More 2nd Amendment Erosion

They are bound and determined to slowly erode our 2nd amendment rights. The latest trend, which I’m discovering has been going on quietly in different states for a few years now, is to insist on serial coding all ammunition, the bullets as well as the case.

The logic behind this one, of course, is to make it easier to catch criminals who use guns in the course of committing their crimes. Naturally, all good law-abiding criminals will of course go to the proper source to buy their ammunition and submit their personal information to be entered into the database, so that when they shoot someone the cops can easily identify and find them when they perpertrate a crime. Of course they will, just like they legally purchased the license for and the gun they used in said crime.

Yeah right, and I’ve got some great oceanfront property right here in the heart of downtown Phoenix I can sell you, real cheap.

Who thinks this idiocy up? Better yet, we actually pay these people via our tax dollars to continually enslave us with their laws. To my knowledge they’ve never once been able to find, let alone convict, the perpetrator of a crime using this method.

And before anyone even thinks about bringing up all the school/mall shootings lately, let me remind you that none of those are committed by actual criminals. They are lone gunmen with some kind of problem and it doesn’t matter if the gun and/or ammo is registered or coded because they are already known and usually end up dead anyway (which is why they do this). These laws will NOT prevent this from happening. Ever notice how they always choose “gun free” places to shoot up?

As usual it’s the law abiding citizen who will pay for this law also, and in more ways than one.

ENCODING AMMUNITION WILL ONLY AID CRIMINALS

By Larry Pratt
February 27, 2008
NewsWithViews.com

The latest back-door gun control scheme has come to a number of state legislatures, and California has already enacted it.

The latest way to solve crime, and thus make criminals shake in their boots before they commit another crime, is to put unique serial codes on bullets and the cases in which they sit. The theory goes that even if a case is not recovered at the scene of the crime, the bullet will have the unique marking that will enable it to be traced back to the perpetrator.
Assuming that any manufacturer can afford to manufacture such ammunition at a price that individuals are willing to pay (a big assumption), here are the other problems with ammunition encoding.

Bullets that are best for self defense (or harming victims) are quite likely to be so deformed or disintegrated that they will offer no possibility of identifying a unique marking on the bullet.

Cases can be caught by brass catchers on a pistol or semiautomatic rifle. These are already available for those who reload their ammunition and reuse the cases. Would case catchers be outlawed, too? In any event, the likelihood that the police would have anything useable to trace back to a criminal is rather unlikely. Revolvers, of course, do not eject their cases, so there is zero chance of using cases for tracing those guns.

Read the full story here.

I notice how all their laws that supposedly will cut down on crime, etc, only ever manages to make life harder for the average law-abiding citizen while the criminals are free to do as they want.

And just because it’s individual states doing this, don’t be fooled one moment into thinking that the Feds are not behind this somehow. I’m guessing the database will be national, as in “homeland security”.

Here’s more on this issue, including from my own state of Arizona (I never heard a word on the news about this either).

Ammunition Coding System (with the required emotional blackmail to numb you into submission first)

Cogita Ergo Geek (a shooting sports blog who seems to be keeping a watch on this issue)

Desert Rat (an Arizona hunting/fishing blog, also watching this issue)

Advertisements

~ by swfreedomlover on February 28, 2008.

3 Responses to “More 2nd Amendment Erosion”

  1. What will these brilliant minds in California come up with next? Tracking poop from your pet? Are we sure that California and Californians are human? Maybe they are mutants with all the bio-additives in their water.

  2. “ANOTHER ATTACK ON OUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS”

    Senator Edward Kennedy is at it again; trying to chip away at the Second Amendment Rights of Americans by making it harder for us to comply with federal gun laws. The Senator has been trying to ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns in the Unites States for over thirty years and his latest bill, S-2605, is another attempt to accomplish his goal of achieving a national gun ban, one step at a time. An identical bill, H.R. 5266, has been introduced by Representative Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.), called the “National Crime Gun Identification Act.”
    The two bills seek to ban the manufacture, importation, and transfer (sale, etc.) of any semi-automatic pistol unless they have a microscopic array of characters etched into the breech face and firing pin of a pistol that will identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol. The process is called micro-stamping. It is a patented process that laser engraves the firearm’s make, model and serial number on the tip of the gun’s firing pin so that, in theory, once the gun is fired the information is imprinted onto the discharged cartridge cases.
    Unfortunately, there are numerous problems associated with Micro-Stamping. Both the University of California (at Davis) and the Association of Firearms and Tool Marks Examiners on Long Island have found that Micro-stamping has repeatedly failed in tests. In these tests, the vast majority of micro-stamped characters in the alphanumeric serial number couldn’t be read on any of the expended cartridge cases generated and examined. Micro-stampings can easily be removed, the firing pins can be easily replaced and millions of guns without stamping would still be available on the black market. In addition, most guns do not automatically eject fired cartridge cases and only a small percentage of guns would be micro-stamped. The people would be better served by increasing the funding for law enforcement agencies to fight the illegal trafficking in firearms rather than restricting the rights of American citizens by imposing faulty and unreliable technical requirements on them.
    If American citizens want to be able to defend themselves, they should be free to do so. No person, not even a member of congress, has the authority to deprive American citizens of the means of effective self-defense, including the use of handguns. How many shootings at schools or malls will it take before we understand that people who intend to kill will not be deterred by gun laws that only restrict the rights of law abiding citizens? A person intent on committing a murder will not be stopped by the fear of being charged with a lesser crimes of illegally possessing a firearm or not having their gun micro-stamped.
    Criminals always have the luxury of choosing the time, location and method of their crimes, but they will rarely attack people they know are armed. That’s why anyone thinking of committing mass murder is usually attracted to the gun-free zones of schools and malls because there’s a good chance that no one will be present at those types of locations who will be able to stop them. The National Academy of Sciences reviewed dozens of studies and could not find a single gun regulation that clearly led to reduced violent crime or murder. When Washington, D.C., passed its tough handgun ban years ago, gun violence rose.
    As a former law enforcement officer, I know that criminals will always find a way to get guns. By disarming our law-abiding citizens or making it harder for them to comply with regulations, we take away the strongest deterrent to violent criminals – the uncertainty that their next potential victim might be armed and able to protect themselves. We know that law enforcement personnel can’t be everywhere, all the time. Lawfully-armed citizens routinely assist their fellow citizens by using their firearms to prevent robberies, rapes, and the murder of innocents. For example: In 1997, Pearl, Miss., a school shooter was stopped when the school’s vice principal took a .45 from his truck and ran to the scene; In 2002, at the Appalachian School of Law in Virginia, after hearing shots, two students went to their cars, got their guns and restrained the shooter until police arrested him; In the February’s 2007 Salt Lake City Utah mall shooting, it was an off-duty police officer who happened to be on the scene and carrying a gun who managed to stop the shooter from shooting more people.

    The Founding Fathers knew that a government facing an armed citizenry was less likely to take away our rights, while a disarmed population wouldn’t have much hope. We can see this throughout the world today, as dictators and tyrants use deadly force against their own unarmed citizens. Without our Second Amendment rights, all of our other rights would not be inalienable. They would just be “on loan” from the government. Second Amendment rights belong to individual citizens, not to town, village, city, county, state or federal governments. The government has a responsibility to ensure that criminals who violate the law are prosecuted to the fullest, rather than trying to restrict the rights of American citizens. Gun control has been a proven failure in fighting crime and law abiding citizens should not be asked to give up their rights because of criminals who ignore gun control laws anyway.

    I believe that the right of American citizens to keep and bear arms is a fundamental, individual Constitutional right that we have a sacred duty to protect. Our Founding Fathers, having endured the tyranny of the British Empire, wanted to guarantee our God-given liberties. Even though they devised a formal system of checks and balances for our government, they were still concerned that the system could fail and that we might someday face a new tyranny, not from a foreign government, but from our own government. They wanted us to be able to defend ourselves, and that’s why they gave us the Second Amendment.
    For additional information, contact:

    JOHN W. WALLACE
    Candidate for Congress
    NY’s 20th CD
    Tel: 518-392-7062
    http://www.freedomcandidate.com

  3. Hi John,

    Thank you for stopping by. Thank you also for your wonderful comment here. I never fully understood our need for the second amendment in these modern days. It’s only since Bush took office that I’ve come to realize just how insightful our Founding Fathers really were.

    I’ve never owned a gun, or fired one. The closest I’ve ever come to one was standing next to a policeman on a NYC subway a few years ago. I am however, now giving serious consideration to purchasing a gun and learning how to use it properly.

    I only wish we could get more Citizens to realize this also.

    Thanks again for stopping by, and good luck with your bid for office in your district.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: