Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Video & Multimedia
Showing Original Post only (View all)A Sensible Safe Smart Gun Law - Guess Who Hates It [View all]
The Young Turks ·Published on Jan 26, 2014
"Gun manufacturer Smith & Wesson refused Thursday to comply with California's controversial "microstamping" law, causing more of its products to fall off the state's permissible firearms list and be ineligible for sale.
In a two-page statement on its website, Smith & Wesson criticized Assembly Bill 1471, which requires new or redesigned semiautomatic weapons to carry microstamping technology, imprinting its make, model and serial number onto shell casings when a bullet is fired.
Though the law was passed in 2007, language in the legislation stipulated it would go into effect when the necessary technology was widely available. It was not enacted until May 2013."* The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down.
*Read more here from Kate Mather / LA Times
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
46 replies, 3789 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (14)
ReplyReply to this post
46 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Gun fanciers say it doesn't work. I think they are afraid they might pull a Zimmerman and
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#1
If those objections were valid, don't you think S&W would have referenced them in their anouncement?
baldguy
Jan 2014
#9
Gotta take the long-term view. Nothing works all the time, and if we don't start somewhere
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#11
I'm for gun fanciers starting to act "responsibly" with society's best interests in mind, rather
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#18
When gun fanciers stop whining about it. Fact is, I think you guys are afraid of anything that
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#23
Until they invent gun barrels that do not wear, it will not get better.
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2014
#24
The quest for preventing gun violence is not worthless. Gun owners won't stop gun use, so
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#26
Personally, I'm for any hoops that might make you guys stop buying/carrying/promoting gunz.
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#30
Apparently, some local governments think it is a good idea, notwithstanding the whining.
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#36
You mean 'notwithstanding the complete ineffectiveness as a law enforcement tool'?
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2014
#38
That is your opinion. I think it is effective, as do these companies and some states.
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#39
How is one solved crime, ever, an 'effective' law enforcment tool, at a cost of 2.6mill?
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2014
#40
Not exactly, but it is not in society's best interests for you and a bunch of gun fanciers to
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#43
Difficult to get "traction" from right wing gun owners, and they are the majority.
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#45
And, if they get caught with altered gun, they can't have anymore. Problem solved for that miscreant
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#27
Yeah, I'm really concerned about any hassles the poor, pitiful gun fancier is put through.
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#31
Like gunners stance on microstamping, you are not likely to get any meaningful "AID" from them.
Hoyt
Jan 2014
#35
If you want to know why it's opposed, ask the Police in CA why they are exempt.
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2014
#19