Above is a 45 colt 1911 firing pin. How many millions like that were made? It would not take one minute to replace a microstamped pin with a plain one. Any criminal would do that first thing.
Posted on 05/16/2008 4:55:29 AM PDT by Brilliant
The whole premise would be expensive because you not only have to modify current firearms and the manufacturers would have to buy expensive equipment, the government would have come up with a huge, searchable database. The only outcome would be that the government could determine who the last registered owner of the weapon was.
The technology is easily defeatable by a nail file or the use of a revolver, or just picking up your brass.
Since when do we use lasers to engrave computer chips? I thought we were still using lithography.
The researchers did not have access to patented information allowing them to read the bar- or gear-codes
How could the knowledge to read something be patented? The system really is out of hand.
Codes engraved on the face of the firing pin could easily be removed with household tools, Beddow found
We could have told them that.
“I suspect that if they have that microstamp, they could track the firearm anyway, without registration, thru the dealer network, assuming that it was not transferred illegally, or thru a private transaction.”
You got it. If the microstamping of ammunition is to be effective, then the firearm must also be registered. Otherwise, there is no mechanism to link the ammunition to the gun.
Above is a 45 colt 1911 firing pin. How many millions like that were made? It would not take one minute to replace a microstamped pin with a plain one. Any criminal would do that first thing.
But how would gun registration make this work? Most crime guns are stolen. So the police would trace the fired casing back to the original owner whose gun was stolen. So what? Still doesn’t tell you who the criminal was.
If they're criminals, then they've already broken laws. Is an armed robber going to care about a gun regulation? Is a murderer?
Gun regulations are intended to ensnare the otherwise law-abiding citizen.
I’m not sure how this could ensnare the law abiding citizen, though.
True, criminals will find a way around this, but some criminals are not as smart or as careful as others. That’s why we find fingerprints at crime scenes. That’s why surveillance cameras sometimes help.
If you can put away enough of these criminals using this technology, then there will be less pressure to take away rights from law abiding citizens.
To me, though, the question is what you’re going to do to these guys once you’ve got them. If you’re just going to give them a slap on the wrist, then why bother?
“But how would gun registration make this work? Most crime guns are stolen. So the police would trace the fired casing back to the original owner whose gun was stolen. So what? Still doesn’t tell you who the criminal was.”
So true. Then you get to the next step in the processs where if your gun is stolen and used in a crime, then you can be prosecuted as if you’d done the crime. No joke, I’ve seen gun control advocates argue for this. I asked if your car is stolen and used in a crime, should you be prosecuted. I was told ‘that’s different’.
How is that different? Because the Liberal Hoplophobe you were talking to owns a car?
It's not likely to help solve many crimes any more than the requirement to keep a fired shell casing from handguns has.
It gives the impression that they are trying to fight crime, and expands government, and raises the price of firearms.
While the cost of making the microstamping parts isn't going to be too high in itself. The cost of tracking all those parts, who owns the guns, how they are transferred, and how to handle when a part is replaced, is going to end up adding a significant amount to the cost of the gun. The effect is especially noticeable on low priced guns.
What liberals fear most about guns is them being easily owned by the masses. That was why there was a big push against "Saturday night specials" based on the price they were sold at, not based on functionality.
They've gone after simple guns without lots of safety features. Not because those safety features significantly reduce the risks of accidents, but because they increase the cost.
They are systematically looking for ways to price guns out of the range of most Americans to afford them, and they are willing to do so slowly and incrementally.
That’s about the best argument you can make against it. But if the libs want this, then my response is that as soon as you start putting these guys in jail for long stretches of time when we catch them, we’ll consider your request. There is no point in requiring this if you’re just going to give them a slap on the wrist anyway, as is usually the case.
I, too, found that statement curious.
The whole point of a patent disclosure is that it's supposed to explain whatever is being patented in sufficient detail that a "skilled practitioner of the art" can reproduce it, moving it into the public domain after the patent expires.
My guess, if the real answer is not "idiotic writer", is that the proper word would have been "proprietary" rather than "patent".
Meanwhile, it can be defeated in 30 seconds by rubbing the firing pin with a file
And for it to really work, replacement firing pins would need to become controlled items.
How was it different? Well, his argument went like this: you need a car but you don’t need a gun. Essentially, that’s the whole liberal gun grabber argument. You don’t need a gun therefore any restriction is justifiable considering the adverse impact firearms have on society. (not my argument, the gun grabbers).
Or use a brass catcher...
I have never needed a fire extinguisher either, but one is sitting in my kitchen just in case I ever do. If he ever has someone at his front door trying to break in with the cops twenty minutes away if it's a slow night, he'd realize how much he needs one too. I doubt if you can ever convince someone so profoundly afraid of inanimate objects of that, however.
“...doubt if you can ever convince someone so profoundly afraid of inanimate objects of that, however.”
You’ve touched on two important aspects. The gungrabbers are afraid of guns. It’s simply not something they understand. To them, a gun is something to be feared. To most gun owners it’s a tool. Respected perhaps, but not feared.
The second thing is akin. The only experience they have with guns is violence on TV or in the movies. Guns are to be feared and have no legitimate purpose.
BTW, out where I live, it would take the police 30 minutes to drive here assuming they weren’t otherwise busy. Of course, a gun grabber would say my choice of living is mine and I have to bear all the costs.
A twenty minute response time was from fifteen years ago. The response time here has probably changed. The donut shop extant then has closed and a new one opened slightly farther away. The perp had long since remembered an important appointment elsewhere.
I have long believed that a course in home economics should be required for graduation from high school. Gun safety and handling revolvers, pistols and shotguns should be in the curriculum. Other topics would include how to do laundry, how to make a budget, tax form preparation and the short class on vacuum cleaner repair.
The last would take about one class period and involve demonstrating how to change the bags and drive belts on the most common types of vacuum cleaners. That would prepare the student to fix about 80% of the "broken" vacuums in the US.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.