Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Boston Globe Editorial - A False Choice: Gun making vs. gun control

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 12:32 PM
Original message
Boston Globe Editorial - A False Choice: Gun making vs. gun control
NEW ENGLAND has a centuries-old tradition of both gun manufacturing and gun control. It shouldn't have to pick between the two. However, at least one manufacturer is trying to force the matter. Proposals to require that guns be made suitable for micro-stamping, a technology which would allow shell casings to be traced back to the exact gun they were fired from, have been introduced in the Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts legislatures. These have drawn significant criticism from gun manufacturers, at least one of which, Colt, is threatening to move out of New England if such legislation is adopted.
.
.
.
While firearms manufacturers have a right to lobby against this legislation and explain their objections to it, it is inappropriate to wield the jobs of hundreds of workers as a weapon. Micro-stamping does not place any significant burden on the sale or manufacture of guns. It is not a ban or an arduous tax. It merely requires the engraving of a serial number in one more place on the weapon. If a state legislature decides micro-stamping is appropriate, it should not be forced to choose between citizens lives and citizens livelihood.

Complete article here: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/edi... /
============================================
This is an interesting conundrum for the pols. In an area where manufacturing jobs are already seriously eroded, do they run more off for something of negligible effectiveness. Unlike the Boeing fracas, this is not over union issues, but the political climate, so there will be no NLRB action. However, like Boeing there will be numerous states willing to host Colt and any others that choose to move. The stakes are pretty clear.

The squeals of the author are hypocritical. Actions, especially political actions have consequences and the Globe surely knows that. The comments on the article are fairly surprising in their tone. Then again, its not like comments in a major newspaper are just from the local area either.

The down side of course is the impact on the workers. IME, New Englanders tend to be less mobile than others groups. Extended families often live in the same region. The pols decision in light of announcements could force hard choices on them.
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
ileus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. Dearest Colt, we'd welcome you here in Virginia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PuffedMica Donating Member (584 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
50. I think Colt would be much happier here in Florida
After all, Florida is also the home to KelTec and Taurus USA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #50
54. You are both wrong. Please come to Texas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #54
56. Colorado Rocky Mountain High
Edited on Sun Aug-28-11 06:58 PM by RSillsbee
They could make Colt's in the sky

It's rough when i can't even spell the name of my state right
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Glassunion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #56
72. O bull... The Commonwealth of PA would be a perfect location.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
OneTenthofOnePercent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #72
114. Cleveland, Pittsburgh or Detroit would make ALOT of sense...
All are industrial hubs with alot of skilled machinist, metal fabricators, and finishing labor. And all have prime access to american shipping & manufacturing infrastructure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Glassunion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #114
115. Pittsburg it is!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
OneTenthofOnePercent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #115
122. Cleveland. (Go Browns)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Common Sense Party Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-06-11 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
127. I have a lovely valley here in Utah where you would feel very much at home.
You know you want to, Colt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
2. Prime example of Shooting ones self in the foot or do whats right.
NWO
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. What would you consider "doing whats right"?
Microstamping is clearly not going to be effective
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. Thats why they want to do it?or "GUN CONTROL JUST DOESN'T WORK" PERIOD!
Legal gun ownership shouldn't worry Either side of the argument.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #2
22. OMG I thought I just saw a ghost NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #22
55. LOL! Me too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
4. If S&W, Springfield, and Colt left NE, that would be something.

Of course, there were be a host of RKBA friendly states that would welcome them.

I'm just waiting for one of the companies to pull a Barrett and not sell to city and state agencies when the states enact poorly chosen gun laws.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. SA did not leave Illinois, but IIRC established a second facility elsewhere
Government agencies remain the largest block buyers of firearms, and the margins in the business are quite meager. I would be surprised to see any manufacturer black list a government body.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #9
53. True enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Euromutt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-03-11 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #9
60. Maybe, but compare what Ruger's been doing...
First they open a "secondary" facility in Arizona, now that facility is producing all their semi-automatic products, along with the new "Gunsite Scout Rifle." And the "primary" facility has moved from Southport, CT to Newport, NH.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
5. Typical corporation -- bend over to our demands or we're shipping jobs elsewhere. Screw em.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Pretty bold considering what has happened in California
where we have hemorrhaged blue collar jobs both overseas and to other states. How many Starbucks does it take to replace Kaiser in the Inland Empire? What about McDonnell-Douglas in Long Beach? Manufacturing and industrial jobs drive economic recovery, not coffee shops.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #10
35. Maybe it's time corporations stop their threats. Micro-stamping is not a big deal for them.


Now the gunners who want to have guns that are difficult to trace, are a different story. Wait until a few come here and tell us about how criminals will go out and pick up casing at gun ranges to use a crime scene. If that doesn't make you double over with laughter, you have no sense of humor when it comes to guns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. There is a history of boycotts against manufacturers, see Post#33.
Edited on Sun Aug-28-11 04:18 PM by ProgressiveProfessor
Have to wonder about any pol who sacrifices goods jobs for a non-effective statement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #37
42. How about the gunners who whine about innocuous micro-stamping? They are our problem.

Call up colt and tell them that if the law passes, you won't be taking your next few firearms purchases to some other manufacturer. I know none of you will do that, though. You'll just come here and bitch about a proposed law that won't hurt true law-abiding gun owners who don't tote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #42
47. Concealed carry does not figure into this at all
I for one am not sure that Colt would move over this by itself. There are probably other reasons. They are very heavily a government more than civilian shop these days. Not sure about the others.

It is going to be interesting to see who blinks on this one. The obvious flaws in microstamping make it a dumb thing for the pols to risk jobs over. That the Boston Goble editorialized over it indicates the pols might be seriously thinking about backing down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Katya Mullethov Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-03-11 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #47
61. You cant bargain or try to "work with" those who wish to destroy you
Even if you are only doing it for appearances . Look where that got Gibson .
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-03-11 09:02 AM
Response to Reply #42
65. You don't own any weapons, so make the call and tell us what happens. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-06-11 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #35
126. It is a big cost to them, gets passed to us, means lower sales
The company that has the patent on microstamping has been lobbying the government to force the manufacturers to use their technology, which means payment to them.

How much more obvious of a money grab can this be?

It's a CORPORATION paying off GOVERNMENT to funnel money from the PEOPLE to that CORPORATION.

I'm amazed how much support this corporate theft is getting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #5
14. Actually, the states want these corps. to bend over to THEIR demands. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Euromutt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-03-11 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #5
62. "Screw 'em" in what sense?
Do you mean in the sense of "let them move the jobs away"? Because there's not a whole lot anyone can do to prevent them from doing so if their current location is inimical to their profitability. I've frankly thought for a while that the state governments of places like Massachusetts and Illinois were more than a little hypocritical in being perfectly willing to reap the benefits from having corporations based within their jurisdictions while being vehemently opposed to permitting those same corporations' products from being sold there. It just seems so... Taliban-like; "you're very welcome to grow opium poppies and make heroin from them, provided you let us skim a percentage and you don't actually sell the heroin here."

To draw an analogy, can you imagine the government of a particularly homophobic state trying to tell its homosexual citizens that they shouldn't move to a different state because the state government needs their tax revenue?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #5
124. Why would you want to have your business someplace hostile to your trade?
Regardless of the business, it makes sense to move elsewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
6. and they say the gun manufacturers aren't ...
... behind the moves to defeat efforts by legislatures to reduce the harms associated with firearms.

Snork.

Can we have the manufacturer's reasons for making this threat, please?

political actions have consequences, you say.

What other political actions that place no burdens on corporations are the corporations trying to defeat by making economic threats?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. How does microstamping "reduce the harms associated with firearms"
Given that many shooters change/upgrade the relevant parts already, it is effectively useless.

Read the article when it comes to why...though I assume there are other reasons as well. Last I checked Colt was predominately a supplier to Government rather than private individuals as measured by $$$. Not clear if Gov production would be exempt or not.




Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. It shows respect to a sports item that can kill ,just like a Boat ,Suv, or motorcycle..
Edited on Sun Aug-28-11 01:50 PM by orpupilofnature57
Items also unnecessary for national defense in the post militia America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #13
77. Guns already have serial numbers
At least modern ones. I have three that don't because they're old enough.

I say you need technology on your SUV that will stamp an ID code on any victim you run over.

Idiotic? That's the equivalent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. The Globe assumes, without evidence, micro-stamping will work. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. there were a couple of questions in my post
I note that you have studiously evaded them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #16
28. They were answered as best they could be
Your questions were:

Can we have the manufacturer's reasons for making this threat, please?

What other political actions that place no burdens on corporations are the corporations trying to defeat by making economic threats?


My response was to read the article (the primary source) and that presumptively there were others. Since no one here represents those companies, I am not sure how much more could accurately be provided. I know how you hate speculation.


I did note that you declined to answer how microstamping could "reduce the harms associated with firearms". Your assertion concerning it in post #6 is baseless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. It's religious with some people ,and they wonder why they worry people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #12
19. well you're a cute one, aren't you?
Why do I worry people, exactly?

Got any answers to my questions?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. Good Questions ,Corporations use Guns ,Sex,and Religion to keep us
Scared, dead or angry.The reason why no one will ask their reasoning ,is they already know ,Fear of the reasoning of Greed,which is why it exists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #8
17. LOL. For some, "truth and beauty" have little to do with I-Net vision. n
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. Fireworks are fun and firearms are necessary??
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #20
29. To me, "yes," and "yes."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #20
30. Yes and Yes
Edited on Sun Aug-28-11 02:25 PM by ProgressiveProfessor
Maybe not to all people in all circumstances, but given where I live firearms are mandatory
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #8
18. from the master of bald assertions
That bolded part is a false statement

Sez ... I hear grasshopper legs being rubbed together ... was that a TPaine7 squeaking there?

a false statement that you are trying, surreptitiously, to slip into the conversation.

Oooooh, you are too smart for me, aren't you???

Me, I was reiterating a statement made in the item quoted in the opening post:

Micro-stamping does not place any significant burden on the sale or manufacture of guns.


that nobody ... you included ... seems to have lifted a pinky to refute.

It looks kind of like "water is wet", to me, but if you disagree, feel free.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
petronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #18
26. What actually did happen to that 'water' subthread? It seemed quite civil
and educational to me... :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. it had my name in it
so it got 27 alerts, would be my assumption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TPaine7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #18
34. tut, tut, iverglas
Haven't you picked up by now that sources like the one quoted in the OP almost always lie about guns?

And I see you haven't learned anything about water, yet, have you? So sad--you actually think the "water is wet" comment makes you look good. Wow.

Well I'm sure you've heard the reasons why "micro-stamping" is a significant burden to manufacturers, but no doubt you've forgotten them by now. (Like you've probably forgotten that all nine justices of the US Supreme Court agreed that there is a right to self-defense, or that the Fifth Amendment doesn't require a person to flee their own home when they can safely do so rather than stand their ground against a deadly threat, or that "unalienable" doesn't mean "not subject to forfeiture," or that "keep and bear arms" doesn't imply anything about a "collectivity".)

So, just for you, here's a refresher:

Early stage technology in the conceptual phase with one patented vendor and no commercially available equipment. Also cost prohibitive, inefficient, and counter-productive to traditional forensics:
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/JUDdata/Tmy/2008SB-00607-R00...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #34
40. I "actually think the 'water is wet' comment"
made you look.

And look -- I was right!

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #8
21. it was a very simple question
Can we have the manufacturer's reasons for making this threat, please?


I'd think that anyone standing up for the poor, downtrodden manufacturer would know the answer and be more than willing to share.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
rrneck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. Money. It's good PR. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #21
25. I tried.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #6
32. If I manufactured an item ...
and I felt the state I lived in was trying to pass legislation that might hurt my business, I would consider moving to a state that was more friendly to my business. Why should I give tax money to a state that seeks to over regulate my product?

Many years ago Smith and Wesson decided under pressure to incorporate a safety lock in their firearms. This led to a boycott by shooters of new S&W firearms which hurt sales dramatically and increased the value of older S&W firearms without this feature.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #32
85. Several other companies now have that same lock.
I have an S&W642 and it has a special key for a built-in lock on the frame. My Bersa and a Walther also have the same type of lock.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #6
57. Can we have the manufacturer's reasons for making this threat, please?
Because they know it would drive the price of their product so high they'd go broke because no one would buy them
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bluerum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
31. Good. One of the members at my club keeps shooting my targets and messing up my scores.
Now I can prove it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #31
121. I shot at your target, it looked pathetic with no 10s or Xs
Good luck proving it from my gun's serial number stamped on some spent brass on the floor behind us.

You're welcome.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
-..__... Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
33. It comes down to one word - "Boycott"
The author is either clueless about the firearms community and/or is deliberately omitting a major reason for the manufacturers unwillingness to comply.

It's unimportant what state a manufacturer is located in... be it MA, CA or TX; if any gun company shows even the slightest interest in adopting

"micro-stamping", they would face an inevitable nation-wide boycott of their products (just ask S&W or Ruger how that worked out for them).

Not only would the manufacturers themselves be boycotted, but any FFL/gun store that carried/stocked their products would be boycotted as well; I for

one, would gladly join in.


Don't think for a minute that the pro gun-control crowd/legislators aren't aware of this.

Requiring any new semi-auto handguns sold in MA to carry "micro-stamping" technology would result in a de facto ban of the same in this state.

So... in the case of Colt (which BTW, has been relatively unfriendly to the civilian market), it's the wisest, shrewdest decision they can make... what

what possible reason would make them want to comply with the law of a few states (states which account for as very small percentage of the marketplace),

when that decision could force them out of business?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #33
36. Good point. It's gunners opposed to micro-stamping -- fearing they might shoot someone and not

want anything left behind that could tie them to the execution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
-..__... Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. Ok... who talked/leaked the memo?
That's supposed to be privileged info for "gun militants" eyes only!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. You forget the bullet. Which is definitive and hard to change
Fired bullet characteristics can be changed but is well beyond most criminals.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. You guys use those dumbed out bullets that break up so you get more organs when you shoot someone.

Whatever little edge there is to tracking down the shooter, or the guy who sold it without a background check is OK with me. Micro-stamping costs practically nothing. It's not perfect, but anyone who objects is just afraid they might get drawn into a crime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
petronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. I rarely laugh out loud at a post, although I frequently use the smiley
(guess that makes me some sort of low-down dirty deceiver, huh?) but this one genuinely cracked me up. Thank you! :spray:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #41
45. I won't jump you for the bad terminology...I think you mean hollow points
Edited on Sun Aug-28-11 05:31 PM by ProgressiveProfessor
Modern ones are designed not to break up. Some informational links on the history and technology
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanding_bullet
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollow-point_bullet
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_point_bullet

Like many of the technical aspects of firearms, there are trade offs when it comes to using hollow points. Some autoloading pistols do not feed them reliably since they were designed for military style full metal jacket rounds. That can often be addressed with some gunsmithing. Hollow points also lessen penetration, often a good thing. They are standard issue will all cops shops that I know and are restricted in the military to non-combat use only. Generally speaking they are the preferred round for self defense since they are perceived as having more stopping power.

My personal take as an instructor is the bullet placement matters more than "stopping power". Better the firearm you can effectively hit your target with reliably than a hand cannon that will totally destroy it if you get lucky enough to hit it.

Microstamping is a solution looking for a problem. When the obvious technical deficiencies have been pointed out, the supporters said things like:
- We will make anything that defeats it illegal
- We will require new submissions if you change relevant parts
- If we check your gun and the microstamp is no longer visible even if you have done nothing to it, it will be a crime.
Clearly it is not a viable technical approach so stick with the stuff that works.

I do not know anyone who has been involved in a legitimate self defense shooting that has tried to ditch the gun etc. Most of the time they are too broken up over it to do much of anything.

Local cops have discussed finding extra casings at crime scenes. Sometimes they have looked to be seeded but it is not always obvious. One has said he has found spent casing in baggies in some cars. Clearly the gang bangers are already on to this. They also know how to obstruct a GSR test as well.

Finally I would be careful with the "If it helps catch bad guys in the slightest we should do it" approach to things. It is a very slippery slope when it comes to privacy etc.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #45
58. Look up "dum dum" bullets boys. You apparently don't know as much as you thought.

The slippery slope we are on is to having marginally less and less "law abiding" citizens toting as more and more have to tote to keep up with the public arms race you guys are responsible for starting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #58
59. Well aware of the term Dum-Dum and its roots. I assumed that is what you meant by
Edited on Sun Aug-28-11 08:37 PM by ProgressiveProfessor
"those dumbed out bullets". It is discussed in the first citation I furnished above.

I do not see fewer and fewer civilians getting CCW permits. The numbers by all accounts seem to be growing nationwide and more states going to constitutional carry. In SoCal that won't be much of an issue unless the state legislature or the courts go to shall issue.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Euromutt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-03-11 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #58
64. Strictly speaking, "dum dum" bullets are soft point .303 British
It's named for the town of Dum Dum near Calcutta, which is where the arsenal that developed them was located. Nothing to do with the bullet being "dumbed out" or any other relation to the word "dumb." Do you own damn homework before you accuse others of not doing theirs.

And if you want to bitch at somebody for supposedly "starting a public arms race," why don't you take it up with the violent criminals first? I'm sure you can make them see the error of their ways, and how they're polluting society. And once the violent crime figures drop to zero, I suspect very few of us "toters" will bother to continue "toting."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Marengo Donating Member (296 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #58
113. LOL! "Dumbed" from Dum Dum?
Yeah, you really know what you're talking about.:eyes

No one familiar the subject would make such an error. Unless you would care to claim this was intentional.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-03-11 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #41
66. Yes, I got a Wurlitzer the other day. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #66
118.  Was it a waltz model, or full rock and roll. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-03-11 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #41
67. Are you really as ignorant about firearms and ammunition as you sound?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #67
73. Yes, he is. 'Tis a puzzlement.... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #41
86. Dumbed out? Do you mean pre-fragmented?
Pre-fragmented bullets are a safety device. They don't ricochet nor do they over penetrate. They won't go through multiple walls and hit someone in the next house. Instead they shatter after the first wall. For all of those reasons they are excellent self-defense rounds. They are pretty expensive however.

Wounds produced by Glasers tend to be large but shallow, doing less damage to deeper internal organs. Blue Glasers penetrate tissue somewhat more. Because of the greater trauma induced to the body Glasers have a high chance of stopping the fight with one hit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glaser_Safety_Slug
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ileus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
44. Another reason reloading is a great thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #44
46. How does that play into microstamping which includes the firing pin/primer?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
-..__... Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #46
48. Probaly thinking of "laser etching"...
pretty much the same horse-different color except that it's even more foolish, expensive and unworkable.


http://www.ammocoding.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. The IT problem alone would be overwhelming for that approach though at least it is more viable
technically. It also ignores the huge quantities of surplus ammunition out there. ACS also does not cover .22 rimfire, whose annual quantities alone would swamp it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
51. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
azureblue Donating Member (412 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-28-11 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
52. it ain't the guns that kill ya'
it's the bullets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-03-11 08:36 AM
Response to Original message
63. California's micro-stamping law has been a complete failure. It is not in efffect after four years.
Maybe the Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts legislatures think they can compensate for that failure by doing the same stupid thing in larger volume.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #63
69. How can it be a "failure" if it is not in effect?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #69
70. Which brings up an obvious question: Where HAS it worked?
You've been the prime proponent of microstamping on this thread, so you must have some real-world examples of effectiveness
to back up your claim.

After all, you wouldn't want to add to the perception that you're "all wind and no windmill", would you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #70
71. Penicillin was considered ineffective before it was tried. Besides . . . . . .

It might make some of you who regularly add to your cache buy used -- instead of new -- to keep from being implicated if you screw up and shoot an unarmed teenager in the back or something and need to run. That might help impede the proliferation of more and more guns you guys hope for.

I say try it -- what have we got to lose, other than pissing off a few gun fanatics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #71
78. It is already documented as ineffective
By your logic, every new homeopathic drug should be passed by the FDA
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #78
79. Where has it been proven "ineffective?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #79
81. If it can be defeated by a diamond nail file or simple wear and tear, it's ineffective
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 11:31 PM
Response to Reply #81
87. Why would you and other supposedly law-abiding toters feel the need to do that?
Edited on Sun Sep-04-11 11:31 PM by Hoyt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #87
106. This is meant to stop criminals, right?
We absolutely know it will be ineffective for criminals, since they will simply file off the markings.

So the ONLY people who will be affected by this are lawful gun owners.

So what's the point? What crime are we trying to stop now if it's ineffective for criminals?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ileus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #81
111. Buy the firearms you want now before big brother gets microstamping done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #79
83. Here, by an actual forensic firearms examiner:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

(Note: link is to a *.pdf file)

http://www.nssf.org/share/legal/docs/AFTEVol38No1Krivos...

Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners Journal

AFTE Journal--Volume 38 Number 1--Winter 2006

NanoTag Markings From Another Perspective

By: George G. Krivosta, Suffolk County Crime Laboratory, Hauppauge, New York

....The manufacturer marketing this technology has, in its
literature, suggested several countermeasures to defeat the
intentional defacement of the NanoTag identification.
These include placing additional NanoTag markings on the
breechface, extractor, ejector, and the interior of the chamber.
This examiner feels that each of these suggestions must be
demonstrated and tested and not just given a general acceptance
that they will work. Problems that may be encountered with
these locations include the following:

Headstamps present on all rimfire cartridges could
interfere with the NanoTag impression.

Rimfire pressures are much lower and hard brass
cases seldom show traditional breechface markings.
It is anticipated that the cartridge cases will be
reluctant to pick up the NanoTag impression for
the same reason.....

(I like this evidence of NanoMarks dishonesty)

... The companys literature shows a NanoTag
marking on the extractor and ejector in areas that do
not come in contact with a cartridge and cannot mark
the case.
...


Much more at the link, including some rather damning photos of the lack of identifiable markings on tested cartridge cases.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #83
88. Why would any law-abiding toter need to take countermeasures?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #88
105. Dislike of big brother?
When a cop asks, "May I search your car" do you say "no" because you have something to hide or just for general purpose standing up for your rights?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
OneTenthofOnePercent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #88
120. In general, I do not support any meaningless legislation - not just for 2A/gun issues.
I think America has a ridiculous number of laws and obscenely high incarceration rates. You went to law school, I think you can understand this sentiment. I especially dislike laws that do little to actually solve problems but just end up creating more headaches and red-tape for people that were never the target of legislation and have no criminal intent.

In general, I do not support meaningless laws (addressing drugs, immigration, reproductive rights, taxes, guns, etc...). It wastes politicians' time, taxpayer money, and law enforcement budgets. And it's all for nothing when a law cannot hope to fullfil its charter. This microstamping/nanotagging thing is just another pointless law. It is too easily countered to actually have an impact on crime. It offers requirements and restrictions with no meaningful return on investment for the effort. No thanks. I won't support this legislation - and my reason has nothing to do with paranoia, guns, or criminal intent/fantasy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #83
103. It's worse than I thought
Thanks. I think I misread your last post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #79
84. UC Davis report..
A graduate student in the forensics science program set up a test, with firing pins specially designed by the single company who holds the patent for this technology.

A fingernail file and a few strokes was enough to make the number unreadable. As was firing anywhere from 200 to 1,000 rounds through the gun. A couple of range trips, or a $0.49 file and five minutes- and the technology is defeated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 11:34 PM
Response to Reply #84
89. Why would a law-abiding toter take a file to the microstamping technology?

Must not be so law-abiding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #89
92. Who said they would, Hoyt?
But if it's so easy to defeat, what makes you think criminals wouldn't take the five minutes to do so?

But just for shits and giggles, let's say I replace a broken firing pin with a new one. What then, Hoyt?

Or let's say I go to the range every weekend for a month, which degrades the stamp to unreadability. What then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #92
97. No answer to your questions, I see....
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #92
98. Criminals don't usually buy guns -- unless they buy it before losing their "law abiding" ranking.

Fine, even if the stamp degrades -- which other experts say it won't -- it still is legible enough to help tie some guns used in a shooting to the original purchaser. Maybe microstamping can help tell us who a gunner sold it to without a background check, or even caring what their name is or why they need a gun . . . . . . .

I'm sorry, the only reasons I can see for gunners being opposed to microstamping are the same paranoid delusions that make them carry a gun or two in public, and the knowledge that one day they may shoot an underserving individual and need to distance themselves from the scene. Well, they also think none microstamped guns will sell quicker in the "back alley."

If you are thinking you'll just carry a revolver to avoid the implications of microstamping, that's reason enough to suspect one's reason for carrying and owning guns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #98
101. "legible enough"?!?
It's not like a name, like if I called you "Hout", you'd still recognize it as a mis-typing of your name.

No, if you miss one digit, it's useless.

Which 'expert' says that it won't degrade? The only people claiming that are the patent-holder and gun control orgs- neither of which has an unbiased opinion in the matter.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #98
109. Goldilocks Gun Control, redux:
Edited on Mon Sep-05-11 01:02 AM by friendly_iconoclast
If you carry a semi-automatic: "You're planning a massacre"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

If you carry a revolver: "that's reason enough to suspect one's reason for carrying and owning guns."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #69
74.  How can you call it a winning program, if it has never been tried? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #74
76. If everything had to pan out before trying it, we'd still be using logs for wheels. Be honest.

If you guys are so law-abiding, why would you care if newly manufacturered guns have to have micro-stamping? Costs almost nothing to do.

Of course, gunners might not feel as comfortable selling them without background checks as they like to do now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #76
80. You want to make it mandatory *before* it's been tested.
Not only that, the patent is held by one company- so you're basically advocating corporate welfare.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #80
90. No, you're advocating protecting manufacturers/purchasers of killing apparatus by blowing smoke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Katya Mullethov Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #90
116. This same technology should easily cross over
To the hob nail manufacturing industry , thus creating jobs and income .

Did you know a typical pair of boots can require as many as 70-80 hobnails ? That's a lot of micro stamping . And not unlike firing pins , the Bureau of Compliance will discover that further legislation will be required as each nail will require a tiny metal slip cover in place at all times which must be removed before each curb stomping .

The fact that federal excise enforcement agents , hobnail slip cover compliance agents , and Fenton Art Glass would be excluded should go without saying . But Fenton will definitely have to do some lobbying and put some lawyers on it , thus further stimulating the economy and creating more jobs .
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
S_B_Jackson Donating Member (564 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-03-11 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
68. I disagree with the author's contention that
"Micro-stamping does not place any significant burden on the sale or manufacture of guns."

As absolutely false. First of all, as a technology it is unreliable and is so easily defeated as to make is useless. Second, the microstamping of the firing pin may make that part subject to unnecessary failure - i.e. the issues with Smith & Wesson's locking mechanism on their pistols. Third, the claim of no significant burden upon sales is a flat-out lie....again referring to Smith & Wesson (BTW: headquartered in Springfield, MA) their agreement with the Clinton administration to the integral locking system on their pistols led to a boycott of their products and a 40% drop in sales - there is no reason to think that this reaction within the market wouldn't happen again.

For any of the firearms manufacturers: Come to Texas! there are long and historical ties between Colt and Texas and we would welcome your presence and your skilled employees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
75. What they're not telling you
1. Microstamping doesn't work well. Often the marks can't be read reliably.

2. Microstamping is easily foiled. A nail file can easily remove the stamp. A brass catcher can be used. A revolver can be used. Or there is this highly technical think called picking up your brass. If it's illegal to remove the mark, well, they're criminals already! What do they care? Only law-abiding gun owners would care about removing the stamp.

3. Microstamping increases the costs of weapons. Yet another right only for the richer among us. We argue that an ID to vote prevents exercise of a right through an extra charge, why not here? This is not just from the cost of tooling to something that changes constantly instead of identical parts, and the cost of the paper trail. See #4.

4. Microstamping is crony capitalism. A company called NanoMark Technologies has a patent on this, and has been pushing the idea to anti-gun groups and lobbying it to governments very hard. They look to make millions with the government forcing manufacturers to use their technology and pay them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #75
82. IOW, it's a technological version of supply-side economics
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #75
91. OK, let's just keep records of who purchases bullets and put identifiers on bullet and casing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #91
93. One word- reloading.
http://www.amazon.com/Lee-Loader-Kit-308-Winchester/dp/...



$30 and it's defeated.

Unless you're also going to make reloading components illegal, all you'd do is make some entrepreneurial criminal rich. Oh, and screw over anyone who fine tunes their ammunition for hunting or competitions.

Didn't think this one through, either, did you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #93
95. Ah, you are already thinking of a way around being tied to a shooting.

How many robbers are going to reload, file down a microstamp, etc. Probably none, unless you listen to gunners paranoid of being tied to a gun somehow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #95
100. I'm thinking of the logistics. If I can think of a $30 solution to your "fix" then so can criminals.
Like I said, if you made reloading equipment illegal, all you'd be doing is making some criminal rich. And fucking over anyone who currently reloads.

Another solution in search of a problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #100
108. You just don't want to have your guns "microstampled"!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Apparently our man Hoyt has also twigged to the existence of the great NRA/GOP/Lowe's/Home Depot/Craftsman/Ace Hardware Underground Anti-Microstamping Conspiracy:

"...you gunners are actually so illegal you're already acquiring anti-microstamp tools"

...which would be such things as sandpaper, sharpening stones, power drills, diamond/carborundum files, etc.
Looks like we'd better see about requiring permits for these hazards.

Honestly, this is like debating macroeconomics with Sarah Palin. Can anyone say "Dunning-Kruger effect"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 08:34 AM
Response to Reply #108
112. Again, why do you want to obliterate it? Criminals won't waste their time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Marengo Donating Member (296 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #112
117. Criminals never "waste their time" taking precautionary...
actions to reduce the evidence of their crime? I had no idea they were so pressed for time to not find five minutes to run a file over a firing pin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #117
123. Reasonable, common-sense abrasive control will put a stop to such diabolical actions! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #123
125. When nail files are illegal, only criminals will have nail files n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #91
94. Nah, we're not trying to artificially drive up costs
Far beyond what any but the rich can afford.

And then there's reloading.

It's not even hard to cast your own bullets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #94
96. Yep, that mugger that is behind every tree in public toters' paranoia are going to reload, cast

bullets, etc. Get real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Euromutt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-11 02:43 AM
Response to Reply #96
128. They won't do it themselves; they'll just buy them off some unscrupulous individual...
...just like criminals in Chicago, DC and NYC typically don't run guns across state lines themselves, but buy them off some enterprising spark who does. Similarly, such an enterprising spark might be willing to invest in reloading equipment in order to provide untraceable ammunition to his customers or, more likely, he'll smuggle ammunition in from, say, China or the former Yugoslavia. Or buy it from some corrupt cop who pilfers it from law enforcement stocks, as law enforcement will undoubtedly be exempt from any ammunition registration requirement, just like it's exempt from every other fucking gun law (which fact alone usually negates the justifications proffered for it).

I mean, fer Chrissakes, Hoyt, are you really that ignorant about the economics of criminal enterprise or are you just in denial?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:16 AM
Response to Reply #94
99. Don't bother- Our keyboard commando "knows" more about guns than published forensic examiners
Look at his (non-) response to post #83...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #99
102. Quite possibly, or at least I don't have my head in the clouds
I've been involved with them since I was a kid. I cast bullets when I was a teenager. It's easy and totally untraceable.

Then of billions of bullets made, you have to put a unique ID on each bullet, that may end up looking like this after impact:



Good luck reading that, or maybe you've been watching too much CSI.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #102
104. A prosecuting attorney I know hates, hates, HATES CSI and their ilk*..
She tells me that juries expect all kinds of things that actually aren't real science, or don't have the reliability that is portrayed on TV.

I don't doubt we've got at least one CSI junkie here who thinks that bullet could be reconstructed.


*CSI, NCIS, Bones, etc
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
rrneck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #104
107. Dude, I've seen it done...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 07:31 AM
Response to Reply #91
110. Sure, just as soon as we keep records of who withdraws what bills from ATMs...
...and when and where.


Oh, and CDs and DVDs, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-05-11 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #91
119.  The keeping of records of ammunition was tried once.
And dropped as being usless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 15th 2014, 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC