A couple/few days ago, I had writen an email to Senator Campbell (district 35 in the PRK) to express my feelings on AB352. I'm fairly sure he got the impression that I'm against it.
His response:
But this:
Well - it may be the right thing for (at least partially) the wrong reasons, but I think we've had far too little of the right thing, so I'll gladly take it.
His response:
In his defense, at least it seems he understands how this will affect the criminals it's meant to capture. And that is not one whit.Thank you for your recent e-mail regarding AB 352 (Koretz) which would require specified semiautomatic pistols to be equipped with microscopic identifying markings which are transferred to each cartridge case when the firearm is fired. I understand your concerns.
AB 352 is currently in the Senate. I believe this bill will have a harmful impact on current law enforcement efforts as well as the manufacturers of ammunition used by our nation’s armed services and local law enforcement agencies.
Criminals will easily defeat the technology. As with 'ballistic imaging,' criminals can and will easily defeat the 'micro-stamping' technology by simply filing away or scratching with a steel/wire brush the surface of the firearm where the laser engraving has been placed. Criminals will do this for the same reason they deface the serial number on firearms to avoid detection by law enforcement. Criminals will be able to confuse the police and send them on 'wild goose' chases by simply throwing around at crime scenes expended cartridge casings (having a make model and serial number imprinted on them) from other firearms.
Mandating this technology will dramatically increase the price of firearms for all consumers, including municipalities and the State of California purchasing firearms for law enforcement agencies. This is because firearms for the civilian, law enforcement and military markets are all manufactured at the same time on the same machines using the same equipment and manufacturing processes. The cost would have to be spread across all products in all markets necessarily resulting in significantly higher prices for all products.
For these reasons, I expect to oppose AB 352 if it comes to a vote in the Senate.
You may follow the process of this bill or any other legislation by logging onto the Senate Web Page at www.senate.ca.gov; clicking on ‘Legislation’ on the left hand toolbar and following instructions from there.
John Campbell
Senator 35th District
But this:
has me a bit nervous. Seems one of his larger concerns with the bill is that there's no way to implement without costing the military and law enforcement as much as it costs consumers. I'm also not sure why he thinks this is going to cost ammunition manufacturers any money at all. His letter makes it clear that he understands this is something done to the guns and not the ammunition. *sigh*Mandating this technology will dramatically increase the price of firearms for all consumers, including municipalities and the State of California purchasing firearms for law enforcement agencies. This is because firearms for the civilian, law enforcement and military markets are all manufactured at the same time on the same machines using the same equipment and manufacturing processes. The cost would have to be spread across all products in all markets necessarily resulting in significantly higher prices for all products.
Well - it may be the right thing for (at least partially) the wrong reasons, but I think we've had far too little of the right thing, so I'll gladly take it.
Last edited: