Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 86

Thread: California shell casing micro stamp law ruling pending

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,121

    Default California shell casing micro stamp law ruling pending

    NOT trying to start a political debate or discussion at all- just think it is an interesting read.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015...ostamping-law/

    BEE

  2. #2
    Member sayak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Central peninsula, between the K-rivers
    Posts
    5,790

    Default

    Hand gun sales will be ended in CA, responsible gun owners will be penalized or move away, criminals will continue to kill with illegal older or modified guns. Another misplaced law which punishes good citizens and and makes them more vulnerable to the bad, like so many other do-gooder policies.

  3. #3
    Supporting Member Amigo Will's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Wrangell
    Posts
    7,601

    Default

    Sure stop you from leaving any brass at a gun range.
    Now left only to be a turd in the forrest and the circle will be complete.Use me as I have used you

  4. #4
    Moderator Daveinthebush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Valdez, Alaska
    Posts
    4,403

    Default

    A little filing and gone. Range brass I don't think would be a problem as if you reload, the indentation is gone with the primer. Useless rules by useless people.

    Vietnam - June 70 - Feb. 72
    Cancer from Agent Orange - Aug. 25th 2012
    Cancer Survivor - Dec. 14th 2012

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    723

    Default

    Would scooping up used brass be "tampering with evidence?"

  6. #6
    Member Libertine's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Murder Capitol, AK
    Posts
    185

    Default

    Sounds like the Kalifornia brain trust is going to require this for revolvers as well. You know, for the criminal who dumps his fired brass from the cylinder...

  7. #7
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,218

    Default

    Somebody call me when there's something to worry about.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,815

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    Somebody call me when there's something to worry about.
    Awww, you wouldn't listen.

    SOTN
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,815

    Default

    There should be an exemption for folks who didn't INTEND to commit murder with their firearms.

    Besides, this law is unfair to minorities.

    It actually IS, you know, but you won't hear of the aclu, opposing it.

    SOTN
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bakerton, WV
    Posts
    467

    Default

    The crack across kalifornia is late again!

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Between mentally adjudicated and cybersapce
    Posts
    555

    Default

    Let's see this law would encourage several things:

    1. Any "good" criminal quickly finds ways around laws. Such as: policing up their brass, filling off the mirco stamp, or even replacing the firing pin.

    2. The pre-law made underground gun black market would explode.

    3. Sayak said: "Another misplaced law which punishes good citizens and and makes them more vulnerable to the bad, like so many other do-gooder policies." What we as a collective group seldom voice is from the perspective of those pushing for these laws, there are no "good citizens" that own guns just those with guns that have not committed a crime or been caught YET" mentality.

    4. Laws like this are based in the effort to control crime from a perspective that criminals follow the law, and the all citizens are best served by government employees with a narrowly focused purpose.

    What's next microstamp the base of all bullets and ban reloading to circumvent the law?

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Eureka MT
    Posts
    3,048

    Default

    IO you are deliberately missing the point again. This law is not what one should be worried about as a spare firing pin fixes the issue. What one should worry about is the intelligence, or lack there of, and the mind set of the legislators proposing this type of legislation.

  13. #13
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,218

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rbuck351 View Post
    IO you are deliberately missing the point again. This law is not what one should be worried about as a spare firing pin fixes the issue. What one should worry about is the intelligence, or lack there of, and the mind set of the legislators proposing this type of legislation.
    I'm not missing anything, RB. I fully realize that every time the NRA floats a news release full of political rhetoric, it's followers get all riled up and go off foaming at the mouth about the evils of the great conspiracy against them. If anyone's missing a point, it's those who don't understand how they're being manipulated by the big lobbyist organization.

    The people proposing (you realize this California state law passed in 2007 and has already been in effect for coming up on two years) this type of legislation are just well meaning folks (including the NRA member who conceived of, developed, and strongly advocates for the technology) struggling with how to solve the issue of preventing crimes. I often don't agree with their ideas, but we wisely have a system of legislation that provides checks and balances, such that it's difficult for such a law to become unilaterally enacted. I don't worry about this law for several reasons, but primarily because it's a California state law that does not effect me. If I lived in California, I would have provided input to my legislators at the time it was being discussed. However, as this is the ALASKA handgun forum, and I am an Alaskan...I'm not going to get all lathered up about what Californians have elected to do in their own state.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    I'm not missing anything, RB. I fully realize that every time the NRA floats a news release full of political rhetoric, it's followers get all riled up and go off foaming at the mouth about the evils of the great conspiracy against them. If anyone's missing a point, it's those who don't understand how they're being manipulated by the big lobbyist organization.

    The people proposing (you realize this California state law passed in 2007 and has already been in effect for coming up on two years) this type of legislation are just well meaning folks (including the NRA member who conceived of, developed, and strongly advocates for the technology) struggling with how to solve the issue of preventing crimes. I often don't agree with their ideas, but we wisely have a system of legislation that provides checks and balances, such that it's difficult for such a law to become unilaterally enacted. I don't worry about this law for several reasons, but primarily because it's a California state law that does not effect me. If I lived in California, I would have provided input to my legislators at the time it was being discussed. However, as this is the ALASKA handgun forum, and I am an Alaskan...I'm not going to get all lathered up about what Californians have elected to do in their own state.
    I hate to say it, but this is a bit short sighted. Take for instance Automobiles. You know that many cars have emissions systems on them that are not required within the state that they are residing. Simple things. For instance, try and buy a new car without a catalytic converter on it. But why would you need a catalytic converter if your state doesn't require such devices? Well, California does. And rather than make a California legal car and a 49 other states legal car, manufacturers make one car. (This is of course over simplified because since CA made the law more states have followed, but that's included in my thought process.) California has been trying to make all kinds of ridiculous laws to infringe on your rights regarding guns. Most of them are handily covered by a simple addition or subtraction by the brands and no biggie. This one, which only took affect in 2013 and has since seen the removal of 2 major manufacturer's from the market is similar in attempt to the emissions thing. California is trying to influence the market by making one of the largest potential markets in the country follow their rules. In doing so, manufacturer's can either not sell in CA or change to abide by CA laws. With cars, they changed. So far with guns, they haven't. So while you don't live IN CA, you are certainly affected by some laws they institute. In this case, the law was made, went into effect in 2013 and the makers backed out. That forces a potential infringement which would allow someone to sue. This is the basis of this lawsuit. IF the ruling is that the law stands, then makers will be forced to choose to comply or not sell in CA. As CA goes, so goes many other wack-a-doodle markets like NY etc. In the end, the makers will face the music, either comply with one state's laws and infringe on the people or stop selling your products.

    This does affect us even in AK.

  15. #15
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,218

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mobius View Post
    I hate to say it, but this is a bit short sighted. Take for instance Automobiles. You know that many cars have emissions systems on them that are not required within the state that they are residing. Simple things. For instance, try and buy a new car without a catalytic converter on it. But why would you need a catalytic converter if your state doesn't require such devices? Well, California does. And rather than make a California legal car and a 49 other states legal car, manufacturers make one car. (This is of course over simplified because since CA made the law more states have followed, but that's included in my thought process.) California has been trying to make all kinds of ridiculous laws to infringe on your rights regarding guns. Most of them are handily covered by a simple addition or subtraction by the brands and no biggie. This one, which only took affect in 2013 and has since seen the removal of 2 major manufacturer's from the market is similar in attempt to the emissions thing. California is trying to influence the market by making one of the largest potential markets in the country follow their rules. In doing so, manufacturer's can either not sell in CA or change to abide by CA laws. With cars, they changed. So far with guns, they haven't. So while you don't live IN CA, you are certainly affected by some laws they institute. In this case, the law was made, went into effect in 2013 and the makers backed out. That forces a potential infringement which would allow someone to sue. This is the basis of this lawsuit. IF the ruling is that the law stands, then makers will be forced to choose to comply or not sell in CA. As CA goes, so goes many other wack-a-doodle markets like NY etc. In the end, the makers will face the music, either comply with one state's laws and infringe on the people or stop selling your products.

    This does affect us even in AK.
    Some good points. For the sake of accuracy tho, it should be pointed out that those two manufacturers are still on the approved list, until into 2016. They chose to pull out early (or at least threaten to pull out early (I'm sure there's still enough product in distribution to carry them for a long while)), as a political maneuver. The manufacturers don't want to have to comply because it would increase their manufacturing cost, plain and simple.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    Some good points. For the sake of accuracy tho, it should be pointed out that those two manufacturers are still on the approved list, until into 2016. They chose to pull out early (or at least threaten to pull out early (I'm sure there's still enough product in distribution to carry them for a long while)), as a political maneuver. The manufacturers don't want to have to comply because it would increase their manufacturing cost, plain and simple.
    Whether political or not it allows the conflict that results in the claim that the law in combination with the approved gun list is a violation of the 2A. Which allows the lawsuit. When they announced they would not submit guns for re-approval, the industry as a whole speculated that the intent was to force this "infringement" to the top of the pile and force the lawsuit. So the threat, while it does affect their bottom line, was probably a calculated move to try to overturn the law in the first place.

    To me, increasing costs to accommodate a useless and unenforceable law that will do zero to reduce crime is a thing worth fighting to stop.

  17. #17
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,218

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mobius View Post
    Whether political or not it allows the conflict that results in the claim that the law in combination with the approved gun list is a violation of the 2A.
    Yes, It's obvious the intent by the two manufacturers and their lobbyist organization was to attempt to play it as a 2A issue. Frankly, I can't see how that idea has even the slightest hint of a legal leg to stand on. And in deference to this forums rules, I'm not going to pursue that discussion any further. One way or another, I don't feel concerned by California's law. If it were the law of Alaska, or the law of the land, it wouldn't concern me either. Frankly, I don't care that my brass could be identifiable to me; I am responsible and accountable for every round I fire.

    To me, increasing costs to accommodate a useless and unenforceable law that will do zero to reduce crime is a thing worth fighting to stop.
    Fair enough. We each have to choose our battles. If that's something you feel strongly about, you should by all means pursue it.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  18. #18
    Member sayak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Central peninsula, between the K-rivers
    Posts
    5,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mobius View Post
    I hate to say it, but this is a bit short sighted. Take for instance Automobiles. You know that many cars have emissions systems on them that are not required within the state that they are residing. Simple things. For instance, try and buy a new car without a catalytic converter on it. But why would you need a catalytic converter if your state doesn't require such devices? Well, California does. And rather than make a California legal car and a 49 other states legal car, manufacturers make one car. (This is of course over simplified because since CA made the law more states have followed, but that's included in my thought process.) California has been trying to make all kinds of ridiculous laws to infringe on your rights regarding guns. Most of them are handily covered by a simple addition or subtraction by the brands and no biggie. This one, which only took affect in 2013 and has since seen the removal of 2 major manufacturer's from the market is similar in attempt to the emissions thing. California is trying to influence the market by making one of the largest potential markets in the country follow their rules. In doing so, manufacturer's can either not sell in CA or change to abide by CA laws. With cars, they changed. So far with guns, they haven't. So while you don't live IN CA, you are certainly affected by some laws they institute. In this case, the law was made, went into effect in 2013 and the makers backed out. That forces a potential infringement which would allow someone to sue. This is the basis of this lawsuit. IF the ruling is that the law stands, then makers will be forced to choose to comply or not sell in CA. As CA goes, so goes many other wack-a-doodle markets like NY etc. In the end, the makers will face the music, either comply with one state's laws and infringe on the people or stop selling your products.

    This does affect us even in AK.
    Exactly. California's disfunction has a way of seeping into the rest of the country; laws, wacko ideas, illegals, etc. I'd say that CA and NY are about on equal terms for the export of disfunctional policy.

  19. #19
    Member cod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Kenai Peninsula, Ak.
    Posts
    2,214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    . One way or another, I don't feel concerned by California's law. If it were the law of Alaska, or the law of the land, it wouldn't concern me either. Frankly, I don't care that my brass could be identifiable to me; I am responsible and accountable for every round I fire.

    And this is why you catch so much heck from those on this forum. Most here feel you do not understand the need by ALL citizens to DEFEND freedoms. I highly doubt you would be perfectly willing to let law enforcement enter your home whenever they feel like it. After all, by your argument you have nothing to hide. You're legal. Same type of your argument.
    Connecting dots is not too hard anymore.
    Your sarcasm is way, waaaayyyyyyyy more sarcastic than mine!

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cod View Post
    And this is why you catch so much heck from those on this forum. Most here feel you do not understand the need by ALL citizens to DEFEND freedoms. I highly doubt you would be perfectly willing to let law enforcement enter your home whenever they feel like it. After all, by your argument you have nothing to hide. You're legal. Same type of your argument.
    Connecting dots is not too hard anymore.
    I don't see the problem allowing that police officer to make me stop at a random stop and force me out of my car and make me take a sobriety test without any cause. After all, I don't even drink alcohol.... {/sarcasm}

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •