Re: Top Ten Gun Industry Lies About Microstamping

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:41:11 -0500, The Lone Weasel
<loneweasel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Peter Franks <none@xxxxxxxx> said:

The Lone Weasel wrote:
TOP 10 GUN INDUSTRY LIES ABOUT MICROSTAMPING


Despite an extensive disinformation campaign by the gun
industry, microstamping came within a single vote of being
sent to the Governor?s desk during the past legislative
session in California. As legislators around the country
consider implementing microstamping in their own states,
we would like to set the record straight on the
technology.

LIE #1: There is ?no support? from California law
enforcement for microstamping technology.

TRUTH: Microstamping is supported by more than 55 police
chiefs, sheriffs and prosecuting attorneys across
California. Los Angeles Police Chief William Bratton has
stated, ?I strongly believe microstamping is a valuable
tool that will enhance law enforcement's ability to gather
intelligence and put bad guys behind bars." Microstamping
technology is also supported by California State Attorney
General Bill Lockyer.

How many police chiefs are in the state?

LIE #2: The technology can be easily defeated ?in seconds?
by criminals using ?common household tools.?

TRUTH: Handguns equipped with microstamping technology
create a redundant system for transferring the make, model
and serial number of a handgun to a cartridge. The system
makes multiple marks and is designed with ?anti-counter
measures? to prevent tampering. Most criminals would not
even know how to find the technology?it is not visible to
the naked eye?never mind defeat it. The firing pin on a
handgun equipped with microstamping technology is nearly
as hard as a diamond and impervious to common household
tools. And if the firing pin were replaced, the redundant
markings would transfer the information to the cartridge.

Are these "most criminals" using guns that they purchased
or are "most criminals" using illegal (and therefore
untraceable) guns?

LIE#3: Criminals will gather used microstamped cartridges
at government facilities and private shooting ranges and
?seed? crime scenes with this false evidence to implicate
others and cover their trail.

TRUTH: There is nothing to stop criminals from taking such
measures now to fool the existing ballistics
identification system in the state (the National
Integrated Ballistics Information Network), but they
rarely do, according to law enforcement officials.
Experience shows that most criminals fail to take even
modest precautions, like removing license plates from a
stolen car or wearing gloves during burglaries.

1) NIBIN does not provide a means of tracking a firearm
back to its original owner, it only deals with ballistics
fingerprinting /after/ a crime has been committed.
Therefore, this comparison is without basis.

2) What safeguards are in place in the event that the
criminal DOES spread around gathered casings? A just law
must never provide a means for the criminal to easily frame
the law abiding.

LIE#4: Microstamping would lead to significant price
increases for firearms consumers, as much as $150 per
firearm.

TRUTH: Todd Lizotte, the developer of microstamping
technology, has testified that outfitting new
semiautomatic handguns with the technology will cost gun
manufacturers only between 50 cents and one dollar per
firearm. The process is analogous to the current laser
processes used to create micro serial numbers on handguns
sold in Massachusetts.

What Todd Lizotte says is irrelevant. Who defines the
price of the firearm? How about we ask them how much it
would cost to implement.

What is the licensing cost for microstamping technology in
states other than California? What makes California so
special that it receives special consideration that the
remaining states must compensate for?

LIE #7: Microstamping is a sole-source technology that
would create a government-sanctioned monopoly for a single
company.

TRUTH: The patent holder of microstamping technology has
announced that a royalty-free license will be provided to
every firearms manufacturer on guns sold in California.

Microstamping is a sole-source technology.

LIE #8: Microstamping would be ineffective because only a
small percentage of gun crime is committed by criminals
using handguns they purchased legally.

TRUTH: The percentage of gun crime committed by legal
versus illegal handgun owners is not relevant to the
effectiveness of microstamping. Microstamping will help
law enforcement solve crimes committed with new
semiautomatic handguns by providing substantial
investigatory links that can aid in identifying the
handgun and the perpetrator in handgun crimes. Currently,
no arrest is made in approximately 45 percent of all
homicides in California because police lack the evidence
they need to identify suspects, and of the approximately
2,400 homicides in California, over 60 percent are
committed with handguns (2004 California Department of
Justice data).

What increase in the percentage of arrests is projected?

What increase in the percentage is considered a success?

What number of false positives and unjustified arrests is
considered acceptable?

LIE #10: The technology has not been studied or tested ?in
the real world.?

TRUTH: Independent examiners have fired thousands of
rounds with microstamp-enabled guns and the firearms have
continued to produce a consistent and observable mark. In
a May 2006 test at the California Highway Patrol range,
California Assemblyman Paul Koretz was unable to damage
the structures on the firing pin of a microstamped gun
using several types of household files. The results were
verified by a firearms expert at the California
Criminalistics Institute.

Neither of those are "in the real world".

Gunborgs get pissy when they encounter the truth - eh Goober?

What truth? All I've seen from you since I started here is half truths
and outright lies, halfwit.


POINT PROVEN!

Laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh.
.

Relevant Pages