Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: New Microstamping Regulation in CA?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , California, USA
    Posts
    82

    Post imported post

    Picked this up on the CA AGs website(full PDF attached):

    "Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 12125 and 12126, only handguns that are on a DOJ roster of handguns identified as not unsafe can be sold by licensed firearms dealers in this state. As of January 1, 2010, a new law mandates that for a new model of semi-automatic pistol to be placed on the DOJ roster of “not unsafe” handguns (models currently on the roster are excluded), the pistol must 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 in two or more places on the interior surface or internal workings parts of the pistol, that are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case expended from the pistol when the firearm is fired."

    How the hell did this slip by? I don't recall hearing anything about this in the news or any magazines or websites. This is absolutely ridiculous.

  2. #2
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,713

    Post imported post

    Well the NRA talked about it for quite a while. I suppose in a few years they will mainly only sell revolvers in California.

    Probably won't be long until CA tries to extend it to guns other than semi-automatic pistols.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,415

    Post imported post

    Everything to do with tracing firearms. Nothing to do with "safety".

    Then again, everybody here knows that.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Personal responsibility is a facade created by religious people in particular...
    On "Personal Responsibility just after the previous, in the same exact thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Religion uses is as a tool, they did not create it.
    The wheels on the bus go round and round...round and round.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    You think that I am ill-equipped...hit me with your best shot Einstein, I am calling you out.


    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Free will is only slightly a conscious exercise...

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    As always, one needs to read the text of the law.

    http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12126.html

    Allow me to quote section of 12126:

    As used in this chapter, "unsafe handgun" means any pistol,
    revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the
    person, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 12001, for which any
    of the following is true:
    ...
    (7) Commencing January 1, 2010, for all semiautomatic pistols that
    are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it
    is not designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters
    that identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol,
    etched or otherwise imprinted in two or more places on the interior
    surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and that are
    transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is
    fired, provided that the Department of Justice certifies that the
    technology used to create the imprint is available to more than one
    manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions.
    The Attorney
    General may also approve a method of equal or greater reliability and
    effectiveness in identifying the specific serial number of a firearm
    from spent cartridge casings discharged by that firearm than that
    which is set forth in this paragraph, to be thereafter required as
    otherwise set forth by this paragraph where the Attorney General
    certifies that this new method is also unencumbered by any patent
    restrictions. Approval by the Attorney General shall include notice
    of that fact via regulations adopted by the Attorney General for
    purposes of implementing that method for purposes of this paragraph.
    The microscopic array of characters required by this section shall
    not be considered the name of the maker, model, manufacturer's
    number, or other mark of identification, including any distinguishing
    number or mark assigned by the Department of Justice, within the
    meaning of Sections 12090 and 12094.
    Notice the part in bold? Such certification is not forthcoming, and is unlikely to be brought about any time soon, as the only patent holder for a viable microstamping process has little incentive to give up their patent rights.


    Aside: This is yet another amusing result of the fictitious and irrational concept of "intellectual property" (a massive fraud few Americans are willing to question).

    Consider: The patent holder has no motivation to give up the patent, because to do so would negate the competitive advantage provided thereby. Because the is only one viable technology and it is encumbered by patent, this law remains unenforceable. Because the law is unenforceable, there is no microstamping in CA. Because there is no microstamping in CA, there is no demand for microstamping technology, so no market for the same. With no demand and no market, there is no incentive for other processes to be developed and patented.

    Finally, inventors have become so dependent upon and hence crippled by the supposed crutch of patents, that there is little incentive to develop new products for which there is already a competitor with firm patents of their own.

    So, although you might expect some entrepreneur would see that the market can be instantly and artificially flooded with demand simply by patenting an alternative microstamping process that allows the law to come into effect, this is actually unlikely as it would mean going into competition on even terms, without the advantage of being the only (or at least first) patent holder.

    Therefore, as is the case with so much other progress "stimulated" by the existence of patenting, the very system designed to stimulate progress actually halts it totally for arbitrary, fixed periods -- which increase whenever the right interest controls enough of our bought-and-paid-for legislature to increase patent terms.

    However, even a broken clock is right twice a day. We should feel lucky that this broken clock was "right" at such a fortuitous time!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , California, USA
    Posts
    82

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    As always, one needs to read the text of the law.

    http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12126.html

    Allow me to quote section of 12126:

    As used in this chapter, "unsafe handgun" means any pistol,
    revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the
    person, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 12001, for which any
    of the following is true:
    ...
    (7) Commencing January 1, 2010, for all semiautomatic pistols that
    are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it
    is not designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters
    that identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol,
    etched or otherwise imprinted in two or more places on the interior
    surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and that are
    transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is
    fired, provided that the Department of Justice certifies that the
    technology used to create the imprint is available to more than one
    manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions.
    The Attorney
    General may also approve a method of equal or greater reliability and
    effectiveness in identifying the specific serial number of a firearm
    from spent cartridge casings discharged by that firearm than that
    which is set forth in this paragraph, to be thereafter required as
    otherwise set forth by this paragraph where the Attorney General
    certifies that this new method is also unencumbered by any patent
    restrictions. Approval by the Attorney General shall include notice
    of that fact via regulations adopted by the Attorney General for
    purposes of implementing that method for purposes of this paragraph.
    The microscopic array of characters required by this section shall
    not be considered the name of the maker, model, manufacturer's
    number, or other mark of identification, including any distinguishing
    number or mark assigned by the Department of Justice, within the
    meaning of Sections 12090 and 12094.
    Notice the part in bold? Such certification is not forthcoming, and is unlikely to be brought about any time soon, as the only patent holder for a viable microstamping process has little incentive to give up their patent rights.


    Aside: This is yet another amusing result of the fictitious and irrational concept of "intellectual property" (a massive fraud few Americans are willing to question).

    Consider: The patent holder has no motivation to give up the patent, because to do so would negate the competitive advantage provided thereby. Because the is only one viable technology and it is encumbered by patent, this law remains unenforceable. Because the law is unenforceable, there is no microstamping in CA. Because there is no microstamping in CA, there is no demand for microstamping technology, so no market for the same. With no demand and no market, there is no incentive for other processes to be developed and patented.

    Finally, inventors have become so dependent upon and hence crippled by the supposed crutch of patents, that there is little incentive to develop new products for which there is already a competitor with firm patents of their own.

    So, although you might expect some entrepreneur would see that the market can be instantly and artificially flooded with demand simply by patenting an alternative microstamping process that allows the law to come into effect, this is actually unlikely as it would mean going into competition on even terms, without the advantage of being the only (or at least first) patent holder.

    Therefore, as is the case with so much other progress "stimulated" by the existence of patenting, the very system designed to stimulate progress actually halts it totally for arbitrary, fixed periods -- which increase whenever the right interest controls enough of our bought-and-paid-for legislature to increase patent terms.

    However, even a broken clock is right twice a day. We should feel lucky that this broken clock was "right" at such a fortuitous time!
    Hmm. You could be right. However, I have a hard time believing that they would allow themselves to be trapped by such a loophole of their own creation. Remember that we are talking about the People's Socialist Republic of Kalifornia here. They operate on the false premises that; guns are evil and that anyone who would possess a gun is going to, sooner or later, become a criminal; and that the state can dowhatever it needs to to protect innocent civilians.

Posting Permissions

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