No products in the cart.

News

California Supreme Court Upholds the Impossible Microstamping Law

By Posted June 29, 2018

Here’s liberal logic for you: Breitbart reported that the California Supreme Court upheld the state’s microstamping law on Thursday. The catch is that it’s not possible to comply with it. The technology  doesn’t exist, but the court didn’t see that as a problem. Will California soon be demanding that people use Star Trek-type transporters to get to work so their cars don’t emit greenhouse gases? The reasoning, or lack thereof,  is the same.

The court ruled: “state laws cannot be invalidated on the grounds that complying with them is impossible.”

California Supreme Court Upholds the Impossible Microstamping Law

Gun rights groups sued the state of California on the grounds that the technology doesn’t exist to allow gun manufacturers to comply with the law. But the court…and the state, believe that the law will force technology to advance. The law has been in existence since Arnold Schwartzeneggar signed it in 2007 and there’s still no technology available to do it.

What is microstamping?

The microstamping law requires that a one-of-a-kind microscopic marker be placed on the firing pins of semi-automatic weapons so that police will be able to trace a shell casing back to the gun it was fired from.

The LA Times Daily Pilot notes in an op-ed by Matthew Harper:

“The problem is that the technology is wholly unreliable and prohibitively expensive. Each time a gun is fired, it wears slightly, leaving a microstamp unreadable after a short period of normal use. On top of that, it would be easy for a criminal to swap out microstamped gun parts for ones with no markings…”

Attribution:Uncle Sam's Misguided Children

8

nancy.larned

Oath Keepers Merchandise

5 comments

    1. It means no newly issued or produced hand guns can be purchased in California unless microstamping is implemented on that weapon. Currently approved weapons on the DOJ list can still be purchased……..for now. But don’t be surprised after this ruling if the Dumorats in California try and change that. The DOJ under Kamala Harris (now US Senator) was who initiated the change to the policy when she was the Attorney General of Cal. The people had no say in the decision. The current face of the Gestapo in California AG Becerra is worse than Harris, if possible.
      The State Supreme Court ruling needs to be appealed. This kind of non-sensical thinking is typical of a Activist Judicial System of social engineering that has no place in the justice system. Common sense would normally apply that if something is not possible or available…….it can’t be regulated.

  1. I would like to point out that everyone seems to be overlooking what the word “arms” meant for the founders of the USA. Every single rifle included a bayonet for those common times when ammunition ran out or the gun jammed. This essentially meant changing the rifle into a bladed weapon, perhaps best called a spear or sword. Thus, knives are definitely included in the right to bear arms. No one in their right mind would skip having a bayonet when going into battle.. Worst case, skip the bullets, remove the firing pin and attach a bayonet. Problem solved. Idiots. They are basically forcing the issue of knives on the end of rifles to be confirmed as true “arms”.

  2. Doesn’t anyone here ( and throughout America) remember or know (as they should know) that those who serve within our governments were NEVER delegated any type of authority over the people and their weapons, not what type, not how many, etc – or any of the peoples other Rights, listed or not listed. They have NO LAWFUL authority to tell anyone what they can carry, what they cannot carry, or conceal carry, how much ammo they can have and/or store and it matters not if the state is California, Montana, Kansas, RI, MA, etc, etc. it matters not if they are SERVING WITHIN the state or federal government, they have NO LAWFUL authority.

    Our governments were created to PROTECT our rights, all of them! Even the ones not listed as stated within the Ninth Amendment:

    “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

    This was how James Madison attempt to ensure that the Bill of Rights was viewed by those who serve/ed within our governments were not only required to protect only those specific rights listed within the Bill of Rights, but all of the rights of the People, listed (enumerated) or not listed.

    Cockrum v. State: “The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the high powers delegated directly to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power”.

    “Arms restrictions – even concealed weapons bans – are unconstitutional, since arms bearing is an individual right and the legislature may not restrict any aspect of such a right.” Bliss v. Commonwealth

    This is NOT a “law”, it is “Color of Law”, pretend law, yet there are enforcers – Oath sworn to the US Constitution and to the California Constitution, and with those documents as the FIRST documents that are the contracts they MUST follow – who will unLawfully and maybe even terrorist/treasonous actions enforce them against the people.

    All of the enforcement arm, agencies and militaries too numerous to list, civil and military, stand with your country, KEEP YOUR OATH to the legitimate government, our constitutional republic. It will be, it is now, a tough thing to do, but do it you must or this nation will fall. It is a heavy burden to bear, but if this nation falls, you too, all of us, will pay the price of no more ownership, of no more deciding for ourselves and our families, of – for many of us – no more life as we will be considered threats though we were USED AGAINST our own nation and people. Think not? Then you do not now history.

    Thought this was worth putting it here again since it has been a number of years since the last time.

    Veterans of Foreign Wars: “Whereas it has been proposed that the United States of America become a part of a world federal government;
    And … this program…would entail the surrender of our national sovereignty and… bring into being a form of government whose authority would supercede that of the Constitution of The United States Government;
    And … institute a system of laws where-by American citizens could be tried by aliens in controversion of the provisions of the Constitution of the United States;
    And … the Veterans of Foreign Wars is composed solely of men who have worn the uniform of the United States on foreign shores and in hostile waters in time of war and from their personal experiences are familiar with the traditions and operations of other countries;
    And … many of our comrades rest forever in foreign soil and their sacrifices were made to retain the dignity and sovereignty of the United States of America:
    Now therefore, be it Resolved by the Fiftieth Annual Convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, That we hereby declare that we are unalterably opposed to any program which would entail the surrender of any part of the sovereignty of the United States of America in favor of a world government…”

Leave a Reply