Mission statement:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

IL Commissar Senator Kotowski introduces microstamping bill

Yesterday, rabidly anti-gun Illinois state Senator Dan Kotowski (haven't mentioned him in a while, have I?) introduced SB 3425 to require that after 2010, all new semi-automatic pistols be equipped with "microstamping" technology, and to impose a felony charge on anyone who disables that technology.

For those unfamiliar, "microstamping" involves etching the firing pin (and also somewhere else in the chamber--presumably the breech face) with microscopic characters identifying the gun. The characters are then (in theory) transferred to the primer and cartridge case when a round is fired. The theory goes on to hope that when police investigators retrieve the ejected cartridge cases after a criminal shooting, check the characters under suitable microscope apparatus, and link the characters to a database that would be kept, and lead to the buyer of record.


So far, only one state, California, has passed such legislation, and the California Police Chiefs Association (CPCA), who lobbied enthusiastically for passage of the bill when it was up for consideration, now seem to have changed their minds, as indicated in a letter to California Attorney General Edmund Brown.

In the letter [pdf file], CPCA Acting President Susan E. Manheimer wrote, "There are too many unanswered questions with microstamping in its current iteration" and raised concerns that "statements about the capabilities of microstamping may have been technologically premature." In 2007, CPCA supported legislation (AB 1471) to require firearms microstamping in California.
What are some of these unanswered questions?
The letter continues, "We support further research of microstamping in light of the new information that has surfaced since California passage of the legislation. Publicly available, peer-reviewed studies conducted by independent research organizations conclude that the technology does not function reliably and that criminals can remove the markings easily in mere seconds. We believe that these findings require examination prior to implementation." The CPCA also expressed concerns over implementing the technology during a very difficult budget environment and the negative impact on law enforcement budgets which are already under significant pressure.
The "very difficult budget environment" certainly strikes home. Illinois, like California, is in very dire budgetary straits

Even Illinoisans who care nothing for gun rights, and who believe shall not be infringed shouldn't be accorded any respect, should ask Senator Kotowski why he is pushing a "solution" that has so many obvious problems, and that will exacerbate an already untenable fiscal situation. In fact, I hope people do just that.

Oh--and don't "threaten" him.

4 comments:

LeftCoastConservative said...

The microstamping law in California does not go into effect until the Attorney General verifies that the technology has become unencumbered with patents, presumably removing financial burdens on firearms manufacturers producing guns with the technology.

Thus far the microstamping requirement remains unenforced, so Illinois might actually become the first state to require guns with microstamping. If so, will gun manufacturers begin making microstamped guns in general for all markets, or will they simply stop selling guns in Illinois?

Either outcome would be acceptable to anti-gun rights people. The effects of such restrictions on gun model introductions has already been felt in California: only three new semi-automatic pistols have been approved for sale in this state. I am sure that Senator Feinstein is pleased with that.

W W Woodward said...

Firearm manufacturers need to follow Barrett's example of refusing to sell to anybody (including government agencies) in the state of Illinois.

This idiocy is getting completely out of hand.

the idea of Texas seceding from the union (again) is looking better and better every day.

[W-III]

45superman said...

Firearm manufacturers need to follow Barrett's example of refusing to sell to anybody (including government agencies) in the state of Illinois.

I'm with you, Woody--but let me get a couple more things first ;-).

Who are we kidding? said...

"impose a felony charge on anyone who disables that technology." Yup I can hear the drug dealers, Gangsters, bank robbers , all quaking in their boots. We're gonna fill up the state penitentiaries so fast because these guys are just going to show up on the prisons doorstep turning themselves in rather than wait 1 more minute on the lam avoiding the CAGE units for altering a firing pin . I guess Quinn will have to release all the muggers and rapists and pedophiles in order to make room for the sudden influx of justice delivered due to a single fell swoop of a pen in Springfield.