The California Senate passed a microstamping bill on Friday that now heads to the desk of anti-gun Gov. Gavin Newsom to be signed into law. It will be signed.
It is a terrible law, possibly unconstitutional.
AB 2847 states that starting on July 1, 2022, all new handguns sold in the state will need to be micro stamped in one place on the interior of the handgun (current law requires two imprinting locations).
Additionally, for every new gun added to the state’s roster of approved handguns, three firearms that do not meet the requirements for what the state calls a “safe” handgun must be removed by the Dept. of Justice.
-
The Importance of Prayer: How a Christian Gold Company Stands Out by Defending Americans’ Retirement
Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco), the author of AB 2847, said the legislation “would require gunmakers to incorporate microstamping technology — to imprint microscopic characters that identify a handgun’s make, model, and serial number on the casing of every bullet that is fired. Having this information is critical to solving countless crimes involving firearms, as well as to reducing the black market for guns.”
THE PROBLEMS
AB 2847 is problematic for a number of reasons as Mark Oliva, director of Public Affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, noted in an email to GunsAmerica.
“This microstamping bill is doubling down a technology the state knows is unworkable and is easily defeated by criminals,” explained Oliva.
“The state’s Department of Justice hasn’t even begun to weigh in on how this will be enforced and regulated. There’s no formula for which guns would come off the approved roster and why. This is nothing short of a slow-rolling gun ban that will eventually eliminate Californian’s Second Amendment rights,” he continued.
Microstamping is believed to be a scheme to eliminate handguns. GunsAmerica believes that once manufacturers start manufacturing and selling the new pistols that include the new microstamping, the department of justice can start pulling the “unsafe” guns off the street.
What makes a pistol or a revolver unsafe in California?
As used in this part, “unsafe handgun” means any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, for which any of the following is true:
(a) For a revolver:
(1) It does not have a safety device that, either automatically in the case of a double-action firing mechanism, or by manual operation in the case of a single-action firing mechanism, causes the hammer to retract to a point where the firing pin does not rest upon the primer of the cartridge.
(2) It does not meet the firing requirement for handguns.
(3) It does not meet the drop safety requirement for handguns.
(b) For a pistol:
(1) It does not have a positive manually operated safety device, as determined by standards relating to imported guns promulgated by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
(2) It does not meet the firing requirement for handguns.
(3) It does not meet the drop safety requirement for handguns.
(4) Commencing July 1, 2022, for all centerfire semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 32015, it does not have a chamber load indicator.
(5) Commencing July 1, 2022, for all centerfire or rimfire semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 32015, it does not have a magazine disconnect mechanism if it has a detachable magazine.
(6) (A) Commencing July 1, 2022, for all semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 32015, it is not designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters used to identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol, etched or otherwise imprinted in one or more places on the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and that are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is fired.
It certainly looks like they are planning for fewer guns.
Alan Gottlieb, Founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, told GunsAmerica via email, “The real intent of this legislation is to make fewer guns available to the public for self-defense by limiting the number of models and making others more expensive.”
They plan to sue.
Subscribe to the Daily Newsletter
wpDiscuz
