Friday, October 05, 2007

Still No Word on CA Microstamping

Time to give the governor's phone/email system another boost, don't you think?
Posted by David Codrea at 10/05/2007 08:28:00 AM

8 comments:

Kurt '45superman' Hofmann said...

It's part of my daily regimen--it's a lot more fun than exercising, or something.

10/05/2007 6:46 PM
Anonymous said...

We agree call to support AB1471, it is a great technology for targeting firearm trafficking.

10/06/2007 1:16 PM
Unknown said...

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!!!!??? It will do no such thing whatsoever. Are you really that ignorant on reality?? CRIMINALS DO NOT OBEY LAWS!!!!!! Does "BLACK MARKET" mean anything to you and no it is not out of some Hollywood movie. It exists and is alive and well. Technology has not reached that level and I hope it doesn't. The last thing I need is more government intrusion in our daily lives. Even if this law does go into effect, you will have increased prices on ammo as if they are not already high enough. There will still be millions of rounds of different types of ammo on the market even in California without it that will be grandfathered in. All the criminal has to do is file out the number. Even if it is micro it will not be hard to do. No two bullets fired out of a gun are a like. That is why ballistic fingerprinting is a failure and why YOUR state even gave up on it because it does not work. You need to look up your information instead of following everything the bureaucracy tells you to.

10/06/2007 1:31 PM
David Codrea said...

It's a troll, Scott. A police-state-lovin' fascist troll.

You can't reason with these degenerate creatures--all you can do is thank God you're not afflicted with the same mental illness, and do what you can to make them powerless to impact your life.

10/06/2007 1:40 PM
Anonymous said...

Hello Scott,

It doesn't affect ammo. It is placed into the firearm, no change on ammo.

However, by identifying a firearm the first time it is used is a tremendous benefit, it allows fresh INTEL on trafficking patterns.

The more data you have, i.e. firearm theft area, localities, people with ties to gangs, "straw purchasrers" and specific patterns, the quicker the analysis can identify these trafficking patterns, so law enforcement can target their resources.

If you can reduc ethe time-tocrime timeline to months instead of years, you can disrupt these enterprises. Law enoforcement is using new techniques such as link analysis and scoial netowrking methods to track these patterns. What you need is fresh data. It is just like hunting terrorists, you need fresh INTEl, not info that is 2 to 3 years old.

How does it affect us as law abiding citizens? "Zero" other than an added cost to a firearm.

Which equates to about 50 cents to $1.50, based on eqivalent CNC technology.

What you are forgetting is ballistic imaging failed because it was rolled out using seriously bad technology and was based on a microscpe tool, they people forgot they were building a system, which is complicated.

However, ATF has been testing new technology. At $1 Million a unit (250 are needed across teh country for it to work), 3D confocal imaging "3D surface mapping, which will cost a handgun owner ~>$50/firearm to register. Never mind what it will cost each state to hire the people to run it. They will roll it out as a forensic tool again, because they can do that behind closed doors .. this has been going on for 3 years ... have you heard about it by the NRA or NSSF?

Microstamping is benign, however it negates any need for 3D or standard imaging of new firearms,it also negates the need for ammo serialization.

You better realize, fighting from a defensive position is a loosing battle. Either you control the arugment, the strategy or technology, or you end up having incremental rights slowing taken away.

Read about Access 2000 database, all the big firearms producers use it, it allows the ATF to enter and acces all firearm data instantly. Where was the NRA and NSSF on that little jewel? Seems the big firearm companies love it, it allows them to hand over the tracing roll to the government .. what!! wait, I thought that was a bad thing ..

Where was the NRA and NSSF on NIBIN, the imaging system was a glorified forensic microscope, which was then thrown into a networked system, where there is no shared calibration standard.

Do you understand, the system was bought and paid for before anyone asked if a picture in CA and one taken in NY would actually match each other, if the forensic investigator did not have a shared standard ... process capability studies were never done. There is no guarantee that the mighting of one system matches the other across the country ... of course to date, the NRA and NSSF never argued that point.

Yes, imaging as it stands is a waste of money, but the NRA and NSSF didn't take a stance on it as a forensic tool, they let the $500 Million dollar network get into place .. do you think teh ATF is going to let that investment go ... once again, the NRA and NSSF was not thinking strategically, they are reactionary ... they do not engage law enforcement on a level where working on solutions to firearm trafficking, they let the anit-gun engage law enforcement ... just my take on it.

You can call people names all day, but unless you are ready to face reality and truely get involve, it is just wasted breath.

One other arugment is the idea criminals will change over night, it is pretty well set in history that technolgy never brings a paradigm shift in the intelligence of criminals. Most people, who have never owned a firearm could take a firing pin out, nor have the inclination to attempt to change the ballistic signature of the firearm.

10/06/2007 3:30 PM
Kurt '45superman' Hofmann said...

My, my--the Big Brother apologists are out in force today, aren't they?

10/06/2007 8:24 PM
Anonymous said...

I don't think he is an apologist. I think he is French. He has already surrendered and he is willing to send the rest of us to the camps if he can keep his cheese and wine.

10/07/2007 12:48 AM
Jerry The Geek said...

I ... am ... in ... AWE!

I know how easy it is to write 400 words and say nothing, but 2ndAmendmentgunowner (?) within the same text volume, manages to say the exact opposite of what he purports to say.

Pretty impressive, for someone who can't type.

He starts out with a true statement: "It doesn't affect ammo."

But then he goes into Major Moonbattery and completely loses track of his point.

He exits the stratosphere when he states that the cost added to firearms purchases is fifty cents to $1.50. I assume he figures this is the added price of using a firing pin with a 'microstamp'.

Guess he hasn't read the law. Either that, or he hasn't factored in the administrative costs, or the non-productive 'bureaucratic' costs.

In fact, if 'microstamping' is ultimately considered to involve ONLY using a 'microstamp' firing pin, the whole program will have been obviated because of the ease of replacing the firing pin with a 'plain' version ... available online for about $20, depending on the firearm.

Will owners of current firearms be required to cease using their guns until they get a microstamped firing pin? If not, the value of microstamping is essentially ... not much.

(If there was EVER any value in the Microstamping technology, it is eliminated by the ease of getting around it. BTW, are all CA firearms going to be required to replace their current firearms? Can anyone see any cost to gunowners in replacing an existant firing pin with a $20 + $1.50 firing pin?)

And if current firearms owners will be required to replace firing pins with microstamped versions, the MINIMUM cost of this measure to firearms-owners would then be something on the order of $50 million.

It's worth considering that, at this time, this is a 'single vendor' proposition. I wonder how long it will take that vendor to replace several million firing pins and ensure that the information is correct?

The commenter finishes with these words of wisdom:


One other arugment (sic)is the idea criminals will change over night, it is pretty well set in history that technolgy never brings a paradigm shift in the intelligence of criminals. Most people, who have never owned a firearm could take a firing pin out, nor have the inclination to attempt to change the ballistic signature of the firearm.

How does that square with his beginning statement?

Answer: it doesn't.

But it's also worth considering that " ... technolgy never brings a paradigm shift in the intelligence of politicians."

What a buffoon! Who elected him?

10/08/2007 4:17 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)