posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 01:29 PM
From an engineering standpoint:
The only realistic way this could be accomplished is by having each firing chamber contain a raised or lowered stamp, so the expanding shell casing
would receive an imprint upon firing. The issue with this is that any raised surface, on firing chamber or casing, would also act as an impediment to
smooth ejection of the casing. This would lead to misfirings as the casings would not always remove themselves from the weapon properly.
The stamp would also wear quite rapidly as expanded casings are ejected. I would estimate maybe 10,000 rounds before a stamp is rendered
undecipherable, and that estimates takes into account special hardening techniques to prevent excessive wear.
Once worn, a firearm could not be easily re-fitted with a stamp. The firing chamber is the most integral part of any firearm and thus cannot be simply
replaced any more than one can replace the unibody on a vehicle. The firing chamber, for all practical purposes, is the weapon.
Now, from a practical standpoint:
Ignoring the fact that any raised surface can be easily removed with a $25 Dremel tool, just simple wear will also render any stamp unreadable. It
will also lead to safety issues with re-used brass, since even a microscopic indentation creates a stress point. I have reloaded brass upwards of 20
times over, and that means 20+ stress points.
Reloaded brass would not be identifiable. It would contain multiple stamps, possibly from different weapons. Some people actually help clean up firing
ranges for the brass so they can reload.
Picking up one's shell casings only takes a few minutes.
Since weapons can be easily carried across state borders, having a law in California just means gun manufacturers would simply need to move to Arizona
or Nevada to manufacture guns legally. A new industry of illegally importing guns into California would grow up overnight. The only way to combat this
would be to have check stations along every route into and out of California, along with border patrol along the entire border. In essence, California
would need their own wall.
Any weapons manufacturer in California would pretty much be forced to move out of state anyway. Once word got out about their micro-stamping, their
product would be shunned across the other states and their sales would only happen inside California. Moving across a state border would open up an
entire new market for them.
Since a large percentage of guns used in crime are obtained illegally, having an identification mark would not indicate who the crime perpetrator
really was, only who legally owned the gun at the time. This would likely lead to legal owners who had been the victim of crime being prosecuted for
being the victim of a theft.
It would be simple enough, with the proper technology, to use this law to frame a law-abiding gun owner. If the technology exists to create this
stamp, that technology will become available to the public as all technologies eventually do. All one would need do in order to obtain the stamp of a
legal weapon is to find a single brass casing from it, an easy proposition if the owner fires the weapon regularly. A firing chamber with identical
markings could then be manufactured and used in a crime and the owner of the original gun would be charged with "damning evidence." Expensive, yes,
but no more expensive than other attempts to get revenge on someone one does not like... and at present, gun owners are not popular in some areas of
Even easier, use a stolen brass casing reloaded and fired from a gun without a stamp... the identifying mark will still be readable.
The micro-stamping idea is absolute lunacy, from both a technological and practical standpoint. I propose that instead of having a law to require
useless and expensive alterations to legal weapons, we instead need a law to make useful alterations to politicians who propose such idiocy...
lobotomies come to mind.