Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Democrats introduce gun regulations to make them easier to trace from fired bullets BadgerHerald.co

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    http://badgerherald.com/news/2009/03...un_bill_st.php

    A bill introduced by state lawmakers to change gun regulations in Wisconsin is drawing criticism from Republicans who argue the bill infringes on citizens’ Second Amendment right to own a gun.

    The proposal, introduced by Milwaukee Democrats Rep. Leon Young and Sen. Spencer Coggs would require any handgun manufactured after 2011 and sold in the state to contain microstamp technology, according to Young spokesperson Rachel Rodriguez.
    “A laser etches information about the gun onto the bullet casing when the gun is fired,” Rodriguez said. “So instead of technology that’s used right now that relies on distinctive patters on the bullets…that can only be matched up when they find the gun, this allows law enforcement officers to track down the weapon that shot the bullet even before they’ve found the gun.”

    The bill would not increase the cost of guns nor does it try to eliminate any older guns currently owned by individuals in Wisconsin and will only have an effect on new guns, Rodriguez added.

    Rep. Scott Suder, R-Abbotsford, and Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, disagree with Rodriguez, arguing the bill will increase the cost of guns by $200 and infringe on individuals’ constitutional rights.

    “Criminals are going to file off the microstamp and law abiding citizens are going to pay the cost,” Suder said. “In this tough economy, people who want to buy guns for sport or protection are going to have to pay a gun tax.”

    Suder said he doubts the proposal will have any affect on current criminals, who are unlikely to get rid of their old guns or take their new ones in to get microstamped.
    According to Suder, both he and Grothman are going to do everything in their power to make sure the bill is not passed by the Legislature.

    “It’s going to be an uphill battle. We hope that people who care about the Second Amendment call their legislator and speak out against it,” Suder said.

    According to Rodriguez, the bill is currently circulating the Legislature for co-sponsorship. If the proposal passes both the Assembly and Senate, it would be sent to Gov. Jim Doyle to be vetoed or signed into law.


    [line]

    Anonymous (March 26, 2009 @ 9:10am): Firearm Microstamping as I see it is a great idea, these are the reasons:

    1. No state database is necessary.

    2. The firearm indsutry can work directly with state law enforcement to specifically target gun traffickers, while protecting the rights of indivudal gun owners.

    3. With microstamping there is no need for national registration or even state registration, becuase it targets the traffickers. The codes used reside at the manfuacturers facility, not with the BATFE.

    5. With microstamping there is no need for asault weapon bans.

    6. With microstamping you can protect 2nd amendment rights, by de-centralizing control from the BATFE and hold the data where it should be, at each individual firearms manufacturers site. Allowing them to charge a price for searches and to work with state governments and law enforcement to evolve the technology and combat firearm trafficking.

    The NRA/NSSF argument is slippery slope, but it is obvoius that they have been facilitating the systematic reduction of gun rights through their actions as well as co-conspirator in the systematic formation of a national registration system. So, much so, California is a 100% registration state.

    Since 1934, the NRA has systematically inched us toward national registration. They supported the act in 1934 and in 1968 which gave the BATFE the ability to create the FFL system that allows them to interfere with state commerce - instead of limiting them to only interstate commerce.

    To make matters worse, the NSSF specifically supported the creation of an electronic E-4473 form.

    "The E - 4473 will help all firearms retailers, especially small independent retailers, by giving the federal firearms licensee an opportunity to reduce costs and further enhance compliance issues by eliminating -- or at the very least reducing -- innocent mistakes caused by human error," said NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane.

    The NSSF will tell you that it is optional and not tied to a natonal database, which is funny - because it doesn't take to much more to link it to a national database.

    What kind of statement is that? The NSSF actually said "the E - 4473 is not part of a government database, and it is not connected to any government computer or exchange."

    Do they understand what it takes for that next step? This is what you get when you have lawyers negotiate from a defensive position. When was the last time the NRA or NSSF took an offensive position - when was the last game changer they borught to teh table? When did they ever say (to protect our 2nd amendment rights) we are going to self police ourselves and work with law enforcement from a positon of strength and by a means that protects the 99% of us who don't commit crimes with guns. Instead they are forced to make the same argument over and over.

    Furthermore, the BATFE has started to cut back on 4473 paper forms. Shop owners are going to begin to be forced to conform - by BATFE means - audit coercion.

    I am not sure how the NSSF can support this type of back door registration ... it is voluntary, until the stores are forced to do it, by shortages of paper forms and government audting requirements.

    Furthermore, this is a BATFE strategy, a systematic placement of parts and pieces, to an overall national registration database scheme. You do not need to be paranoid and of course the NSSF is playing right along.

    So, let's understand the situation:

    NSSF/NRA doesn't want microstamping becuase it isn't 100% -- does that mean they support methods that are only 100% effective? that must mean they support the assault weapons ban.

    There is one reason the BATFE doesn't want Microstamping - they won't be in control of it - the firearm industry will be in control.






    Anonymous (March 26, 2009 @ 9:34am): Stupid is as stupid does....

    This is way too easy to confound or eliminate.

    1) The criminal uses a Dremel tool to blend out the laser etched microstamp on the gun chamber. The shell casings are not marked there after.

    2) An aspiring criminal picks up a few discarded casings at the local firing range or neighborhood gravel pit and drops them at his next crime scene. He uses his own revolver, which does not automatically eject shell casings, so he leaves only false evidence at the crime scene.

    Democrats Rep. Leon Young and Sen. Spencer Coggs are exhibiting their liberal lack of logic coupled with legislative expertise in creating really dumb laws that solve nothing. As such, they show themselves to be as equally qualified to be President as Barrack Hussein Obama.

    Send in the clowns. Don't bother, they're here!
    Anonymous (March 26, 2009 @ 9:35am): When are we going to fight against the 1% who jeopardize our 2nd amendment rights?

    The NRA/NSSF continuous defeatist argument is just the same ole mantra! They tell us the United States indsutry is incapable of producing products and the indsutry is incapable of innovation. What has become of US indsutry? The NSSF had the last president of Ruger testified in CT that the firing pins of Rugers are the weakest link and that they break all the time. What does that say about US made firearms? It is competely nuts. Just recently, the chief lawyer from Colt said they will pick up and leave CT. Basically using economic terrorism. What is humorous is the European manufacturers love this.

    Slowly but surely, the NRA/NSSF will systematically hobble the US firearms indsutry and the Europeans will dominate - if they haven't already.

    The NRA, should change its name to the international rifle association, they are ineffective and seem willing to cry foul every chance for the main reason that they created the problem ever since 1968 when they helped the BATFE form the FFL system.

    What is microstamping? it is an added code to target traffickers; how does that violate anyones rights?

    These groups need to start taking the high ground. They are layers who think that arguments solve problems - solutions solve problems. All they will do is argue our rights away.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Saukville, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    233

    Post imported post

    What is microstamping? it is an added code to target traffickers; how does that violate anyones rights?
    Wow what a ******* idiot. How about this: it violates my right to not have to pay for a rediculous feature on a gun that I don't want and won't be of any use to anyone.

  3. #3
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668

    Post imported post

    Oh great, if I ended up having to own a microstamping gun, you can be damn sure I'd police all my brass from any range. Can you imagine trying to explain how brass traced to your gun was present at the scene of a crime after somebody planted it there?

    Junk science from junk politicians!
    A. Gold

    Failure to comply may result in discipline up to and including termination.
    The free man is a warrior. - Nietzsche "Twilight of the Idols"

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    721

    Post imported post

    Shotgun wrote:
    Oh great, if I ended up having to own a microstamping gun, you can be damn sure I'd police all my brass from any range. Can you imagine trying to explain how brass traced to your gun was present at the scene of a crime after somebody planted it there?

    Junk science from junk politicians!
    I was also thinking this. It would be foolish to bring any microstamping gun to the range. Not that criminals frequent shooting ranges, but largely because the cases or primers could end up anywhere...reloaded cases to someone else, disposed-of primers, etc....

  5. #5
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668

    Post imported post

    If I remember correctly, wasn't there just ONE single case in the entire USA where microstamping was useful in solving a crime? Quite the impressive track record, eh?
    A. Gold

    Failure to comply may result in discipline up to and including termination.
    The free man is a warrior. - Nietzsche "Twilight of the Idols"

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Saukville, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    233

    Post imported post

    Nope microstamping has not been used to solve a crime ever. In fact, I think this has passed in CA only, but has not yet been actually implemented. I'm not 100% on that, though. You might be thinking of the "ballistics databases" that IIRC CA and MA have, where a spent casing has to be included with any new handgun, which is sent to the state police to be entered into a database with the owner's information. I'm pretty sure those have never actually solved a crime, either, though they cost hundreds of millions to administer.

  7. #7
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668

    Post imported post

    Rick Finsta wrote:
    Nope microstamping has not been used to solve a crime ever. In fact, I think this has passed in CA only, but has not yet been actually implemented. I'm not 100% on that, though. You might be thinking of the "ballistics databases" that IIRC CA and MA have, where a spent casing has to be included with any new handgun, which is sent to the state police to be entered into a database with the owner's information. I'm pretty sure those have never actually solved a crime, either, though they cost hundreds of millions to administer.
    I think you may be correct, because Massachusetts seems to ring a bell within my foggy recollection of the details.
    A. Gold

    Failure to comply may result in discipline up to and including termination.
    The free man is a warrior. - Nietzsche "Twilight of the Idols"

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    248

    Post imported post

    Back in December last year (2008) I contacted Sen. Vinehout about this and pointed out some things to her about this effort that has been going state-to-state. I recently summarized these to a friend who works in my local FFL so he could have some talking points to customers and will do the same here.

    1. The cost estimates are flawed.

    2. Another attempt to make law-abiding end-users pay for something done by those who are already pre-disposed to commit crime.

    3. The "theory" looks great to someone who watches too much 'CSI' on television. Ballistic gelatin is different than the varied materials that might cause bullet deformation.

    4. Such efforts to ballistically catalog cartridge cases have already cost states so much money and proven so useless that only a handful of states do it and one state (Maryland) is seriously considering giving it up because after millions of dollars spent, such efforts have ONLY ONCE been instrumental in MAYBE solving one firearms crime.

    I had pointed all these things out in an attempt to contact the front organization and cc'd Sen. Vinehout, also pointing out that (in his identical PPA veto messages) the Governor adamantly states that Wisconsin is among the safest states in the nation. To her credit, Sen. Vinehout replied next day personally (vs. the normal "canned" reply) and stated:



    Dear (WIG19),

    Thank you very much for keeping me updated on this issue. I appreciate the time you took to do the research.

    I will keep an eye out for any such bill. We have been successful at killing restrictive bills in the past. It is good to know what is being planned.

    I completely agree with your conclusion. We definitely have more important issues to address.

    Thanks for your assistance.

    Happy New Year!

    Kathleen Vinehout



    I summarized further some talking points to my buddy at the local gunshop as follows:

    You can see Sen. Vinehout's response above when I copied her on the note to Ms. Taylor (the lobbyist) who is going around trying to get state legislature's to buy into this BS.

    Why would she do this? Because she's the also the marketing shill for this company:

    http://www.ammocoding.com/index.php

    Here's just one article from a Seattle paper, March 2008, that comes right out and says so. The company with the "patent" hired her as a lobbyist! What better way to get your bogus product sold then to have laws made to say it must be used:

    http://www.seattleweekly.com/2008-03-05/news/three-seattle-guys-want-to-bar-code-bullets.php

    "To this end, Ammunition Coding hired Briahna Taylor, a lobbyist with Gordon, Thomas, Honeywell's Tacoma-based government affairs office. With Taylor's help, they began pushing for ammunition coding legislation on the state level. Taylor quickly launched a Web site, ammunitionaccountability.com, and bills were introduced in 12 states, including Washington."

    Ms. Taylor then went on to create "Ammunition Accountability.Org" (.org makes it sound legit):

    http://www.ammunitionaccountability.org/Coalition.htm


    Now that Spencer Coggs has been suckered into this I re-contacted Sen. Vinehout again. There is never a lack of suckers but, again to her credit, Sen. Vinehout respondedto me again today:

    Dear (WIG19),

    Of course you can count on my support to oppose such ridiculousness.

    I understand Senator Coggs has constituents to represent. And I respect him for that. But this is not good policy.

    I will continue in my vigilance to protect our 2nd Amendment writes and appreciate my partnership with you.

    Please continue to keep me informed as you hear of such nonsense!


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •