It doesn’t solve that crime. So what? You were (are?) an LEO. Should Wisconsin shitcan all its cops because some crimes are unsolved? 
Show me a significant amount of gun related crimes that microstamping has solved.
This does not lower gun violence and it requires national registration to be worthwhile. That may not bother you, but it will awaken the sleeping giant that is the 70 million gun owners who are not currently NRA members.
Why 10? Why not 11, 7, 15, or 6? 10 is an arbitrary number that is no better or worse than 30, 40, or 100. A determined dealer of carnage will find a way. See the Va Tech shootings for a recent and perfect example. The fear that gun owners have is that once these are banned (again) when it is found that nothing changed (again) that our pump guns, and lever guns are next. They fire almost as fast by the way…
Exactly, nothing of significance changed during the first ban, nor after is was allowed to expire. It is complete bullshit. Please let others know to drop this one. It is worthless.
Now you are talking. Ban and confiscate is the only way to make a difference. Warning, you will finally wake up the fudds, the collectors and everyone else who doesn’t think they have a dog in the fight today. A lot of people will be affected by this sort of ban and as such, a lot of politicians WILL lose their jobs (again) should they support it. That a Senator like mine (Tom Harkin, IA) wont be able to state what a sportsman he is as he votes to ban over 60% of guns in private possession.
This is pretty easily assuaged since this is how CA currently operates. You can loan weapons for a period I believe up to 30 days. People can borrow or try your firearm at the range no problem. Only sales or actual transfers trigger the FFL requirement.
I think we all want to ensure prohibited persons do not purchase firearms. This doesn’t do anything to dissuade illegal sales, however law abiding folks wont accidentally sell to prohibited persons under this setup. I acknowledge this is an added burden to gun owners, but for me this is acceptable given the benefit and peace of mind it gives to sellers knowing the person they are selling to is not prohibited.
You know 1, 2, and 3 are all the same thing right? And arguably #4 is also the same. Just saying.
And when Bill in Phoenix (from my previous post) does all this but has his weapon stolen during a burglary, how did any of it prevent a gang banger in Chicago from getting it?
And when mom in Bumfunk, Connecticut does all this, but her insane son steals her guns, how did any of this stop him from gunning down whomever he wanted?
A columnist in the Seattle Times, by no means a conservative newspaper, had some interesting things to say a few weeks ago about more gun laws. His contention was that new laws were more or less useless because we don’t begin to enforce the ones we have. And he presents some really infuriating local examples. Here is his column.
http://seattletimes.com/html/dannywestneat/2018762877_danny25.html
If that doesn’t make you want to bitch-slap the judicial system, I don’t know what would.
I support people control and police control. When America is no longer the place that came within a couple of primaries and two bad unemployment reports of electing Rick Santorum president, then I and other homosexuals can stop worrying about who may come for us in our homes and give up our guns. When the police stop seeing their job as busting faces for fun and raising money for their political masters and start actually protecting me from random street crime, then I can give up my gun. Until then, sorry, I’m not giving up my own life so that the WON’T SOMEBODY PLEEEEEEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN crowd can have a false sense of security while they continue to abuse and neglect their kids, deny mental illness, and otherwise create the murderers of the future.
Still waiting.
Still waiting.
Where has microstamping been implemented?
is ‘gun advocates’ code for ‘Americans’??
‘freedom advocate’ might cover the bases a little better??
It’s been the law in California for over 5 years.
Good!
Someone show me other countries that are using it.
Identifying the firearm used in a crime is one of the biggest challenges for criminal investigators. But what if a shell casing picked up at a murder scene could immediately be tracked to the gun that fired it?
What if the actual perp picked up some shell casings at a local gun range and left them at the scene. Sounds like a pretty good way to skew the trail.
Can’t police forensics already match casings to firearms with marks left by firing pins, breech or ejectors?
Why don’t criminals skew that process with random casings?
Why isn’t a better and more reliable way to do this something our police forensic labs should have?
This hasn’t been shown to be reliable, just a huge expense. Not one person has posted any data to show it to be an advantage to solving gun crimes. Nor has anyone shown where this “technology” is being used anywhere else on the planet.
For one thing, 90%+ of all homicides are solved quite quickly. This is simply a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. Another thing is, as mentioned before, many of the street crimes being committed with guns are committed with stolen guns. Microstamping would be useless in such cases.
90%+? More like under 65%, and dropping. As the homicide rate goes down, the rate of unsolved homicides is going up.
***Experts say that homicides are tougher to solve now because crimes of passion, where assailants are easier to identify, have been replaced by drug- and gang-related killings.
Drug and gang related. Individuals who are not obtaining their weapons through legal channels, thus your little gun control ideas would be useless.
My little gun control ideas? Pray tell, what might my gun control ideas consist of?
No, I object to things that will not prove to be even 1% effective. For instance, let’s take the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994. Note that crime diminished all the way through its sunsetting, and then continued to diminish. Something caused the drop in gun crime, but it can’t be attributed to the AWB. Yet this is step one in our current attempt to “solve” our gun problem, to go back to the past for something that didn’t do anything then and won’t do anything now.
There is a “solution”, inasmuch as this can ever be solved to anybody’s satisfaction, and it ironically doesn’t involve guns: mental health. The Republicans have long been on the wrong side of this, and it has long been ignored by the general public. In fact, I’ve often dismissed it myself. I can’t quite ring myself to say that everybody on prescription dope needs to be on it, and I think that we drug too many people into delirium just so we don’t have to deal with them, but nevertheless we need to address this subject honestly.
Every mass shooting has two things in common: guns and mental health issues. Since a gun is an inanimate object subject to the whims of its user, it seems obvious to me that we should address the problems of the user.
But, since this is about gun control that I can accept, here’s the umpteenth repost:
-
All firearm purchases are subject to a background check. All of them. No exceptions.
-
All firearms must be registered through permissive process that does not allow the local government authorities an opinion on the matter. Further, the list must only be accessible to law enforcement in the event of the commission of a crime.
-
Going along with that, a firearm owner must report a stolen weapon as soon as possible, allowing for the possibility that they may be unable to report something they simply don’t know about.
-
HIPAA must be repealed insofar as mental health history must be accessed during the NICS check. If you are unable or unwilling to allow that access you will be denied a firearm.
-
In order to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon, you must pass a test that is modest in scope, offered freely, and is not cost prohibitive. It should not be a thousand questions, given once a year for 15 minutes 500 miles away, or cost $1000.
-
Any crime committed with your firearms will result in you being charged with a crime as well. If you can’t take care of your weapons you have no business having them.
I have reservations, of course, but given the proper implementation these proposals are bound to work better than banning a weapon because of what it looks like while leaving its functional equivalent alone. I mean, seriously, how does that make any sense at all? Also as I said before, show me the steak and not the sizzle.