As our state legislature closes out another session voting on a myriad of Bills let me share some thoughts about AB 1471.
If approved it mandates, commencing January 2010, that “all semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the “not unsafe handgun” roster shall be designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters that identify the make, model and serial number of the pistol, etched or otherwise imprinted onto the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and which are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is fired provided that the Department of Justice certify that the technology used to create the imprint is available at more than one manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions.”
Supporters of the Bill include O.C. chiefs of police services representing the cities of Anaheim, Costa Mesa, Irvine, Newport Beach, Tustin and Westminster. Other supporters include the mayor and chief of police of the City of Los Angeles as well as L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca.
Opposing the bill is OC Sheriff Carona and a listing of other out of the area police chiefs and private groups.
AB 1471 ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION:
The North State Sheriffs’ state, “As we see it, the technology to implement the micro-stamping is flawed, there would be an increase in the potential for civil liability for law enforcement agencies that continue to use handguns which will be placed on the “unsafe” handgun list, there would be an increase in law enforcement training costs due to not being able to reuse spent cartridge casings, the technology could be easily defeated since the stamping is only 25 microns deep and the cost of the technology would be passed on to law enforcement agencies and citizens alike.”
The California Association of Firearm Retailers state, “The technology which this proposed bill seeks to promote has not been shown to work under actual field conditions. Mandating its implementation by law at this time would be excessively premature as it cannot be scientifically justified, and it has not been proven to be practical in application. Impartial testing to date has raised very serious questions relative to whether this technology could actually work in the field given all the variables and other factors that are present outside of the laboratory.
“For example, criminals can easily defeat it in a number of different ways, and it is well known that the overwhelming majority of handguns used in crime are stolen. Fired casings from them found at crime scenes in most cases would not lead law enforcement to the actual perpetrator. Placing micro-stamping on semi-automatic handguns, even if the technology was reliable, would be ineffective as a law enforcement tool.
“Furthermore, micro-stamping is a “sole source” technology at the present time. It is owned by a single company. If micro-stamping did work, a matter that the results of recent independent scientific research casts in doubt and highly questions, it would probably continue to be “sole source” as other forms of cartridge case marking have reportedly been proven to be more difficult and costly to engineer.
“This increases the likelihood that the sole source problem would in fact continue and that the costs of using it would not be contained by realistic competition. The result would be higher costs for retailers and their customers for a system that is not reliable and would not be of much assistance to law enforcement.”
The Third Reading of this proposal was scheduled for today.
Based on your own thoughts and the opposing argument cited above, what’s your thoughts about the possible crime-fighting benefits of this legislation?
Has the OC Board of Supervisors taken a stand on this bill, for or against? If not, why not?
Email response from the honorable Chuck DeVore, 73rd AD follows:
I’m opposed to this bill.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
Anonymous 4:03 p.m.
As of Aug 27th there were no positions, be it in favor or opposition, taken by any member of the OC BOS or any individuals.
Is there a plan to do that with condoms too?
This is a truly moronic bill that will have absolutely no deterrent or law-enforcement value whatsoever. Most guns used in crimes are stolen. The technology does not work, and it can be easily defeated. There are environmental and practical ramifications as well – how about all he recycled brass that will have to be discarded?
This is the kind of idiot bill that was produced solely to get the author’s name in the paper. Kind of like LA politicians waving a .50 cal. rifle around after banning them. Has any criminal ever used a $6,000 dollar, twenty pound rifle that is 6 feet long and kicks like a pissed off mule, and fires hard to obtain ammo (at $2.00+ per round) to commit a crime?!?! NO!! Just like Joe street thug is going to care less what is stamped on his shell casings – he’ll just discard that gun and steal another!! This bill will actually INCREASE crime.
Damn, idiotic Democrats PISS ME OFF! TRY COMMON SENSE!!!!! Hey, at least Cedillo is trying to break the “one bill Gil” mold…
Rob.
Obviously you are using common sense in your assessment. Some in SAC are so moved by our crimes that they let their emotions override good judgement. Some practice, “ready, fire, aim” in drafting these wild Bills.
E-mail response from a former member of the OC Grand Jury:
“Re: AB1471: Unproven technology, lots of money ,another layer of enforcement problems, not a good idea.”
OK, OK, OK….we want to pile on
too! Micro Stamping was designed
by Liliputians…and can be read
by people with tiny tot vision
or use a microscope! Microscopes
for Micro Stamps!
Final question: How many micro
stamped bullets come to the box?
How many microstamped pistols
were made in 2007?