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 46
    More: Obvious, semiautomatic firearms, PJM, shell casings, Remington Arms  
•       •       •

1964 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Oct 2012 at 11:35 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-10-09 09:18:47 AM
5 votes:
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 08:42:39 AM
3 votes:
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 12:33:55 PM
2 votes:

mrshowrules: More accurately then, people who are pro-gun, should come up with the strategy/rules to reduce gun violence.


No.

You are still thinking from the wrong direction. What violence there is (and it's less than it's been for 45+ years) isn't a *GUN* problem, it's a *VIOLENCE* problem. Pro-gun people can't effectively address a problem that is outside of their expertise.

I can tell you why various gun control measures can't work, based upon the physical realities and characteristics of the firearms in question. What I can't do is effectively address the underlying causes of the violence that way, because the firearm is merely a tool being used to commit the violence, it doesn't cause the violence itself, and even if you were to magically make all guns disappear, you'd still have the violence problem.

*THAT* is why gun control, in all it's forms, is pretty much a fools game.

Even worse, it distracts us from looking at the real root causes of violence, so it's actually counter-productive, instead of just having zero effect.
2012-10-09 11:03:33 AM
2 votes:

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 10:26:45 AM
2 votes:

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 09:46:15 AM
2 votes:

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
2012-10-09 09:20:18 AM
2 votes:
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 01:53:24 PM
1 votes:

CPennypacker: I wouldn't need one. They would just have to overturn Heller.


Once upon a time, it took a constitutional amendment to ban private sale/possession of alcohol, and "the right to bear alcohol" wasn't even in the Bill of Rights.

Just a little historical context for your crusade. You might want to expend your considerable passion on a more realistic cause.
2012-10-09 01:39:35 PM
1 votes:

dittybopper: Melee weapon = club, knife, sword, spear, hammer, fists, etc.


Have any stats for developed, western nations?

manimal2878: Why? That's absurd. Should car manufacturers have to make it easier to identify cars?


You mean other than stamping each car with a VIN, putting visible identification on them in the form of a license place and tagging the paint with trace elements that identify the make and model via spectroscopy?
2012-10-09 01:01:34 PM
1 votes:

Monkeyhouse Zendo: Or you can stamp your foot like a child and say people are going to shoot each other so we may as well do nothing to assist law enforcement in identifying them.


I'm all for assisting law enforcement. I'm not for using that as an excuse for more regulation against people who aren't breaking the law.

This microstamping business is an attempt to make it so that the gun makers just won't be able to sell guns in areas that pass it. It's a pathetic attempt to circumvent the supreme court, and nothing more.
2012-10-09 01:00:23 PM
1 votes:

mrshowrules: Side B: wants to reduce gun violence via gun controls


Part of me believes that gun control isn't the means to an end, but rather the end in and of itself. If reducing gun violence was their goal, they would have abandoned gun control long ago.
2012-10-09 12:46:05 PM
1 votes:

CPennypacker: paygun: liam76: Because it would make the guns cost more, because when you had to replace the firing pin it will cost more, becasue unless they then keep a database fo those serial numbers it is worthless, even if they dot hey expensive system can be defeated by switching firing pins before a murder, etc.

Making the exercise of a civil right expensive is no big deal. Just like voter ID!

You think gun ownership is a civil right?


It is. See: DC v. Heller (holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own and use firearms for lawful purposes), and McDonald v. Chicago (incorporating that right against the states).
2012-10-09 12:44:30 PM
1 votes:

wildcardjack: You'd think the military would be favoring something like microstamping. It would allow for quick post-incident scene reconstruction.


I fully support its use for police guns. It's a limited dataset, and it would make sorting out who fired what and where easier.
2012-10-09 12:40:53 PM
1 votes:
You'd think the military would be favoring something like microstamping. It would allow for quick post-incident scene reconstruction.

As far as crime goes, first you need to find the causes of criminality and work to reduce those. Controlling the tools of crime will, at best, change the prefered tools of crime.
2012-10-09 12:36:05 PM
1 votes:

Monkeyhouse Zendo: Unfortunately, the most well known and politically connected firearm association has taken the position that any regulation is to be opposed rather than working with law enforcement and government to craft regulations are are both effective and not burdensome to law abiding citizens.


GOA has replaced the NRA? 'Cause that's what GOA does.
2012-10-09 12:35:42 PM
1 votes:

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


By itself, no.

With the knowledge that it is a consumable part on every gun I know of, yes it does.
2012-10-09 12:35:41 PM
1 votes:

Monkeyhouse Zendo: Except that it's a sound strategy for firearm enthusiasts who want to ensure that poorly considered legislation negatively impacts their legal exercise of their rights.


oh you're serious, let me laugh harder, etc.

Monkeyhouse Zendo: Unfortunately, the most well known and politically connected firearm association has taken the position that any regulation is to be opposed rather than working with law enforcement and government to craft regulations are are both effective and not burdensome to law abiding citizens.


They've taken the position that gun crimes are already illegal. Making them double dog top-secret illegal isn't going to accomplish anything *but* restricting rights of law abiding people.
2012-10-09 12:26:12 PM
1 votes:

LasersHurt: Yes. That's why I am not wholesale denying the idea because there are a few issues with it. It might be feasible with a little tinkering, maybe not. Unlike you, I don't pretend to know all and live in absolutes.


How would you tinker with it to make it work? I'm pretty damn familiar with guns, and outside of mandating that all new guns be made not user-serviceable (which would be a non-starter), I can't see how you could make this work. It would require quite a bit more than "tinkering".

Then too, it might just spur the development of caseless ammo, which would then have to be banned, of course.
2012-10-09 12:24:53 PM
1 votes:
Also, if this were to pass, the values of pre-microstamp arms would increase. So if I were only concerned with money and cashing out my collection, I could be for this.

/follow the money
2012-10-09 12:20:17 PM
1 votes:

Mr_Fabulous: dittybopper: Do you realize that guns are the only common retail goods that you specifically need prior government approval to purchase a new one, or a used one from a dealer?

Oh please. You really think you can buy a new car without showing someone your driver's license?


Showing a driver's license = criminal background check?

There is no law that requires you to have a valid driver's license in order to purchase a car, certainly not at the federal level, and I doubt most states have such a requirement.

To buy a gun from a dealer, though, either new or used, that dealer has to contact the National Instant Check System (NICS) and get an approval before they can sell you that gun.
2012-10-09 12:18:08 PM
1 votes:
There are effective ways to regulate guns, and then there's this.

I once saw an image that read, "People who can, teach. People who can't, pass laws about teaching." Well, the same certainly holds true for guns. "People who know guns go to the range. People who don't know guns pass laws regulating them."
2012-10-09 12:15:51 PM
1 votes:

MindStalker: This just means guns will be more expensive in NY and manufacturers will if they want to sell to NY create guns for NY.


For handguns, NY is a small market, because the onerous laws keep most people from buying them unless they *REALLY* want one (legally).

For example, if I wanted to get my pistol permit, I'd have to take a 3 hour class (cost: $20), get fingerprinted ($90 fee), fill out a bunch of paperwork including getting 3 personal references who live in the same county, Pay a $25 fee to the county sheriff, pay $14 for 4 photos, and $10 to the county clerk.

Then I get to wait 6 to 8 *MONTHS* for it to get approved.

Once it is approved, I have to notify the local clerk each and every time I buy or sell a handgun, so they can amend my permit.

That's why the market for handguns in New York State is actually relatively small.
2012-10-09 12:13:24 PM
1 votes:

mrshowrules: f you are going to go to the trouble of getting someones spent casings, why not steal their gun. Who things that far ahead honestly? We aren't all dealing with Bond super villains here.


Well, it's easier to report a gun stolen than it is to report spent brass stolen, for one. Number two, people don't discard their weapons at gun ranges and leave them there to be processed for scrap.

My position is that Conservatives should be proposing solutions to gun violence instead of Liberals. Their the ones that have a hard-on for guns.

Good thing I'm a liberal then.
2012-10-09 12:10:49 PM
1 votes:

GoldSpider: Gonz: 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".

So you witnessed a crime, but didn't call the police?


Yep. In 1997(?), it's not like phones were the easiest things to find in a municipal auditorium.

And if I had a phone, who was I going to call? The local sheriff? In Tennessee? I'd be putting my own neck on the line. The ATF? "Hey, drop everything and come to this gun show- there's a Southern dude buying a gun. The dealer's the redneck dude next to the guy selling racist targets."
2012-10-09 12:05:14 PM
1 votes:

mrshowrules: This makes absolutely no sense? If they find the shell casing, it was because a crime was committed. They trace it back to the gun owner and do the ballistics test? That means the gun owner still has the gun? If the ballistics match that means they probably committed the crime. Obviously they are in big trouble. What was your point?


All you'd have to do if you wanted to commit a crime and get away with it or implicate somebody else would be to leave someone else's spent brass at the scene of the crime. This microstamping won't prove anything other then the origin of spent casings at crime scenes. It will not prove that the owner of the microstamped guns was at the scene of the crime, or even that they were the ones who fired the brass that was found at the scene.

This is purely a punitive measure, a ban that seeks to avoid the constitutional pitfalls of Heller and McDonald.
2012-10-09 12:02:31 PM
1 votes:

vpb: 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.


Only if we do so retroactively since 2000 or so. Old guns will never have it and will always be on the market.
2012-10-09 11:56:42 AM
1 votes:

Mr_Fabulous: But who cares about expensive regulations that lose jobs...

Won't someone think of those poor, poor gun manufacturers? They face too many pesky regulations, the poor dears.


Yes, why should liberals give a shiat about blue-collar manufacturing....

dittybopper: Of course, that's the intended effect, isn't it? To make it increasingly harder to buy a handgun in New York State, thus accomplishing a de facto ban, something that has been off the table since McDonald in 2010.


GoldSpider: Or they won't sell guns in NY, and just market more in other states.


DINGDINGDING.

It's like anti abortion laws that Republicans keep trying to pass. Sure, they can't outlaw abortion, but they can establish so many legal and regulatory barriers as to make it impossible for someone to get one.
2012-10-09 11:54:50 AM
1 votes:

Mrbogey: 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?


He's right. Every range I've ever been to has a "police your brass" rule. Yes, many rifles discharge the casing quite a ways, but they'll generally all end up in the same area. Keep count and pick them up after you're done. I mean, this idea is really dumb, but not cleaning up after yourself is a dick move.

/no one really follows it
//we pick up what we fired +10, but the ground is still covered
///annoys the hell out of me
2012-10-09 11:53:59 AM
1 votes:

Gonz: 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".


So you witnessed a crime, but didn't call the police?
2012-10-09 11:46:37 AM
1 votes:

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".
2012-10-09 11:42:42 AM
1 votes:
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 11:40:54 AM
1 votes:

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 11:35:36 AM
1 votes:

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 11:32:50 AM
1 votes:

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 11:24:54 AM
1 votes:

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 11:24:32 AM
1 votes:

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 11:22:16 AM
1 votes:

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 11:06:40 AM
1 votes:

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 10:55:53 AM
1 votes:

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


Uh, yes?
2012-10-09 10:34:28 AM
1 votes:

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 10:32:06 AM
1 votes:

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 10:27:37 AM
1 votes:
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 09:59:55 AM
1 votes:
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 09:25:38 AM
1 votes:
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 09:17:20 AM
1 votes:
"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 09:07:30 AM
1 votes:
My Lawgiver already stamps every round with my DNA code.
 
Displayed 46 of 46 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report