Posts Tagged microstamping

Micro Stamping Law Upheld In California

From Guns.com:

California’s high court on Thursday sided with the state in a long-running case brought by firearms industry groups who say the state’s microstamping requirement is unattainable.

“Impossibility can occasionally excuse noncompliance with a statute,” Justice Goodwin Liu said for the majority. “But impossibility does not authorize a court to go beyond interpreting a statute and simply invalidate it.”

, , , ,

No Comments

Smith and Wesson Second Company to Stop Selling Guns in California

From The Washington Times:

Smith & Wesson announced it will stop selling its handguns in California rather than manufacture them to comply with the new microstamping law. The other publicly traded firearms manufacturer in the U.S., Sturm, Ruger, also said this month that it will stop new sales to California.

The announcement late Wednesday came a week after the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for firearms manufacturers, filed suit against California for requiring that all new semi-automatic pistols that are not already on the state’s approved gun roster have the microstamping technology.

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

NRA News: Microstamping

, , , , ,

No Comments

The Results of Microstamping

From the NRA

, , , , ,

No Comments

Califonia Microstamping Law Causes Ruger and Smith & Wesson To Stop Selling Guns In State

From FoxNews:

“Smith & Wesson does not and will not include microstamping in its firearms,” the Springfield, Mass.,-based manufacturer said in a statement. “A number of studies have indicated that microstamping is unreliable, serves no safety purpose, is cost prohibitive and, most importantly, is not proven to aid in preventing or solving crimes.”

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

NSSF and SAAMI Sue To Stop Microstaming Law

From NSSF:

“There is no existing microstamping technology that will reliably, consistently and legibly imprint the required identifying information by a semiautomatic handgun on the ammunition it fires. The holder of the patent for this technology himself has written that there are problems with it and that further study is warranted before it is mandated

, , ,

No Comments