenals, as long as they got theirs. Yes, statistically, they're isolated incidents, but every time there's another mass shooting- be it Cho at VT, the dude in Aurora, or others, it seems the common narrative afterward becomes "why was this individual allowed to stock up like this"?

And the biggest problem is that the current gun culture finds it amusing to thumb its collective nose at any proposed fixes. When background checks started coming into vogue, I saw more than one dealer at a gun show accept the name "John Doe", with no ID check, because the buyer "looked like an all right guy".

We need to do something now, and give it teeth, because doing nothing is going to result in absolutely Draconian action being taken when a majority of the country finally loses their patience for the final time.
 
2012-10-09 11:46:22 AM  

andrewagill: Hey, can someone tell me how a program that would require developing a completely new technology, deploying that in new machines in every firearm factory, staffing each of those machines, and maintaining them when they fail would lose jobs?


That's what I was wondering.
 
2012-10-09 11:46:37 AM  

GAT_00: Things like microstamping are incremental solutions.


So, a slippery slope? Microstamping doesn't work, so let's try this too. And when that fails, try this. And this. And then you end up like the United Kingdom, where modern handgun ownership is banned, and even shotgun ownership is highly regulated.

Let's look at the panalopy of failed gun laws:

Waiting periods: Enacted in 1993, ended in 1999, FAILED.
Assault Weapons Ban: Enacted in 1994, sunset in 2004, FAILED.
Handgun bans in DC and Chicago: FAILED.
CoBIS (a NYS program similar in many ways to microstamping): FAILED.

I mean, if actual *BANS* failed to work, why would you expect this work? Waiting periods did nothing. Bans on scary looking guns did nothing. Programs similar to microstamping, but using the unique toolmarks left from manufacturing did nothing.

At some point, you have to say "You know, we gave it an honest try. We tried increasing gun control for 30 years, and it wasn't until laws started relaxing that the homicide rate dropped".
 
Displayed 50 of 322 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report