California Microstamping

[Bone]

@Airman_Doors_USAF

Second, revolvers are tacitly exempt from this because the shells do not eject. The savvy criminal will recognize this and adjust accordingly. Or maybe they’ll simply file down the markings on the firing pin, which would make the gun illegal (due to the modification of markings on a gun) but will not leave any markings. How does this affect the legal owner? Firing pins break. When they are replaced, do they have to have the same markings? If so, who will do this? If not, well, it’s easy to replace a firing pin. Is it criminal to fix your property? The law is silent.

Last, how easy would it be to go to a public range and pick up some rounds with the markings on them and scatter them roughshod at a crime scene, thus implicating an innocent man/woman in a crime? Now everybody has to pick up their brass with extraordinary care to protect themselves. A single one could conceivably get you in trouble. If the markings are on the brass, can you reload them? How can you even throw them away without concern that someone will collect a few and implicate you vis a vis identity theft?

This is pretty much why this law is stupid. The purported purpose is to capture more criminals or create more evidence to solve more crimes. However, being so ridiculously trivial to defeat (replace firing pin which is permissible under this law, scatter someone else’s brass at crime scene), I fail to see how this will work.

Not only that, this technology is not employed by any major manufacturer of firearms. In CA, new handguns have to be submitted for testing to be determined “not unsafe”. Only handguns with this designation can be added to the Roster. Only handguns that are on the Roster may be sold through an FFL. By requiring all semi-automatic handguns to have this tech, gun control advocates have succeeded in banning any new semi-automatic handguns in CA. I suspect this was the goal anyways.

I’m suspicious how this declaration by the Attorney General was made. The patent on this technology was held by one group, and was renewed by gun rights advocates along the way as well to prevent the law from taking effect. I suspect there is some shenanigans about the recent declaration, but time, and litigation, will tell.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@RTFirefly

2. If there’s anything more analogous to the Maginot Line than the existing Federal background check law, I can’t think of it.

So you would be OK with getting rid of it, right?

3. Gun violence is more of a public health problem than anything else. Many gun deaths are accidents, and a hefty percentage of gun murders and other violence are committed by people who had the legal right to own a gun, and had only minor stuff if anything in their criminal and mental health history.

2% of gun deaths are accidents (and many of those are probably suicides that are reported as accidents).

So what percentage of gun murders do you think are committed by people who are legally allowed to possess a firearm? I mean its a hefty percentage but its not clear what you think is a hefty percentage.

At any rate, the California approach of tougher gun laws seems to be working. Over the past couple of decades, gun deaths have been dropping faster in California than in the rest of the country. Maybe we should go with the states-as-laboratories-of-democracy approach, and see if it keeps on working there.

Or maybe california had a lot further to drop. What is the percentage of gun murders in California versus other states?

@jz78817

I know you are trying to insinuate that the office of the director is “empty,” but it isn’t.

There is a difference between having an acting director for 7 years and having a confirmed director. Acting anything has trouble doing more than maintain a holding pattern.

@elucidator

But some accommodation will have to be found. On the one side, the pressure multiplies every time something dreadful happens. If that is met with nothing but determined resistance, sooner or later push comes to shove. That would not be a good day.

Pressure may multiply or it may subside.

If you don’t want people making stupid laws, you’re going to have to participate in making those laws, you will have offer your expertise…not because you like it, but to prevent something worse from happening.

Well, when a law has a chance of passing, they might, but your side would have to stop proposing stupid laws to make that happen.

@jz78817

I mean, if you want to fight to ban things so you can pat yourself on the back because you think you’ve “done something,”

And this is why they keep losing these political battles. The anti-gun folks are ignorant and stupid and it shows.

Except when we do, we get excoriated in the press as “hating children” or some other such offensive tripe.

At least they don’t imply that we are indifferent to dead babies.

@elucidator

Why do they make them to look like that?

Why do they put an airdam and spoiler on a CRX?

I think its about promoting the fear and then profiting on curing it.

Its not fear that drive the pruchase of tacticool guns, its desire. AR15s are largely the toys of hobbyists, gun nuts and gun nerds.

But I’m reasonable. If you won’t negotiate with the reasonable, and you are outnumbered, sooner or later you negotiate with the unreasonable.

You would have to outnumber us by 2/3rd of each chamber opf congress and in 3/4 of the states.

I guess you’re right, but we put 'em there, so the shame is us. And their craven subservience to the NRA and its money is a blight on them. But here’s the thing about whores: their allegiances are highly malleable. When the gun-goblins can outvote and outspend the NRA, the whores will join the choir.

Be a good time to think about what you really gotta have, and what you can chuck overboard.

Let me know when you think that has any chance of happening.

@elucidator

The set of laws recently defeated were mild and reasonable compared to what you might expect if the “pro gun” people continue to march with the NRA’s never give an inch agenda. This stubborn resistance is ultimately empowering the very people you most despise.

Those mild proposals were preceded by a push for a retarded AWB. That informs the entire debate.

I am not your enemy, but don’t worry, they will be more apparent. They’ll make me look like a day at the beach. After the next Newtown, or maybe the one after that. You will end up outvoted by the stupid because you wouldn’t compromise with the reasonable.

This is what I fear. One day hysteria will take over and they will point at our lack of cooperation and they will shove some unconstitutional, ineffective peice of shit legislation down our throats and dare the SCOTUS to overturn it. And SCOTUS might look different (if only by one justice) than it does today.

@Measure_for_Measure

The idea is that first you experiment, see how things go, then consider federal action. As opposed to throwing up your hands and deciding that an elevated US murder rate is a-ok-with-U.

I was under the impression rates that murder rates are at the lowest levels we have seen in a century.

@Bone

I suspect there is some shenanigans about the recent declaration, but time, and litigation, will tell.

California is mecca of gun control shenanigans.

[jz78817]

@Damuri_Ajashi

There is a difference between having an acting director for 7 years and having a confirmed director. Acting anything has trouble doing more than maintain a holding pattern.

this is FUD. having an “acting director” doesn’t mean field agents are flailing about aimlessly with no direction whatsoever.
[/QUOTE]

California is mecca of gun control shenanigans.

Californians seem to act like California is the only thing of importance on this entire fucking planet. Believe me, I’ve been there more than I care to, they’re nothing but a bunch of attention-starved, self-centered pathetic wastes of flesh. California does shit like this because they need to make sure they feel important.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

The state of California acts like it’s not only the mecca of forward thinking and cultural importance towards the rest of the US (which in my mind is indifferent to CA), but it also acts like it isn’t the most deeply indebted state in the Union. Hey, brownouts and rolling blackouts are just a way of life there!

That said, there’s a lot of nice things about California, but I do get tired of it being held up as some primary example of how America is…New York is close behind (upstate gets a pass).

[RTFirefly]

@Damuri_Ajashi

So you would be OK with getting rid of it, right?

Maybe you should go the route of assuming the analogy continues to apply at that step.

2% of gun deaths are accidents (and many of those are probably suicides that are reported as accidents).

Cite? Because there sure have been a pile of fatal accidents so far this year, even just counting the ones involving preschoolers.

On Saturday, a 2 year old boy in NC stuck a gun in his mouth and it went off. Guess that’s one of those attempted suicides reported as accidents. (It looks like he’ll survive, thank goodness.) Last Monday, a 4 year old in Florida shot an 11 year old to death. The day before that, a Tennessee man blew a hole in his 1 year old daughter’s chest while cleaning his gun. The day before that, a 6 year old Texas boy shot himself in the abdomen - another of those attempted suicides reported as accidents. (Again, expected to survive, fortunately.) Same day, an 8 year old in Texas shot his 5 year old brother in the head. Fatally. Three days before that (May 8), a 2 year old in Texas did himself in with a gun. Another…well, you know. The day before that, a Texas 5 year old shot his 7 year old brother in the back. Not fatally, thank goodness. Same day in Tampa, a 3 year old shot himself to death. Four days earlier (May 3), either a 4 year old boy shot himself in the head, or the 4 year old girl he was playing with did the deed (cops couldn’t be sure which). Not fatally. On May 1, a 3 year old shot and killed himself in Arizona. The day before, on April 30, we have the killing in Kentucky that introduces us saner types to the notion that they make real, honest-to-God rifles for little kids, in nice kid-friendly colors. The shooter? Age 5. Victim? Age 2. The day before that, an 8 year old Alaska boy shot his 5 year old sister to death.

That’s just the past 3 weeks, and it’s just cases where a kid 5 years old or younger was involved as shooter or victim, and it’s just cases where the wound was either fatal, or hit either the head or the body (so it didn’t miss by much). So I should add in all the accidental shootings involving only people 6 and older, then multiply by 50, you say, to get the full carnage for the period? Holy cow.

So what percentage of gun murders do you think are committed by people who are legally allowed to possess a firearm? I mean its a hefty percentage but its not clear what you think is a hefty percentage.

First of all, I didn’t say anything about murders. I don’t give a shit about murders v. other gun fatalities. If someone accidentally shoots their buddy while cleaning their gun, dead is still dead, and it’s still about guns.

Just based on news reports, it seems to be the exception when the shooter in a gun fatality is NOT legally allowed to possess a firearm. So I’d guess the vast majority. But that’s because you’re asking me to guess.

Or maybe california had a lot further to drop. What is the percentage of gun murders in California versus other states?

Click on the link. It’s right there in plain sight.

[Airman_Doors_USAF]

@FoieGrasIsEvil

The state of California acts like it’s not only the mecca of forward thinking and cultural importance towards the rest of the US (which in my mind is indifferent to CA), but it also acts like it isn’t the most deeply indebted state in the Union. Hey, brownouts and rolling blackouts are just a way of life there!

That said, there’s a lot of nice things about California, but I do get tired of it being held up as some primary example of how America is…New York is close behind (upstate gets a pass).

Let’s be fair, guys. In a lot of ways California has been the mecca of forward thinking in the US (and, arguably, cultural importance). For instance, California has long led the way on environmental issues, particularly air quality, and social issues, whatever you may think of them.

However, the state and its citizens refuse to acknowledge their severe missteps, such as their tremendous water gluttony, the current overzealousness nature of their environmentalism which results in massive uncontrolled wildfires (among other things), and their absolutely bizarre proposition system which allows Joe Blow Citizen to get something passed that screws the state forever (Prop 13).

The state has been at the forefront regarding gun control, and while I don’t think they ever got it right it’s their choice. In this case I hope that it remains one of their particular affectations and it doesn’t get exported anywhere near me.

[Una_Persson]

@RTFirefly

Cite? Because there sure have been a pile of fatal accidents so far this year, even just counting the ones involving preschoolers.

From: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/deaths_2010_release.pdf

Comparing accidental shootings to all firearms deaths

---

Table 10 - accidental discharge of firearm, all ages, 2010: 606 deaths.

Table 10 - accidental discharge of firearm, ages 0-14, 2010: 62 deaths

Table 10 - accidental discharge of firearm, ages 0-24, 2010: 207 deaths

Table 18 - total number of deaths, all ages - firearms - 31,672 deaths

Rate of firearms accidents deaths, all ages, accidents/firearms deaths - 0.019, or 1.9%

---

Thus, the 2% claim is supported.

But let’s make sure this can’t be spun other ways.

Comparing accidental shootings to all deaths

---

Table 10 - deaths from all causes, ages 0-14, 2010: 34,181

Table 10 - deaths from all causes, ages 0-24, 2010: 63,732

Rate of firearms accidents deaths, 0-14, firearms accidents/all deaths - 0.0018, or 0.18%

Rate of firearms accidents deaths, 0-24, firearms accidents/all deaths - 0.0032, or 0.32%

---

Comparing accidental shootings to all accidental deaths

---

Table 10 - deaths from all accidents, ages 0-14, 2010: 4,147

Table 10 - deaths from all accidents, ages 0-24, 2010: 16,488

Rate of firearms accidents deaths, 0-14, firearms accidents/all accidental deaths - 0.015, or 1.5%

Rate of firearms accidents deaths, 0-24, firearms accidents/all accidental deaths - 0.013, or 1.3%%

---

Caveats: 2010 data may not be representative of 2011-2013 data. Math errors or misreading the table may have occurred due to me being tired grading finals all last night.

Note I’m not passing judgment one way or the other on the issue, just presenting facts.

[Measure_for_Measure]

@Damuri_Ajashi

I was under the impression rates that murder rates are at the lowest levels we have seen in a century.

I’m under a similar impression. But it’s also my impression that the US typically has higher murder rates than other OECD countries, though I haven’t checked the last couple of years.

Here’s a cite backing your impression: The US Murder Rate Is on Track to Be Lowest in a Century – Mother Jones

As an aside, Kevin Drum has done some interesting work laying out the case that lead abatement has done wonders for crime control. We had 2 waves of lead exposure in the environment, due to paint in the early 20th century and gasoline in the middle-late era. Both were followed by crime waves, with a delay. And similar patterns are seen in other countries.

I see from Una’s post that with ~62 childhood gun accidents per year, that the media will have no difficulty reporting on human gun-related tragedy. (I had wondered a little about what the underlying stats were.) I’ll quibble a little with her presentation: I’d want to net out infant mortality, as that would tend to expand the denominator disproportionately. I acknowledge that you work with the data you have: getting the data you want requires effort.

[Measure_for_Measure]

@Airman_Doors_USAF

Let’s be fair, guys. In a lot of ways California has been the mecca of forward thinking in the US (and, arguably, cultural importance). For instance, California has long led the way on environmental issues, particularly air quality, and social issues, whatever you may think of them.

However, the state and its citizens refuse to acknowledge their severe missteps, such as their tremendous water gluttony, the current overzealousness nature of their environmentalism which results in massive uncontrolled wildfires (among other things), and their absolutely bizarre proposition system which allows Joe Blow Citizen to get something passed that screws the state forever (Prop 13).

During the 1960s and early 1970s, the California legislature was considered a model of a well functioning democracy. Seriously: an academic wrote a book with that theme. Now it’s an initiative-encrusted mess. Governor Jerry Brown is knocking heads and has received accolades from Business Week, but I see no indication that the dysfunctional initiative process will be reformed. That would reduce the people’s power, or so the typical voter (and typical Doper!) believes.

[drachillix]

@jz78817

Californians seem to act like California is the only thing of importance on this entire fucking planet. Believe me, I’ve been there more than I care to, they’re nothing but a bunch of attention-starved, self-centered pathetic wastes of flesh. California does shit like this because they need to make sure they feel important.

You are just jealous because we have freakin awesome strawberries…

[Una_Persson]

@Measure_for_Measure

I see from Una’s post that with ~62 childhood gun accidents per year, that the media will have no difficulty reporting on human gun-related tragedy. (I had wondered a little about what the underlying stats were.) I’ll quibble a little with her presentation: I’d want to net out infant mortality, as that would tend to expand the denominator disproportionately. I acknowledge that you work with the data you have: getting the data you want requires effort.

The initial claim was merely accidents as a percentage of gun-related deaths, with no age range specified. I’ve shown that as being 1.9%, and infant mortality doesn’t enter into it.

[Enderw24]

@DocCathode

*when somebody who can legally buy a gun does so for and turns around and sells it to somebody who cannot legally buy a gun. It’s a lot like getting a friend who is 21 to buy beer for you

Which is against the law. Is anyone arguing we shouldn’t have laws concerning alcohol because there are crafty individuals able to skirt around the rules?

[RTFirefly]

@Una_Persson

The initial claim was merely accidents as a percentage of gun-related deaths, with no age range specified. I’ve shown that as being 1.9%, and infant mortality doesn’t enter into it.

You have indeed. Thanks for the cite.

Sure seems like the rate is up a bit this year, though.

[Measure_for_Measure]

@Una_Persson

The initial claim was merely accidents as a percentage of gun-related deaths, with no age range specified. I’ve shown that as being 1.9%, and infant mortality doesn’t enter into it.

Point conceded. I was indeed focusing on childhood accidents, which have received heightened reporting this year.

I opine that the shift in reporting has nothing to do with a change in the underlying statistics, though we won’t know for sure until the 2013 data comes out.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@jz78817

this is FUD. having an “acting director” doesn’t mean field agents are flailing about aimlessly with no direction whatsoever.

What is FUD?

No it doesn’t mean they are flailing around aimlessly but they are on autopilot and they don’t have any high level direction. I really don’t think you can excuse the attempts to keep the ATF leaderless while crying about the lack of enforcement.

@RTFirefly

Maybe you should go the route of assuming the analogy continues to apply at that step.

But wasn’t the Manchin Toomey bill just extending the maginot line to cover a little bit of the Luxemburg border but still leaving Belgium open, right?

Cite? Because there sure have been a pile of fatal accidents so far this year, even just counting the ones involving preschoolers.

What Una said.

On Saturday, a 2 year old boy in NC stuck a gun in his mouth… …an 8 year old Alaska boy shot his 5 year old sister to death.

I would venture to guess that every one of these incidents get more than their share of news coverage.

So I should add in all the accidental shootings involving only people 6 and older, then multiply by 50, you say, to get the full carnage for the period? Holy cow.

There are over 30,000 gun deaths every year. Thats over 3 gun deaths every hour, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year.

First of all, I didn’t say anything about murders. I don’t give a shit about murders v. other gun fatalities. If someone accidentally shoots their buddy while cleaning their gun, dead is still dead, and it’s still about guns.

Unless you are advocating for the repeal of the second amendment and confiscating all the guns in society, you are not going to stop people from committing suicide with a gun, there will always be legal access to guns. I was pretty sure that your side was in the habit of giving assurances that that sort of thing was not even in the back of your minds (despite the comments that Feinstein made after the last AWB). So that’s why I take suicides off the table, because the message from your side (and I thought you personally) leads me to believe that you are primarily interested in preventing gun murders and accidental shootings.

Are you now telling me that you are now arguing for the total elimination of guns from the hands of law abiding citizens?

If we are concerned about gun homocides and accidental shootings, I was pointing out how rare accidental shootings are. I was pointing out that the vast majority of gun homocides are committed by people who are not supposed to own a gun. So, I would have thought taht the focus should be on keeping guns out of the hands of criminals rather than keeping guns out of the hands of people who would obey gun bans.

Just based on news reports, it seems to be the exception when the shooter in a gun fatality is NOT legally allowed to possess a firearm. So I’d guess the vast majority. But that’s because you’re asking me to guess.

It goes the other way. Felons commit the vast majority of gun murders most of the rest are committed by people who have a history of domestic violence or are minors.

Some on your side pretend that we can’t differentiate between those who are likely to commit gun violence and those who are not. This is most decidedly not the case. Its not a matter of people being law abiding until theya re not, as things stand, the vast majority of people who commit gun violence are already criminals.

This is why we even bother with background checks. We don’t do it just to fuck with people who have criminal records. We do it because these people are so much likelier to commit gun violence.

[smiling_bandit]

@Enderw24

Which is against the law. Is anyone arguing we shouldn’t have laws concerning alcohol because there are crafty individuals able to skirt around the rules?

You probably shouldn’t. Given this boards’ generally lax views on the use of intoxicants and even hard drugs, I wouldn’t advance that analogy.

[jz78817]

@Damuri_Ajashi

What is FUD?

Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt. Fear, uncertainty, and doubt - Wikipedia

No it doesn’t mean they are flailing around aimlessly but they are on autopilot

Cite?

and they don’t have any high level direction.

Cite?

I really don’t think you can excuse the attempts to keep the ATF leaderless

Leaderless? Was Apple leaderless when Jobs was interim CEO?

while crying about the lack of enforcement.

so they’re not flailing about aimlessly but they’re on autopilot with no direction.

Because you and RTFirefly claim it is so.

Got it.

:rolleyes:

look, this is fucking stupid. Yes, BATFE has an interim director. But the director of an agency this size does not sit there doling out tasks to field agents. There are multiple levels of management between the director and the “boots on the ground,” pages and pages of established policy and US law they are tasked with enforcing. People like RTFirefly like to bring it up so they can insinuate there’s some sinister plan to obstruct enforcement of existing gun laws because “OMG a permanent director hasn’t been appointed!” This isn’t The Fifth Element. BATFE agents aren’t Mangalores, they aren’t ambling about with their thumbs up their asses because a new leader hasn’t been crowned. They didn’t just up and immediately forget what the law is.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@jz78817

Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt. Fear, uncertainty, and doubt - Wikipedia

Cite?

Cite?

What? We all agree that the ATF does not have a director, it has had a series of acting directors, in some cases those directors have had other full time jobs and you want a cite that this doesn’t affect the efficacy of the leadership?

[quote]
Leaderless? Was Apple leaderless when Jobs was interim CEO?[/quotye]

Thats different. Did Jobs have another full time job in another state? Did Jobs have all the responsibility and authority that an actual CEO would have?

The ATF director position didn’t used to require senate confirmation since they imposed that requirement, we have not confirmed a single director under either Republican or Democratic adminsitraion. Bush Jr couldn’t get his nominees confirmed any more than Obama can.

So maybe leaderless was an overstatement but having acting heads of organization (part time acting heads of organizations in some cases) is not the same thing as having a full time confirmed director.

so they’re not flailing about aimlessly but they’re on autopilot with no direction.

Because you and RTFirefly claim it is so.

Got it.

:rolleyes:

Are you seriously arguing that failing to have a confirmed director rather than a series of acting directors doesn’t affect enforcement?

And BTW, RTFirefly and i don’t agree on many things about gun control but you can’t whimper about failure to enforce, failure to change decades of practice of not enforcing while you impede the ability of the ATF to enforce.

look, this is fucking stupid. Yes, BATFE has an interim director. But the director of an agency this size does not sit there doling out tasks to field agents. There are multiple levels of management between the director and the “boots on the ground,” pages and pages of established policy and US law they are tasked with enforcing. People like RTFirefly like to bring it up so they can insinuate there’s some sinister plan to obstruct enforcement of existing gun laws because “OMG a permanent director hasn’t been appointed!” This isn’t The Fifth Element. BATFE agents aren’t Mangalores, they aren’t ambling about with their thumbs up their asses because a new leader hasn’t been crowned. They didn’t just up and immediately forget what the law is.

So you think it makes no difference at all? Why even have a fucking director then. Just get rid of the position and save ourselves some tax dollars.:rolleyes:

Impeding every nominated director under BOTH Republicana dn Democratic adminsitrations looks like more than a disagreement with the politics of the nominee and more like a disagreement with the mission of the organization.

[Bone]

Ruger and Smith and Wesson (not their revolvers or two models recently on the list) have said they are pulling out of the CA market due to this law. All Glock gen 4 pistols are not able to be purchased in CA as well.

A list of pistols (pdf) that have been historically removed from the roster and thus illegal to sell in CA.

As much as it would suck, I would love to see all gun manufacturers and ammo vendors refuse to sell to CA in protest, including all law enforcement. Ron Barrett had it right. If even law enforcement got fucked over this, the law would change. Either that or the current lawsuit in Pena v. Lindley will kill the roster and be done with this stupidity.

[yoyodyne]

The list of pistols removed from the roster includes revolvers, why is that?