Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.6.2
Site Design by Sekimori

« Media and emergencies | Main | Markup of GCA reform bills »

Brady & Calif hearings on microstamping

Posted by David Hardy · 24 May 2006 01:22 PM

Brady Campaign rejoices that a proposal for gun microstamping (putting tiny engravings on the firing pin to mark cartridges fired from the gun) has been shown to function.

Of course, the real issue is how little effort is required to defeat the measure. With a .45 and a spare firing pin, I'd say about 2-3 minutes. If they microstamp the bolt face, then it'd take a spare slide and about 45 seconds. And if you can't get the spare parts, I suspect a 15 second pass with a Dremel mototool would do the job.

[UPDATE: Refugee notes in comments that a legislator says they had a guy remove 70 microns from the firing pin tip and the marking were still visible. I've hunted around to get an idea of whether 70 microns is significant enough to where removing more would cause a malfunction. It doesn't look that way. This webpage on the Steyr Scout says factory tolerances for firing pin protrusion are ".050" - .059" (1.3 mm – 1.5 mm)." This military manual indicates that for an M-1 tolerances are broader: "The minimum should be 0.044 inch and the maximum should be 0.0590 inch." And here's an exchange about the Remington 700, saying tolerances are .055-.060," and he used .052" but had some misfires.

I haven't found the specs for handguns, but these would indicate that the tolerances in question are at least about .2 mm, and at most over 1mm (.05"). Since a micron is a thousandth of a millimeter, seventy of them would be .07 mm. This suggests that the amount removed in the test is far less than factory tolerances would allow, let alone how far it can be taken before the gun malfunctions. You might be able to take 3-10x that much off without going out of tolerance]

7 Comments | Leave a comment

tkdkerry | May 25, 2006 11:54 AM | Reply

Of course they'll make removing the firing pin or bolt engravings prima facie evidence of a crime, just as removing the serial number is now. But we know the goblins go to great lengths to obey that law, don't we?

refugee | May 25, 2006 1:20 PM | Reply

I actually emailed Ladd Everett with the word, "sandpaper", and he emailed me back: "Dave, read Assemblyman Koretz's attached release. He went at the pin with diamond paper, took 70 microns off the tip of the firing pin, and the microstamped markers were still visible. There's a redundancy in the technology that no common "thug" (as you so elegantly put it) is going to be able to defeat, and experience tells us that the overwhelming majority won't even try..."

The press release said, "It was essential that we had an unbiased witness present who had the technical expertise to analyze whether the microstamping characters were still legible on the cartridge shell which was fired after the firing pin had been filed down. Also, we needed to use a weapon that was equipped with microstamping rather than La Suer’s own weapon.

La Suer’s absence did not deter Koretz from doing his own testing of the microstamping technology. Using several types of household files, he was unable to file off the characters. Although he was able to remove about 70 microns from the tip of the firing pin after applying a special diamond paper; expert examination with a microscope by John Rush, a Firearms and Impression Program Manager for California Criminalistics Institute, of several cartridges fired from the weapon after this filing, showed that the microstamped characters were still visible, because of the redundant feature of the microstamping system."

Now, this sounds bogus to me. Seventy microns isn't that much, and I have a hard time believing that a few swipes with 320-grit silicon carbide paper, or, indeed, a touch or two with a Dremel tool, isn't going to take off enough to obliterate the markings while still leaving the gun functional.

But I lack the technical expertise to confirm details. By how much can you shorten the average firing pin and still "bust a cap"? What about other chamber and barrel marks?

(Of course, there are other objections, like the fact that the gun is likely to be stolen, and that this is really just a registration scheme that will burden the law abiding far more than the criminal. But I'd like to nail down the details before responding.)

beerslurpy | May 25, 2006 9:09 PM | Reply

70 microns is a small fraction of a millimeter.

Look at the depth of the impression upon a primer and tell me that taking away even a full half a millimeter would stop the gun from firing. And I dont even think this would be necessary. You can merely sharpen the pin to a point to remove markings from around the edge without removing its ability to indent the primer. Or buy a spare one from out of state, etc.

If you put the markings on the bolt face, you could easily remove remove them without hindering the ability of the firearm to seat the cartridge or eject it. Most combat firearms have gaps in the bolt-face anyway to allow a frame protrusion to smack the cartridge free. You could remove plenty of material from the average bolt face without affecting functionality in the slightest.

Renegade Machinist | May 25, 2006 9:27 PM | Reply

When lathes and milling machines are outlawed...

Brad | May 26, 2006 1:01 AM | Reply

This microstamping tech is pretty pointless on a revolver. Unless of course revolvers are outlawed.

The Mechanic | May 26, 2006 1:27 PM | Reply

What's to stop a criminal fron picking up some of your microstamped brass off the range then leaving a couple at the scene of the crime!???

Renegade Machinist | May 26, 2006 6:44 PM | Reply

What's to stop a criminal fron picking up some of your microstamped brass off the range then leaving a couple at the scene of the crime!???

There will be a law against doing that.

Law enforcement will be exempt.


Leave a comment