Gun microstamping could close American factories

posted at 5:31 pm on October 6, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

I understand that gun owners’ rights and the Second Amendment haven’t really been a touchstone in this year’s elections, but that doesn’t mean that the battle isn’t still being waged. One story out this month hits pretty close to home for me, both figuratively and literally. It involves the Remington Arms plant located in Ilion, a village in upstate New York. They are currently battling a pending move by the state government which would force them to put laser etched microstamps on the firing pins of all their weapons, driving costs through the roof.

Microstamping, or ballistic imprinting, is a patented process that uses laser technology to engrave a tiny marking of the make, model and serial number on the tip of a gun’s firing pin to allow an imprint of that information on spent cartridge cases. Supporters of the technology say it will be a “game changer,” allowing authorities to quickly identify the registered guns used in crimes. Opponents claim the process is costly, unreliable and may ultimately impact the local economies that heavily depend on the gun industry, including Ilion, N.Y., where Remington Arms maintains a factory, and Hartford, Conn., where Colt’s manufacturing is headquartered.

“Mandatory microstamping would have an immediate impact of a loss of 50 jobs,” New York State Sen. James Seward, a Republican whose district includes Ilion, said, adding that Remington employs 1,100 workers in the town. “You’re talking about a company that has options in other states. Why should they be in a state that’s hostile to legal gun manufacturing? There could be serious negative economic impact with the passage of microstamping and other gun-control laws.”

I grew up within bicycling distance of the Remington Arms plant, and nearly every one of our neighbors either had a family member who worked there or knew people who did. It was the central industry of the area, and while diminished in size over the years, is still a primary force in providing jobs. They also have a long, proud tradition of producing some of the finest hunting hardware in the nation for well over a century.

This microstamping, while perhaps well intentioned from a law enforcement perspective, is a business disaster in the making for little or no return on the investment. Bob Owens explains.

For starters: microstamping fails to work on any firearm that already exists, something in the neighborhood of more than 300 million firearms. As firearms last indefinitely, it would be decades before they became a significant number of total firearms — even if the technology was foolproof.

But microstamping is not foolproof. Let’s look at the ways microstamping fails, beyond the numbers:

  • Microstamping does not work if shell casings aren’t automatically ejected from the crime gun. Revolvers, derringers, double-barrel shotguns, pump shotguns and rifles, and semi-automatic firearms that can be equipped with inexpensive brass catchers (common among some shooters) would leave no cartridges at the scene of a shooting.
  • Microstamping does not work because firing pins are inexpensive and easy to replace. The firing pin for most weapons are easily replaced by someone with a minimum of ability to read and follow the basic cleaning directions for his firearm. The expense of millions of dollars in retooling is thwarted by the purchase of a $12 part.
  • Microstamping does not work because the stamping is easily defaced. It would take a matter of a half-dozen passes of a standard diamond file, and less than a minute, to eradicate the microstamping.
  • Microstamping is incredibly fragile. The stamping would wear out over time through simple use of the firearm, or be thwarted by the normal powder residue that builds up on small parts.
  • Microstamping could easily be spoofed and waste police time — or worse, send the wrong people to jail. Most shooters do not reload their own ammunition, and leave their shell casings at the range. All it would take to turn microstamping to a criminal’s advantage would be for a criminal or one of his associates to pick up brass from a firing range in the same caliber as the weapon he carries. After he uses a microstamping-free weapon in a crime, he would merely drop the brass he recovered from Joe Citizen at the range at the crime scene. Joe will wake up with a SWAT team crashing through his door at 5:00 a.m., and if he’s lucky, innocent Joe won’t be gunned down along with his family pets.

Bob has plenty more at the link and a wealth of experience with guns and second amendment issues to back it up. Rules like these, forced through by excitable gun opponents without considering the law of unintended consequences, can and will result in more factories closing down and moving to more business friendly climes. While some may look at this as the natural evolution of business in the free market, it still affects many, many families and entire communities. On top of that, Remington isn’t just another manufacturer of another widget. They are an icon of American history and part of the fabric of New York dating back to the 1800s. Gun violence is of concern to many people without question, but this isn’t an answer to anything.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Solaratov on October 6, 2012 at 10:17 PM

You’re absolutely right of course…..I was sloppily referring to lack of GPS tracking….the guns “walked”.

Tim_CA on October 6, 2012 at 10:56 PM

Oldnuke on October 6, 2012 at 10:35 PM

Yeah. That’s one of the sites that I’ve sent people to when they are looking for info.
It’s amazing the amount of information available on the web, isn’t it?
I didn’t start using a computer (meaning I didn’t even know how to turn one on) until I was over 60; and I am constantly amazed at the stuff that’s out there. (Of course, I’m still pleasantly surprised every time I turn the infernal machine on and it doesn’t blow up or catch fire and melt. :-) )

Solaratov on October 6, 2012 at 11:04 PM

a Galil clone in 7.62 – Hard to get in the states, especially since i want the conversion kit to swap it to a 5.56 at will.

BlaxPac on October 6, 2012 at 9:46 PM

Can’t do it. Take a look at the mag wells.

You can’t swap uppers between AR-10s and -15s for the same reason.

Solaratov on October 6, 2012 at 11:15 PM

This has noting to do with tracing firearms and everything with trying to surpress the manufacture of firearms in NY state.

There actually nothing to prevent the owners from either polishing the face of the firing pin to remove any etching or buying a replacement or aftermarket pin manufactured in a state with out such stupid laws.

LCT688 on October 6, 2012 at 11:38 PM

Why not put the same information on every single part of the weapon?

Let’s make it so prohibitively expensive no one can afford new guns.

profitsbeard on October 6, 2012 at 11:52 PM

The stupidest idea of the day.

Bmore on October 7, 2012 at 12:00 AM

Now, mind you, I’m not a gun-banner.

I’m not the biggest of Second Amendment types, but I am of the school that says if they take away one right they’ll take away the rest, so you’ve got to stop them early.

And yeah, there’s a bunch of perfectly valid reasons why this won’t be half as effective as the advocates think it might be.

But…what we’re talking about here is a change to the way firing pins are manufactured, a serialization process that once brought to production volumes should have minimal impact on cost.

If they close down and move it’s because they don’t WANT to do it, or because they see a commercial disadvantage to selling guns with serialized firing pins, not because they CAN’T.

JEM on October 7, 2012 at 12:28 AM

JEM on October 7, 2012 at 12:28 AM

Well ya just proved that your not a big second amendment person right that.

Of course they can do it, but why? Also, how do you know for a FACT that it would be “cheap” to re tool factories?

That aside, as stated there are many guns out there without. Do you for a minute think that a criminal would use one of these guns? Why would you when you just can get a Eric Holder gun that they lost track of?

watertown on October 7, 2012 at 1:12 AM

JEM on October 7, 2012 at 12:28 AM

I like to add that this is yet another round about way to restricting/banning guns. Make it too expensive. You recall some time ago the EPA or something trying to ban lead from ammo? Claim it was hurting the wildlife or something. I do not recall the details but it was something along the lines of that.

watertown on October 7, 2012 at 1:14 AM

Right now I’m goin’ back and forth between the Walther PK380 and the S&W BG380. Though the little Ruger keeps tryin’ to sneak in.

cozmo on October 6, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Cozmo, just an fyi but Walther just announced a recall on the pk380 for pistols made from may to september of this year. Some type of safety lever issue.

oryguncon on October 7, 2012 at 1:23 AM

And the more I thought about this idea, what does it prove? A micro stamped firearm may have been there, or someone picked up old micro stamped casings from the range and dropped at the crime scene. Or the micro stamped gun was stolen, sold a few times and was used in commission of a crime, or multiple crimes, bogus idea easily defeated and another regulation to harass gun owners. Seriously what does this accomplish? except to pizz off gun owners and have the manufacturers move to a business friendly state.

stormridercx4 on October 7, 2012 at 1:30 AM

watertown – oh, what you’d have is a cottage industry of filing or replacing the firing pins for criminals, it would not be hard to do and it would largely nullify this law in regard to use of such firearms by the usual run of criminals.

But…

From a federalism perspective I do not see how a state mandating something like this represents a greater infringement on the public’s RKBA than any of those rules the Supreme Court has found reasonable.

I do agree it may put arms manufacturers in that state at a very small competitive disadvantage in terms of cost, and perhaps a bigger one in terms of image, but as a believer in a small Federal government and the rights of the states to do what they want except in those areas specifically held for the Federal government in the Constitution, I can’t really object to this.

I’m a Californian, and as much as the behavior of our Air Resources Board and various other agencies is clearly reprehensible, I’m bound by principle to say that we have the right to screw ourselves and can’t expect the Feds to save us.

JEM on October 7, 2012 at 1:33 AM

“Supporters of the technology say it will be a “game changer,” allowing authorities to quickly identify the registered guns used in crimes.”

Okay I see now they are worried about gun owners who have already registered their guns going on crime sprees. As the church lady says Now isn’t that special !!

stormridercx4 on October 7, 2012 at 1:35 AM

“Rules like these, forced through by excitable gun opponents without considering the law of unintended consequences, can and will result in more factories closing down and moving to more business friendly climes. ”

heh. unintended consequences.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_Consequences_%28novel%29

bowman..paging mr.henry bowman…

warhorse_03826 on October 7, 2012 at 1:44 AM

Support your local pig farmer.

Kenosha Kid on October 7, 2012 at 1:57 AM

JEM on October 7, 2012 at 1:33 AM

Understand, but it still solves NOTHING.

Take this for some thought:
Instead of micro stamping, how about we just have the gun fired when it is bought and then that can be put into the database of some sorts. No need to re tool a plant.

Again, take a look at the flaws in that. You can file the barrel to change it just as you could by removing the micro stamp.

I guess the point is, this has nothing to do with making it easier to solve crimes. Most people that commit the crime with their own firearm most likely are going to get caught anyways.

Just a bad idea with too many question marks on it. Reminds me of the cigarette tax, said it was to help curb smoking yet the real reason was more tax income.

watertown on October 7, 2012 at 1:58 AM

And no, I do not own a fire arm nor a bow. Something I ponder the way things are going. I know people that I can drive to and within minutes, buy a gun. Not registered.

watertown on October 7, 2012 at 2:00 AM

I know! I know!

DNA/Iris Sure Fire Identity Technology (DISFIT)

Completely gets rid of the trigger!

You place your eye up against the scope for iris ID and then you spit into a receptacle in the side of the gun stock. A wireless transmitter relays the info to the local community organizer office to verify you as the gun owner.

If there’s a match, the returning message trips the microchip to initiate firing the trigger.

If there’s a definite mismatch, the gun backfires, disabling the user, while a SWAT team is notified of the gun’s GPS coords.

If there’s a bad reading “PLEASE SPIT AGAIN” flashes in the gunsight.

/super genius

Shy Guy on October 7, 2012 at 2:24 AM

Pointing out the frailties of microstamping is kind of pointless in a reality where people fail to exploit the frailties of guns all the time. The fallacy of these arguments is that they assume perfect rationality in a world that clearly doesn’t have it.

1) Yes, guns can be fired in a way that doesn’t leave shell casings at the scene of the crime. Yet, how many crime scenes that involved guns don’t have shell casings?

2) Yes, firing pins are easy to replace. Yet, how many people replace their firing pins, or customize their guns in any other way? Also, by requiring all firing pins sold in the state to be microstamped, the idea of getting rid of the firing pin that way because MOST criminals aren’t going to go out of state to swap the firing pin.

3) Yes, microstamping is easily defaced. So are the serial numbers on the gun itself, yet how many guns recovered at crime scenes have their serial numbers filed off?

4) Yes, microstamping is incredibly fragile. Yet, how many people actually fire their weapons on a regular basis?

5) Yes, microstamping is easily spoofed. So this is an argument to not arrest or convict a suspect on microstamping evidence alone, but it does not preclude using it to help build a case against him.

Nobody thinks you’re going to catch master criminals with microstamping. Arguing against microstamping is like arguing against gun registration and fees – does it effectively raise the cost of gun ownership? Yes. Does it help law enforcement? Undoubtedly yes. Does it actually infringe on the right of people to own and bear firearms? No.

Arguments as to cost are irrelevant as the effects of economies-of-scale ramp up.

solatic on October 7, 2012 at 2:38 AM

While you can make them, they end up not being high quality, reliable and long lasting. At least not with $5,000 in equipment. You can make them, but I would not trust my life to one when given the alternative of a mass produced at a state of the art manufacturing facility weapon.

astonerii on October 6, 2012 at 7:55 PM

What was the ‘state of the art’ facility in 1900?

Plenty of fine firearms have survived from that era where simple lathe copying was utilized. Steel billets you can get today are as of high a quality or higher than the ones you could get from that era. Quality was given in tolerances of working parts, and one of the problems of some designs from that era were not being able to keep to the tight tolerances called for by the designers.

By the 1930′s the tolerances had tightened up to a degree, as well as alloys of steel, and that latter has changed only fractionally since then. I would put it to you that the tolerances of a modern lathe and mill, with DROs and CNC machining software are as high as the 1930′s and the metals just a bit better due to more precise measurements of what goes into the alloys.

The home system may not be up to modern designs, but think of what was available from the 1900-1930 time range, which includes the beloved M1911 and M1911A1 to the Ma-Deuce to the BAR to the Auto-5 to the first 357 Magnum revolvers… to a whole bunch of designs from Lugar, Mauser, Winchester, Colt, Remington and more from lever action guns through SA to FA designs. Designers, time, use and wear have tested designs and only once the metal fatigues to the point of unreliability does anyone have any concerns, and that is only through poor storage, cleaning and use of the guns involved. If you can reach those tolerances with better metal alloys, is that ‘good enough’? Is an M1911A1 ‘good enough’? A Ma-Deuce, of which the US military is still using receivers made in the 1930′s? If these were the ONLY designs that could be done today, not something like a chrome lined barrel for a .223 and a receiver done out of aluminum that Stoner would be able to utilize, then would ONLY designs between in the 1900 to pre-WWII era be ‘good enough’?

Machining is tolerances, precision and good stock to work with. A modern production facility can turn out a high volume and much higher tolerances, yes… and yet the M1911 STILL gets made to this day and is parts compatible with its pre-WWII predecessors. Once you get to some of the most popular firearms on the planet, then you have something that should be ‘good enough’ for daily use. And considering that the off-the-shelf machine tool hardness is as good or better than that era, then what, exactly, is the problem with the home CNC arrangement? Is it that you still require blank feed-stock? Because we are coming to the era of the home forge and making one’s own castings.

There is no magic done at factories, save testing for tolerances and precision. Factories will always have their place for mass-produced parts, don’t get me wrong, but the stuff that can be done today has led to new start-ups that are pushing their States to get them out of the federal system, and they want to be able to offer local customers those designs without the overhead of federal regulation. MT, UT, WY and others are joining to do that since the militia is a local concern for the States.

I do like many modern produced weapons, do not get me wrong, but, as Feynman said, there is plenty of room for growth at the low end. Just like it used to be when we first became a Nation. If you back capitalism, distributed production, entrepreneurship, innovation and competition then backing those wishing to secure liberty and be able to offer goods for sale based on how good they can do the job must be supported. Let the marketplace decide what is ‘good enough’ and what isn’t. Give the big boys some competition, because the era of having to sink a half-million into procurement just to get the basics is long, long, long gone. Dedication to acquiring skill, craftsmanship and quality should be the touchstones, not huge factory space… because competition needs to be encouraged, not written off. If the big boys are so great then they should have no problem handling competition at the local level, right? Supporting liberty, freedom and all that stuff means encouraging innovation and craftsmanship, not denigrating it. Because it is competition that gets you better designs, new approaches and methods, and a lower cost over time.

Yes I do love firearms.

I want the very best that can be made, which requires a market welcoming to competition that can grow with excellence. And sometimes the niche players, like LW Seecamp, can be so innovative that the Glocks of the world have to pay out for years for it. Just one old gunsmith who emigrated to the US before WWII, churning out self-defense pistols at very high tolerances with a striker design… and the big boys had to pay through the nose for that until the patents ran out. And if we only get one more innovation from enhanced competition that becomes a widely adopted standard for the industry, then isn’t it worth it to let the market open up at the bottom?

ajacksonian on October 7, 2012 at 7:11 AM

ajacksonian on October 7, 2012 at 7:11 AM

Well, you know more than me about fire arm manufacture. Pretty much all the stuff I work on they use forgings, rolled parts, lots of non destructive testing, edm, and as little physical cutting machining as possible, because the lathe cuts and mill cuts actually end up being the most prone to failure.

astonerii on October 7, 2012 at 8:13 AM

Does it actually infringe on the right of people to own and bear firearms? No.

Arguments as to cost are irrelevant as the effects of economies-of-scale ramp up.

solatic on October 7, 2012 at 2:38 AM

Of course it infringes moron. Additional cost is an infringement.

astonerii on October 7, 2012 at 8:22 AM

Sorry about last night, Oldnuke, Cozmo…for some reason the LIGHT MIST storm that rolled in here last night was just enough to play hob with the power (dimmed lights etc) so i shut my system down before i could sign off properly.

My UPS system is dead and I have strict rules about running the network without it in place…as in “Dont do it!”.

BlaxPac on October 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM

You know, i think I almost forgot to mention…

Sureeee, Micro-stamping sounds like a KEEN idea, except for 2 problems:

1 – Two words: Case-less Ammo…which 20 years ago was very all high tech and all, especially when HK introduced the G-11…I’m sure it’s a little more mainstream now.

So whats to stop Remington from just joining Winchester, Federal, etc in the Ammo business and mass produce the stuff?

Problem Solved, Problem STAYING Solved.

2 – Isn’t it more dangerous and expensive to weaken the tip of the pin due to all the slamming against primers? Especially if i don’t have the tools or the tech to swap out a “Range Pin” for a “Duty Carry” pin. And even if i do, why the BLEEP should I?

BlaxPac on October 7, 2012 at 8:44 AM

Microstamping does not work because firing pins are inexpensive and easy to replace. The firing pin for most weapons are easily replaced by someone with a minimum of ability to read and follow the basic cleaning directions for his firearm. The expense of millions of dollars in retooling is thwarted by the purchase of a $12 part.
Microstamping does not work because the stamping is easily defaced. It would take a matter of a half-dozen passes of a standard diamond file, and less than a minute, to eradicate the microstamping.
Microstamping is incredibly fragile. The stamping would wear out over time through simple use of the firearm, or be thwarted by the normal powder residue that builds up on small parts.

All of this will require a new “Office of Firearms Inspections.” Every year, for the minimal price of $50 per firearm, you drop the weapon off at the firearms inspection office. Withing 6-12 weeks a certified firearms inspector will look at the firing pin and ensure it has a proper, readable, microstamp. If the stamp is incorrect, or of low quality, the inspector will replace the firing pin for a mandatory $500 fee, or you surrender the weapon. If the stamp is readable, the inspector will certify the weapon for 12 months from the date of drop off.

Think that is far fetched? But, it’s for the safety of the CHIIIIIIIIILDRUUUUUUUUUUUUN!

tdarrington on October 7, 2012 at 8:49 AM

Let’s also have a law that serializes brass casings. If you have a weapon that does not auto-eject, you must turn in the used brass with all serials accounted for before you can purchase new ammo.

This is how “Progressives” work. If you can’t force people not to do something (Cigarettes), Tax it, fee it, and make it so inconvenient to do, that people just stop doing it. It might take 30 years, but guns will be regulated out of citizen’s hands, and the 2nd amendment will be an archaic thing kids read in the old Constitution. Progressives are patient, but they always get their way.

tdarrington on October 7, 2012 at 8:57 AM

From the state that brought you the 10 lb Glock trigger from hell!

And didn’t NY also insist on the magazine-firing pin disconnect?

Both are idiotic but luckily easily fixable with amateur gunsmithing skill.

CorporatePiggy on October 7, 2012 at 9:07 AM

The stupidest idea of the day.

Bmore on October 7, 2012 at 12:00 AM

Right up there with Clinton declaring rifles with flash suppressors, folding stocks and pistol grips as “evil.”

TugboatPhil on October 7, 2012 at 9:08 AM

oryguncon on October 7, 2012 at 1:23 AM

That’s why I don’t already have the PK380.

I read up on the recall and the other issues with the firearm. I don’t like that it isn’t really a Walther, but a design of the parent company branded Walther because of Walther’s reputation.

However, the pistol has all the other features I wanted; larger grip, external hammer and an easier to operate safety. The size works well for my wife and daughter and the controls work for both left and right handed shooters (my daughter is left handed). Being the first new gun purchase in twenty years, I have been taking my time. Its not just for me, but something that has to impress the two most important women in my life.

cozmo on October 7, 2012 at 9:32 AM

And people are panicking about a Bark EO enacting another EBR Ban.

I spent several hours trying to by a high quality AR lower the other day. Panic buying * 1000 is going on.

CorporatePiggy on October 7, 2012 at 9:34 AM

Sorry about last night, Oldnuke, Cozmo…

BlaxPac on October 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM

Don’t worry about it. I almost never say goodnight. I just wander off and forget I was talking to people :-)

Oldnuke on October 7, 2012 at 9:58 AM

The stupidest idea of the day.

Bmore on October 7, 2012 at 12:00 AM

Right up there with Clinton declaring rifles with flash suppressors, folding stocks and pistol grips as “evil.”

TugboatPhil on October 7, 2012 at 9:08 AM

Let’s face it. This is just one more idiotic move by the fools in New York to circumvent the 2nd. Armed citizens are dangerous, just like informed citizens. Remember the powder tagging movement that was started a while ago? Although I think that was federal and not state.

Oldnuke on October 7, 2012 at 10:03 AM

BlaxPac on October 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM

No worries on that account.

cozmo on October 7, 2012 at 10:04 AM

This has noting to do with tracing firearms and everything with trying to surpress the manufacture of firearms in NY state.

LCT688 on October 6, 2012 at 11:38 PM

If that’s the case, and I believe it is, then Remington should “bite the bullet” and move the facility to a “friendly” state. Then NY can microstamp every dollar of revenue they lose.

Finbar on October 7, 2012 at 10:14 AM

solatic on October 7, 2012 at 2:38 AM

You are missing two key points.

1. This requirement is yet another barrier to entry for new manufacturers. Governments love legislating and regulating barriers to entry into manufacture of goods they don’t like or where they have established cronies.

2. It forces Remington and other NY manufacturers into competitive disadvantage in interstate commerce. If I, as a gun enthusiast in Texas, do not like the idea of having a microstamped firing pin, I will not consider purchasing a gun made in NY.

stvnscott on October 7, 2012 at 10:23 AM

It forces Remington and other NY manufacturers into competitive disadvantage in interstate commerce. If I, as a gun enthusiast in Texas, do not like the idea of having a microstamped firing pin, I will not consider purchasing a gun made in NY.

I picked up an M&P made somewhere in Yankeeland with the Magazine disconnect simply because the price was a steal. 5 minutes was all it took to fix that ‘safety feature’.

It’ll be interesting if this goes through. Remington could simply decide to drastically reduce what they sell in NY.

Many smaller manufacturers will not ship ANY of their products to NY, IL, CA, HA, or CT. It was a strategic decision and they’re doing just fine…

And as for those who are saying this is deliberate and part of the long game, yes…it is absolutely.

CorporatePiggy on October 7, 2012 at 10:30 AM

Haven’t read the thread, but couldn’t a criminal ‘drop’ casings from a similar caliber gun at a murder scene…pick some up at a shooting range etc.
Another bright idea from the government brain of unintended consequences. A solution in search of a problem.

Mimzey on October 7, 2012 at 10:40 AM

More nanny state micro-management, akin to the over-regulation of tobacco.

Tobacco itself is not outlawed, but it’s use is either prohibitively expensive or banned in public.

Perhaps if libs taxed guns n ammo to raise money for schools, they’d get all woody about firearms…

locomotivebreath1901 on October 7, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Perhaps if libs taxed guns n ammo to raise money for schools, they’d get all woody about firearms…

locomotivebreath1901 on October 7, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Are you on the lib payroll?

cozmo on October 7, 2012 at 10:57 AM

Stupid people implementing stupid law. It’s what the U.S. government is.

I suggest to everyone in the surrounding Philadelphia area: If you are considering “freedom enhancement” devices. One of the biggest shows is happening today.

Oct 6-7 Philadelphia (Center Oaks) Greater Philadelphia Expo Center, MAP 422 Business Center, Oaks, Pa. 19456 Featuring 700 8′ Tables

Dollar off coupon: http://www.gunshows-usa.com/images/Banners/Eagle%20Arms/Eagle%20Coupon%20Page.htm

- When they come for your guns. Give ‘em the bullets first. -

ROCnPhilly on October 7, 2012 at 11:04 AM

“That’s the new threat: to move where that [gun] friendly state is,” she said. “It’s unfair of them to resist sensible regulation to save lives. It does not impact lawful gun ownership at all.”

Awesome! She was able to work fairness into it!

Come to Texas, Remington. We will greet you with lower taxes, an adoring populace, a strong workforce, and very few stupid laws and regulations with which to hold you back.

stvnscott on October 7, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Of course it infringes moron. Additional cost is an infringement.

astonerii on October 7, 2012 at 8:22 AM

Also, his assumption that it “undoubtedly…helps law enforcement” is not borne by the facts. It might help and he assumes it will to bolster his argument. Not much bolster there.

swinia sutki on October 7, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Come to Texas Remington,

Seconded

CorporatePiggy on October 7, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Every modern computer printer prints a microcode on every page that ties it to the printer that it was printed on. That tech has been in place for years, now.

Most people don’t know about it, but if you want to commit a crime, best not to use a computer printer to do it with, at least not your own. ;-)

HopeHeFails on October 7, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Sureeee, Micro-stamping sounds like a KEEN idea, except for 2 problems:

1 – Two words: Case-less Ammo…which 20 years ago was very all high tech and all, especially when HK introduced the G-11…I’m sure it’s a little more mainstream now.

So whats to stop Remington from just joining Winchester, Federal, etc in the Ammo business and mass produce the stuff?

HK didn’t introduce the G11. It didn’t go anywhere due to standardization with NATO.

Except for Voere rifles, and a very few prototypes with semi-caseless new stuff, everything ist still cased ammo. It’s not mainstream because caseless ammo offers very few advantages at this time over the standardization of cased.

HK was able to deal with the overheating issues on the G11, but caseless just hasn’t caught on anywhere.

2 – Isn’t it more dangerous and expensive to weaken the tip of the pin due to all the slamming against primers? Especially if i don’t have the tools or the tech to swap out a “Range Pin” for a “Duty Carry” pin. And even if i do, why the BLEEP should I?

BlaxPac on October 7, 2012 at 8:44 AM

Probably not, but the microstamp will probably be marred, blurred, damaged, or outright destroyed just through normal wear and tear.

Plus, with minor differences even between each individual gun, there will be variables that still lead to microstamping destruction… which means every part has to be made custom to make sure the microstamp isn’t destroyed, leading to greater cost – manufacturers estimate about $200 extra per firearm.

Of course, it’s a scam by the patent holder to force regulations onto an industry so he can profit:

http://thepatriotperspective.wordpress.com/2012/10/07/whats-missing-in-the-microstamping-debate-its-a-scam-by-patent-owner-todd-lizotte/

CPL 310 on October 7, 2012 at 12:03 PM

It involves the Remington Arms plant located in Ilion, a village in upstate New York. They are currently battling a pending move by the state government which would force them to put laser etched microstamps on the firing pins of all their weapons, driving costs through the roof.

Time for Remington Arms to move their plant to another state.

NY is trying to drive them out of business.

farsighted on October 7, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Texas is a great place to manufacture guns. You’ll save a ton on shipping costs. You know we’re gonna buy ‘em all anyway…

john1schn on October 7, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Remington should “bite the bullet” and move the facility to a “friendly” state. Then NY can microstamp every dollar of revenue they lose.

Finbar on October 7, 2012 at 10:14 AM

I’m still more than a little surprised to hear that by 2012, NY hasn’t found a way to legislate Remington out of the state.

These idiots think 32 oz soft-drinks and salt are friggin’ catastrophic.

Who knew Remington was making American Firearms there?

I swear….libs just friggin’ baffle me.

Tim_CA on October 7, 2012 at 12:38 PM

These clowns are always full of good ideas about what will reduce gun crime in the future. They are always wrong, and are never held to account for their failure — because it doesn’t matter, right? It never is, never was about reducing crime.

Kenosha Kid on October 7, 2012 at 1:06 PM

LCT688 on October 6, 2012 at 11:38 PM

Anyone who can read can destroy micro-stamping in five minutes with a nail file or emory board.

I’m only an amateur gun mechanic, but I can make a perfectly suitable firing pin from steel stock with a file. Heat-treating for hardness is not problem either.

The ignoramuses and idiots defending this political effort to increase the cost of firearms and discourage their manufacture should inform themselves or seek brain transplants.

novaculus on October 7, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Microstamping legislation is being pushed by the inventor of the process, Todd Lizotte. He stands to make millions if he can get it passed.
Here is his self serving defense of it. There are some serious flaws in his statements. This one really stood out to me:

Firing a revolver accurately takes more skill than a semi-auto handgun. And when you have no skill at all in firing, odds are you are going to be limited in the damage you can cause.
Another point is revolvers are “dual action”; the criminal has to pull the trigger fully for each round fired where as semi-auto are typically single action firearms.

single stack on October 7, 2012 at 1:35 PM

Look, I will be putting a mark next to the guy’s name. But I sure as hell am not sold on him not having dramatic unintended consequences that destroys conservative values along the way.

astonerii on October 6, 2012 at 5:50 PM

Thank you. I believe if elected, Romney will do as well as anyone could to restore America to prosperity. I don’t think anyone would be able to enact the level of governmental austerity you desire, because there are too many people who have half-baked left wing ideas and live in left wing states which elect left wing representatives. Some compromise will be necessary. At least if Romney wins, the oval office will be trying to reign in spending, which is far from the current case.

I truly believe Romney has the best chance of anyone that ran this cycle of getting the US to a balanced budget. Here’s hoping he gets a chance.

talkingpoints on October 6, 2012 at 7:05 PM

It was like this right out of the gate after the American Rev0lution was over.
People mainly suck & there are those who cannot stand other people doing things they don’t agree with & therefore wish to control them.
The truth of the matter is, is that barring distinct UnConstitutional encroachments, the state, at the behest of its people, can pass any laws they damned well please. It’s what America is.
So there are just some places where living there is going to suck bcs the people in the community suck.
I know bcs I live in an area like this. Whiners about wanting to be free, but little lock step socialists in the end.
And lots of crooked a$$holes around every corner.
IDK what it is about farmers, but where I live, there’s a lot of really $hitty crooked ones, ready to screw you over at every turn then smile to your face in church like nothing happened.
The ideal Republic is never going to exist.
There’s always going to be conflict & always going to be socialist who try & steal our freedom.
I do not believe Mitt is one of those people. He is merely someone who brings together others to work together to move things along a reasonable path.
FDR was right in that you will NEVER get rid of programs like Social Security.
It’s a vote buyer. People get old & then they get scared about what’s going to happen to them when it used to be you took care of yourself & didn’t alienate your family bcs you were going to need them.
Regarding this gun issue, no one in America should have to register their weapons with the Federal Govt.
Yeah I know there’s some scaredy cats who don’t understand how guns work & bcs they’re emotional & whiney they want them all gone.
And then we’ve got people saying no one needs an AK 47, machine gun, etc.
IN the end, it’s not your right to judge WTF I am buying, so long as I am not trying to harm my fellow man.

Badger40 on October 7, 2012 at 1:55 PM

And then we’ve got people saying no one needs an AK 47, machine gun, etc.
IN the end, it’s not your right to judge WTF I am buying, so long as I am not trying to harm my fellow man.

Badger40 on October 7, 2012 at 1:55 PM

The right to bear arms is intended to stop the encroachment of the government. We should be able to have as top of the line hardware as the government is able to bring to bear against us.

astonerii on October 7, 2012 at 2:30 PM

All the defects are obvious, but apparently not to legislators. It reminds me of Obamacare. We need to put the voter back in the loop (referendum).

reidmj@austin.rr.com on October 7, 2012 at 3:17 PM

The right to bear arms is intended to stop the encroachment of the government. We should be able to have as top of the line hardware as the government is able to bring to bear against us.

astonerii on October 7, 2012 at 2:30 PM

I’d go so far as to require training by the National Guard. Not to keep people from owning them, but to ensure that people who purchase such weapons know how to use them. How about THAT for a deterrent on government encroachment?

Plus the armed forces is pretty good at filtering out screwballs.

MelonCollie on October 7, 2012 at 6:17 PM

Plus the armed forces is pretty good at filtering out screwballs.

MelonCollie on October 7, 2012 at 6:17 PM

Used to be… Not so much any more.

astonerii on October 7, 2012 at 6:32 PM

This is just another way for “gun-Grabbers” to reduce law abiding citizens from carrying and owning guns. Those of you that agree this is a “good” idea, please don’t call us gun owners when your are being robbed, raped, or your home is being invaded. Just call 911 – and hope you’re now placed on hold. Remember this: when you have seconds to live – the police are only minutes away!

If Remington is required to micro stamp, I hope they close and move to another state. I will not buy any firearm with micro stamping.

sigsauer on October 7, 2012 at 7:42 PM

This mico stamping is comparable to the people who believe in chemtrails.

mixplix on October 7, 2012 at 8:08 PM

It’s just another liberal extension into the nanny state if, for no other reason, than to make other people’s lives miserable and to give the liberal proposing it a “warm fuzzy feeling of accomplishment.” Of course, this stupid stamping won’t work and, of course, it will drive American gun makers out of business-but isn’t a “warm, fuzzy felling” (which you can also get with a six pack of beer) more important?

Obviously if there are no guns made here we’ll all have to make purchases of AK-47′s and successor weaponry manufactured by Russians and Eastern Europe.. You remember, from the Eastwood movie that an AK-47 makes a “very distinctive sound when being fired at you” (a high pitched whine-just like a liberal.)

MaiDee on October 7, 2012 at 9:21 PM

The writer here should have mentioned another major point (and maybe another poster has said this). Remington makes very guns typically used in crimes. Most crimes are committed with handguns, not pump or semi-auto shotguns used for hunting. Also, Remington’s hunting rifles and other guns just are not favored by criminals.

BillCarson on October 7, 2012 at 10:39 PM

They want to reduce gun crimes?

They would have to arrest members of the Obama Party base, and we all know that’s not going to happen under this administration, this Obama Party, and this DOJ.

When society starts cracking down on the criminals, not the instruments, then you’ll see improvement.

northdallasthirty on October 7, 2012 at 11:29 PM

Just a thought.

Like fingerprints, once the criminal element becomes aware of the device they will take precautions to mitigate the usefulness of it, if it poses an actual threat. To think that knowledgable criminals, who actually view their criminal activity as a career, even a short one, would not take the steps needed would be ludicrous and those criminals who don’t really care just won’t.

So like fingerprints, microstamping might lead to some convictions for gun crimes, but it would hardly be a panacea. Now factor in the real humbug factor — some firearms the firing pin is not readily replaceable, in others it is readily (even if knowledgeable person has to do it) — which is how to keep the “system” valid.

Pins can be changed or exchanged. Brass can be covertly collected. You have a shooting and the brass from several different guns are found (and if this was Columbo, the shooter would be smart enough to not leave any brass). Without the shooter and proving that he/she used a particular gun, microstamping would be kind of useless. Not totally, after all a solid investigation can turn up enough clues to clear the mess but the idea that microstamping would be a game changer seems far fetched.

Russ808 on October 8, 2012 at 1:13 AM

But…what we’re talking about here is a change to the way firing pins are manufactured, a serialization process that once brought to production volumes should have minimal impact on cost.

Idiotic nonsense.

This is a completely useless proposal for the simple fact that a cheap file would render the “micro-whoopitydoo” totally irrelevant and worthless in under a minute, or a bench grinder or a Dremel™-type tool in seconds.

Of course, the next step would be for Big Brother to enact laws prohibiting such manipulation with draconian minimum sentences required, and then we can set about building more prisons AGAIN. We’ve already got a huge number of able-bodied souls incarcerated at our expense; what’s needed are more work farms/facilities for non-violent and non-serial offenders.

LEAVE OUR GUNS ALONE, YOU IGNORANT POWER-CRAZY BASTAGES! The Second Amendment says nothing about making guns prohibitively expensive, but a half-decent lawyer should be able to smash any such proposed law through the legal system, if all of our Federal Judges aren’t left-wing tools by the time the case would get there.

Any governor who would sign such a measure should be recalled forthwith.

hillbillyjim on October 8, 2012 at 2:51 AM

Bring it on!
Create a black market for drop in replacement firing pins.

kregg on October 8, 2012 at 7:53 AM

I’m a Californian, and as much as the behavior of our Air Resources Board and various other agencies is clearly reprehensible, I’m bound by principle to say that we have the right to screw ourselves and can’t expect the Feds to save us.

JEM on October 7, 2012 at 1:33 AM

That’s great in theory, but in reality CA will expect to be bailed out from its own mess. And, more than likely, it will be. I can’t imagine any president/congress allowing a state to go bankrupt, etc. I wish they would, but way too much political downside to allow it to happen.

Monkeytoe on October 8, 2012 at 8:58 AM

The bottom line here is that you have to both put yourself into the mind of a criminal the read basic military strategy as espoused by the Chinese war expert Sun Tzu-”know your enemy” etc. At best this unbelievably dumb proposal might nab a few passion inspired killings (husband shoots wife’s lover in bedroom)-but almost always dumb or emotionally wrought criminals will be caught by other evidence anyway because they did not carefully plan their crimes.

But EVERY SINGLE preplanned crime involving a gun will be done with a WEAPON WITHOUT AN ID-IMBEDDED FIRING PIN-1 Either the millions of guns issued BEFORE the installation of the incriminating firing pin or 2 the HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of guns on the illegal gun market, foreign manufactured, with not only the absence of a tell-tale pin but, in many cases, no other ID as well such as serial number.

This whole idiotic proposal is “make do work” for liberal legislators with too much time on their hands. It is also another nail the coffin for the death of liberty.

MaiDee on October 8, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Sucks for Remington, but I wouldn’t buy a new Remington anyways. Ever since they were taken over by the Freedom Group, quality control has gone into the crapper.

When Marlin production got moved to the NY Remington plant, they suddenly couldn’t even bother screwing the barrels on straight before shipping the gun out. Those who returned them waited months only to have it come back even worse than before.

I guess they’re more interested in cranking out cheap, shoddy 770 rifles that sell for $279 at Wal Mart than the quality product they used to produce.

Hollowpoint on October 8, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Hollowpoint on October 8, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Shades of Sig pistols.

I’ve got a West German one and compared it to an ‘American made’ one.

It’s like comparing a Chevy Volt to a Porsche.

CorporatePiggy on October 8, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Remington move to Ohio…. we need the jobs & our Govenor does not suck

charmingtail on October 8, 2012 at 12:05 PM

If this is implemented, Remington would have to either reduce production or close the plant anyway.

Who’s going to buy a gun manufactured in NY?

TerryW on October 8, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Microstamping is only one part of the equation. The only way any of this works is by requiring gun registration. There will need to be a record of my personal information associated to each firearm I own and its matching microstamp ID.

The cost of re-tooling for manufacturers and consumer would only be one part of the cost. The state will have the responsibility of operating and maintaining a central database system (computer hardware and software) for all firearm registration. Not only will the cost be an additional burden to tax payers but other major ethical and privacy concerns will become an issue –
Who controls the data? What data will be public information? In what circumstances will the data be available for law enforcement (ie can they do a search for registered firearms of a certain caliber in a specific geographic area?)? What is to guarantee the information will be secure?

I don’t know about the laws of other states, but in Texas gun registration is foreign to us. Having a CHL, I can walk into any gun store, purchase a couple AR15s and walkout only having shown my ID…no paperwork, no registration. Gun registration is a line I will not cross. Does the state of NY already maintain a gun registration database?

John2A on October 8, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Hmmm, to add, that everyone does realize that since the firing pin is manufactured as a separate item from the rest of the firearm (and them assembled) that another not insiginificant burden that would be imposed (if the system is to remain valid) is to make sure the right firing pin is installed in the right gun.

There would be a real problem with mismatches simply because there would be no way or, at least, no easy way for a particular gun to be examined and the validity (correctness) of the information on the firing pin to be established. A gun goes to a gunsmith for cleaning and/or repairs and what comes back may or may not have the same firing pin. If the firing pin broke or was worn down and needed replacement then you have to have a properly inscribed firing pin ordered and, even then, unless the gunsmith or whoever was doing the job had the proper equipment they would have to take it on faith that the proper firing pin was sent to them.

That would almost be like requiring that every jet engine not only have a serial number (which is recorded when installed on an aircraft, the way it is now) but rather a jet engine that has or also includes the serial number of the aircraft, in addition to its own serial number, it is going to be installed on before the engine leaves the factory.

Russ808 on October 8, 2012 at 1:41 PM

2. It forces Remington and other NY manufacturers into competitive disadvantage in interstate commerce. If I, as a gun enthusiast in Texas, do not like the idea of having a microstamped firing pin, I will not consider purchasing a gun made in NY.

stvnscott on October 7, 2012 at 10:23 AM

Congratulations, you just made every liberal’s point that all commerce, nowadays, is interstate commerce and that therefore Congress has the right to regulate every kind of commerce (like healthcare). After all, if one state regulation makes that state’s producers disadvantaged, why not disadvantage the producers of all fifty states?

I mean, if you’re going to look at it that way – that regulation inherently produces disadvantages – let’s just have a society with no regulations. I’m sure that will be just swell. /sarcastic

solatic on October 8, 2012 at 3:22 PM

It’s hard to see how this will kill the domestic gun industry. Overseas made weapons, presumably, would have to comply also.

Somehow this seems like a red herring. How much data can you imprint on a firing pin that would allow for say 50 million unique numbers and still transfer to the primer? This wole gambit sounds like wishful thinking by the anti-gun lobby.

The “problem guns” they are after are those used in gang shootings which are almost never registered to the owner. So you know the gun used to belong to Sam Smith and was reported stolen five years before. That solves nothing!

This is just pie in the sky thinking.

Corky Boyd on October 9, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3