pro-gun AND pro-microstamping?

[TX1911fan]

On the cost, I don't have an estimate but I would expect it to be high. First, the FP will have to be harder, probably titanium, so it won't wear. Second, FP manufacturers can no long just build a bunch and ship them out. They make them, and then have the sit and wait for someone to order one with the correct serial number on them. Think of what it costs to get any generic commodity customized compared to the cost of the commodity without the customization. It can easily double the cost. Also is the hassle. If I only have one gun for self defense and my FP breaks, I can't just run down to the parts store and get another, I have to order a custom one, wait for it to be microstamped, and then sent to me. Also the cost in potential liability if the microstamp wears off or becomes dificult to read, which will render my perfectly operable gun illegal and me a criminal just for possessing it.

Don't know about you, but too expensive for me.

I just had another thought. Someone said that even if a gun used in a crime was stolen, knowing the actual owner of the gun would still be useful as it may lead to facts about the original theft. That assumes the microstamped FP has not been switched. What's to stop a criminal from swapping FPs with a cohort, so not only is the gun stolen, but the FP and the serial number of the actual gun doing the firing no longer match. Another possibility for a defense attorney to easily defeat this technology. While fingerprints may not always be discernable, once they are it is pretty easy to prove that the fingerprint found actually matches a person. Not so with this technology. The FP could have been swapped before or after the crime, thereby destroying any usefulness of the evidence.

 

[SDC]

We may be quibbling over the exact meaning of effective. Would it be useful at all if the micro-stamp numbers were correlated to serial numbers?

It's the same difference; either way, micro-stamping requires registration of a particular firearm to a particular owner to even have a HOPE of doing any of the things that are claimed for it. The anti-gunners know that selling "registration" as a "crime-fighting" tool is a whole lot more difficult than selling "micro-stamping" as a "crime fighting" tool, so they offer micro-stamping and hope that no-one looks close enough to realize that micro-stamping REQUIRES registration.

 

[Mannix]

Yemen, are you just playing devil's advocate here or are you really so naive that you think ANY criminal would be so stupid as to leave the markings intact on a gun that is linked to them? My gun can already be pretty well excluded by ballistic fingerprinting, as imperfect as it is.

It's going to cost me money as a gun owner and a tax payer and will do absolutely nothing to combat crime, that's why I am against micro stamping. Not because the gub'mint is going to come knocking and take away my gun, or a criminal is going to pick up my brass and plant it at a crime scene, but because this is simply going to be a waste of MY money.

Now, you may ask why I think it will do nothing, the answer is quite simple, every registration system we've seen enacted, from Canada's, to DC's, NJ's, NYC's, even MA with it's ballistics database, NONE have delivered on their promise of lowering crime, and I don't see what's so different about microstamping.

 

[ETCss Phil McCrackin]

Do you mean that only 50% of the time do they find a bullet that matches a gun? Or do you mean that 50% of the time when the bullet matches a gun, it's correct?

In the first five years of implementation, Maryland’s ballistics database lead to any criminal arrest or convictions, despite collecting over 80,000 specimens at a cost of $2,567,633.33. Also, supposing the round isn't damaged too much to be testable, data indicates that matching rounds to barrels fails on the average of 50% of the time.

We may be quibbling over the exact meaning of effective. Would it be useful at all if the micro-stamp numbers were correlated to serial numbers?

How could it be truly effective without correlation? From an investigative standpoint, microstamping is useless without it. It's only use would be to firm up a case where they were already on to a suspect.

Most of all though, you have to ask yourself this question, "Is it worth it?" We type all day long on the intent of the 2nd and defense against criminals and tyrants. We sing the praises of the shooting sports we all love. Don't kid yourself, the people submitting and supporting these bills have said proudly and publicly, "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in". They want all guns gone! Further, registration WILL result in confiscation, just ask England, Australia, and 1930's Germany. Are you willing to give up your gun rights for the idea that some criminals may be easier caught? What about if 50% of shootings subsequently resulted in a conviction? MY rights will require a 100% conviction rate in exchange. Unrealistic, yup. But I for one don't take my rights lightly.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Yemen, are you just playing devil's advocate here or are you really so naive that you think ANY criminal would be so stupid as to leave the markings intact on a gun that is linked to them?

I expect the cast majority of criminals will not bother. My guess would be that over 90% would be too lazy, etc. to bother.

Does anyone haver hard numbers on what percent of handguns used in crimes has the serial numbers removed?

Mike

 

[RPCVYemen]

Actually, I do have some stats - my guess of 90% was probably way low. I was giving criminals way too much credit.

What percentage of folks charged with at least one "substantive offense" in addition to a gun possession offense were also charged with possessing a firearm with altered serial numbers (from 1992 - 1998)?

Any guesses?

69.5% of these folks were charged with a commission of a violent crime or drug trafficking offense?

About 21% were bank robbers.

Many of these are career criminals.

What percent of these violent criminals even bother to try to alter the serial number on the weapon they used in violent crime?

Not exactly all of them.

99%, Not exactly.
95%, Not exacly.
90%, Not exactly.
50%, Not exactly.
30%, Not exactly.
20%, Not exactly.
10%, Not exactly.
5%, closer.

3.2% Check it for yourself:

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ffo98.pdf

Let's suppose that criminals are twice as likely to try to alter micro-stamping as they are to try to alter serial numbers. That gets us to 6%.

What percentage of folks who are perfectly happy to commit a violent crime with a weapon with intact serial number do you think are going to bother to dink with the micro-stamping?

Mike

 

[TX1911fan]

They don't alter the serial number because it's not their gun. It's stolen. That's the whole point. If serial numbers did anything then we'd be solving a whole lot more crime, wouldn't we? They don't care about the serial number because they don't own the gun, they stole it. It can't be traced to them. So if serial numbers are not working, how is stamping the case going to do it?

 

[mp510]

It introduces additional points of failure into a firearm, and thus there is plenty to fear. If you don't like reliable weapons, then it will be minimal intrusion.

I am not going to claim to be familiar with how this can induce failure. If there was a significant threat that said ID techniques could inhibit a weapons reliability, you're correct- it is a more serious threat than I see it as.

The intent of my comment should in no means be interpreted as a support for micro stamping, as I don't believe in it. Contrarily, I hate seeing impositions made on businesses. My comment regarding it being a minimal intrusion was guided at the fear of registration schemes rising out of this. To be blunt, California has registration already, and there is nothing in the Second Ammendment that says registration is unconstitutional. While I don't support registration schemes, they don't inherently violate classical utilitarian thought- even J.S. Mill held that poison should be sold freely, but the buyers should be registered in the event it was used for malice.

 

[RPCVYemen]

They don't care about the serial number because they don't own the gun, they stole it. It can't be traced to them. So if serial numbers are not working, how is stamping the case going to do it?

So, are we all agreed that some very small percentage of criminals are likely to modify the micro-stamping? Something leads me to doubt that.

If not, can you make a reasonable argument about how the number of folks you expect to modify micro-stamping as a percentage (or multiple) of the percentage of folks that currently alter serial numbers?

In other words, if you think that criminals will be 5 times or 10 times as likely to modify micro-stamps as serial, can you explain why. Data is preferred over assertion. For example, if you claim that folks will be 30 times as likely to modify micro-stamps as serial numbers, can you specify any data that supports that conclusion?

Mike

 

[RobMoore]

Any data to suggest that microstamping will catch a significant number of criminals? The burden of proof should be on those supporting microstamping.
Prove that its worth #1 The cost to the consumer #2 The cost to the taxpayer #3 The infringment of privacy rights

Spent casings already fell on its face (not that the Maryland legislature cares), why will microstamping be any different?

 

[RPCVYemen]

Any data to suggest that microstamping will catch a significant number of criminals?

I think that we are trying to figure that out - partially based on the likelihood that criminals would modify the micro-stamp.

Prove that its worth #1 The cost to the consumer #2 The cost to the taxpayer #3 The infringment of privacy rights

1. Cost to the consumer: I don't have a number for that. The wikipedia article gives a figure of .25/weapon to .50/weapon. I have to reason to believe or disbelieve that set of numbers. What do you think the cost per weapon will be - and a citation will be very useful.
2. Cost to the taxpayer: I think I saw an earlier claim that some similar regeistory in Maryland cost $2 million for some period of time. Maryland a population of 5 million, so that's .40 a person.
3. Not exactly sure what you mean about privacy "rights". Are you using this as technical legal term? It seems like discarded shells are like other trash, which I am pretty sure is not considered "private" after you discard it. Can you speak more to this point. I am not arguing - I'd like to hear more about what you are thinking.

Mike

 

[RPCVYemen]

While I don't support registration schemes, they don't inherently violate classical utilitarian thought- even J.S. Mill held that poison should be sold freely, but the buyers should be registered in the event it was used for malice.

Interesting point - I didn't know that.

Mike

 

[RobMoore]

I don't have any info on #1 for you. As for #2, that would be .40 a person if everyone in MD paid the same, but they (Baltimore, Laurel/Bowie, most of Pg county) don't. I'd rather have my .40 + back and not have to deal with the hassle, and they can release the criminals its put behind bars (read...zero).
#3 I was speaking to the "yet another means of registration", not to my spent casings being fondled. Although no spent casing I'd ever fire would have a microstamp on it, thats for sure.

 

[RPCVYemen]

#3 I was speaking to the "yet another means of registration", not to my spent casings being fondled.

So if microstamping were not associated with a new form of registration (i.e, if it was merely an association between the case and the gun from which it was fired), would you have the same objection?

Mike

 

[RobMoore]

How could it not be? If they didn't have a "list" to see who owns a gun with XXXXXX microstamping, they'd have to do the same thing they do now.....hours/days/weeks of investigation. Then this program REALLY wouldn't serve a purpose, and I'd still have to object to it.

 

[Phil DeGraves]

"The inventor of microstamping says he's a member of the NRA."

In all fairness, I sincerely doubt that when he invented the technology that allowed microstamping, (if in fact it is even possible anyway), that he was specifically thinking about its application to microstamp shell casings.

 

[PumpAction]

Quote:
3. This will put an end to or at least severely limit reloading for handgunners. Based on the problem with using pre-stamped brass.

Look like a strong argument for primer based micro-stamping or some other method that ties the micro-stamp to the last time the case was fired.

RPCVYemen,

How in the world would you accomplish this? If there are two stamps on a casing, are the police able to determine which of them was imprinted at a particular crime scene?

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

RPCVYemen,

How in the world would you accomplish this? If there are two stamps on a casing, are the police able to determine which of them was imprinted at a particular crime scene?

Don't even bother with him. He's already reduced criminal justice to a statistics analysis.