Gun Companies Under Fire: What’s Their Next Move?

From http://cheaperthandirt.com/blog/?p=39528   2/15/2013

Firearms makers and gun-accessory manufacturers are certainly facing a hostile Senate and federal administration, but the battles aren’t all on the national stage. Several state governments are also making life difficult for firearms businesses, forcing gun and accessory makers in those states to consider moving their operations to friendlier locations. And some companies are beginning to push back, even if it costs them business. Examples:GUN-6920

In a nearby Shooter’s Log item, “What Would the World be Like Without Magpul and PMAG 30s?“, Dave Dolbee reports that “In their zeal to jump on the anti-gun agenda, lawmakers in Colorado have proposed banning the sale or manufacture of high-capacity magazines. The law would go well beyond Colorado’s borders by banning the manufacture of products to be sold out-of-state.”

In another Shooter’s Log item, “Gun Rights in Your State: The ILA and CRLDF,” CTD Scott points out, “State legislatures have more power than the federal government. Because of the smaller constituency and lobbying efforts, state governments can pass bills into laws with more ease than the U.S. Congress. So, you’re more likely to see restrictions on your gun rights come from your state than the federal government.”

Also in the Shooter’s Log, CTD Suzanne reports in the article, “Driving DPMS Out of Business: Minnesota House Bill 241,” Minnesota’s assault weapons ban would put DPMS out of business. On the company’s Facebook page, Adam Ballard, product manager at DPMS Panther Arms located in St. Cloud, said, “This bill would close our doors, put a great number of hard-working Americans out of work and infringe upon the rights of millions of lawful gun owners in Minnesota.”

However, some companies have begun pushing back against anti-gun state governments. In an item reported at GunAuction.com, competition-products retailer Creedmoor Sports has announced it will cease all operations at its Oceanside, California, location and relocate to the company’s newly acquired facilities in Anniston, Alabama. One cited reason: “Better business climate.”

Also in a report at GunAuction.com, Texas-based LaRue Tactical has changed its sales policy for state and local law-enforcement agencies. The company will only sell to local LE agencies what civilians in a given jurisdiction are allowed to own.

On the Olympic Arms Facebook page, Brian Schuetz, president of Olympic Arms, doubled down on LaRue’s policy and published this statement: “…Olympic Arms will no longer be doing business with the State of New York or any governmental entity or employee of such governmental entity within the State of New York — henceforth and until [the state’s gun-ban] legislation is repealed, and an apology made to the good people of the State of New York and the American people.” Find the full statement here.

Of course, Cheaper Than Dirt! reiterated our standing policy here.

York Arms has canceled “LE/Govt” orders in New York, as stated here.

Bob Reynolds, president of Templar Custom, Inc., has said, “We will not sell arms to agents of the state of New York that hold themselves to be ‘more equal’ than their citizens.” Read the full statement here.

EFI, LLC is a firearms manufacturer located in Inwood, West Virginia, that manufactures Heller Commemorative Rifles. Those rifles celebrate the 2008 decision by the United States Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller. The company’s government sales policy reads, in part: “The Federal Government and several states have enacted gun control laws that restrict the public from owning and possessing certain types of firearms. Law-enforcement agencies are typically exempt from these restrictions. EFI, LLC does not recognize law-enforcement exemptions to local, state, and federal gun control laws. If a product that we manufacture is not legal for a private citizen to own in a jurisdiction, we will not sell that product to a law-enforcement agency in that jurisdiction.”

 

[Update on 2-20-13. Since the original article, several other companies have joined the effort. As more companies commit, we’ll attempt to add them in a timely fashion. Woody @ CTD.]

West Fork Armory

Smith Enterprise

Alex Arms

Spike’s Tactical

Quality Arms

Liberty Suppressors

J&T Family of Companies

American Spirit Arms

Trident Armory

Head Down Products, LLC

J&G Sales

Barrett Firearms Updated Policy

Exile Machine LLC

Tier One Arms

Bravo Company USA and BCM

 

Additional Pro-Gun Measures Introduced in Texas

From NRA-ILA 2/19/2013

Previously, we reported on approximately six NRA-backed issues filed so far in the 2013 Regular Session of the Texas Legislature.  A few more bear mentioning with several weeks left until the bill filing deadline the first week of March.  The NRA-ILA will keep you posted as to which committees these bills are referred and if and when a public hearing is scheduled on any of them.

HB 1077 by Rep. Tim Kleinschmidt would prohibit institutions of higher education from enforcing policies preventing students from lawfully transporting and storing legally-owned firearms in their locked private motor vehicles parked on-campus.

HB 1078 by Rep. Tim Kleinschmidt eliminates the criminal penalty against Concealed Handgun Licensees carrying for protection on the premises of an institution of higher education.

HB 1142 by Rep. James White allows school districts to offer an elective course in firearms for grades 9-12, to include instruction on the history of the Second Amendment and safety training and be taught by a qualified CHL instructor or peace officer.

HB 1194 by Rep. Chris Paddie allows open carry as an option for Texas Concealed Handgun Licensees, similar to legislation filed by Rep. George Lavender (HB 700).

HB 1298 by Rep. Jonathan Stickland aims to remove restrictions on Concealed Handgun Licensees carrying in locations where a school field trip is occurring, if the CHL is not a student, teacher, administrator or chaperone on the field trip.

HB 1304 by Rep. Kenneth Sheets protects against inadvertent or accidental display of a handgun by a Concealed Handgun Licensee, similar to legislation filed by Sen. Craig Estes (SB 299).

Please contact your state Representative and politely urge him or her to support these pro-gun reforms when they come up for a vote.  The NRA-ILA will keep you informed on these and other firearm-related measures this session in the Lone Star State.

 

Obama Justice Department Reveals Truth About State of the Union Claims

From NRA-ILA  2/15/2013

Despite long odds, on Tuesday night, Barack Obama managed to turn in a State of the Union performance that was filled with more theatrical pandering than the event is typically known for.  Once again seeking to capitalize off tragedy by opting for emotional, rather than reasoned arguments, the President reiterated his support for increased background checks and bans on common semi-automatic firearms and their magazines, which he referred to as “weapons of war and massive ammunition magazines.”

As usual, Obama’s remarks were short on evidence that his gun control proposals would work.  Of course, that evidence is sorely lacking–and who would know that better than the experts at his own Justice Department?

In a white paper dated January 4 and obtained by NRA-ILA, the deputy director of the National Institute for Justice–DOJ’s research and evaluation agency–said that the proposals before Congress are unlikely to have an effect unless they are made even more draconian.  For instance, the document makes clear that the effectiveness of “universal” background checks “depends on … requiring gun registration.”  On the topic of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, NIJ writes, “In order to have an impact, large capacity magazine regulation needs to sharply curtail availability to include restrictions on importation, manufacture, sale, and possession.”  As for popular semi-automatic firearms, the NIJ notes, “Since assault weapons are not a major contributor to U.S. gun homicide and the existing stock of guns is large, an assault weapons ban is unlikely to have an impact on gun violence.  If coupled with a gun buyback and no exemptions then it could be effective.”

The NRA’s response was clear and strong.  The evening of the speech, NRA-ILA released the memo along with a hard-hitting ad.  In the ad, NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox points out these highlights of the memo and urges viewers to call Congress in opposition to new anti-gun legislation.

And two days after the speech, in a speech to the National Wild Turkey Federation’s annual convention, NRA Executive Vice-President Wayne LaPierre commented on what was notably absent in the State of the Union address:  “It was only a few weeks ago when they were marketing their anti-gun agenda as a way of protecting school children from harm… That charade ended at the State of the Union, when the president himself exposed their fraudulent intentions.  It’s not about keeping kids safe at school.  That wasn’t even mentioned in the president’s speech.”

To ensure lawmakers know you will hold them accountable if they support such legislation, contact your legislators by using NRA-ILA.org’s “Write Your Representatives” tool or contact Congress by phone at (202) 224-3121.

 

Handgun Proficiency Training

Now available at concealedcarryaustin; handgun proficiency training. Matt, a former law enforcement officer is now available for beginner training. Whether before or after your CHL class, if you need to get more comfortable with a handgun, this training is for you. The training will take place at Eagle Peak Shooting Range in Leander, will cost $50.00 for a two hour block and have a maximum of two people. Matt will evaluate and coach you to be no only comfortable with your handgun but skillful with it as well. Classes are now scheduled, please check the class calendar…

 

Media Quiet About San Antonio Theater Shooting

On Sunday December 17, 2012, 2 days after the CT shooting, a man went to a restaurant in San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the people in the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman followed them and entered the theater so he could shoot more people. He started shooting and people in the theater started running and screaming. It’s like the Aurora, CO theater story plus a restaurant!
Now aren’t you wondering why this isn’t a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting?
There was an off duty county deputy at the theater. SHE pulled out her gun and shot the man 4 times before he had a chance to kill anyone. So since this story makes the point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun, the media is treating it like it never happened.
Only the local media covered it. The city is giving her a medal next week. Just thought you’d like to know.

 

 

Feinstein Goes For Broke With New Gun-Ban Bill

From NRA-ILA (www.nreila.org) 12/28/2012

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)—author of the federal “assault weapon” and “large” ammunition magazine ban of 1994-2004—has announced that on the first day of the new Congress—January 3rd— she will introduce a bill to which her 1994 ban will pale by comparison. On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, “I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.” Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012.

According to a Dec. 27th posting on Sen. Feinstein’s website and a draft of the bill obtained by NRA-ILA, the new ban would, among other things, adopt new definitions of “assault weapon” that would affect a much larger variety of firearms, require current owners of such firearms to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act, and require forfeiture of the firearms upon the deaths of their current owners. Some of the changes in Feinstein’s new bill are as follows:

·         Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law. Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.

·         Adopts new lists of prohibited external features. For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the “pistol grip” of which “protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon,” the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any “grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” Also, the new bill adds “forward grip” to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as “a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.” Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle. At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California’s highly restrictive ban.

·         Carries hyperbole further than the 1994 ban. Feinstein’s 1994 ban listed “grenade launcher” as one of the prohibiting features for rifles. Her 2013 bill carries goes even further into the ridiculous, by also listing “rocket launcher.” Such devices are restricted under the National Firearms Act and, obviously, are not standard components of the firearms Feinstein wants to ban. Perhaps a subsequent Feinstein bill will add “nuclear bomb,” “particle beam weapon,” or something else equally far-fetched to the features list.

 

·         Expands the definition of “assault weapon” by including:

·         Three very popular rifles: The M1 Carbine (introduced in 1944 and for many years sold by the federal government to individuals involved in marksmanship competition), a model of the Ruger Mini-14, and most or all models of the SKS.

·         Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” except for tubular-magazine .22s.

·         Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches,” any “semiautomatic handgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” and any semi-automatic handgun that has a threaded barrel.

·         Requires owners of existing “assault weapons” to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines.

·         Prohibits the transfer of “assault weapons.” Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein’s new bill, “assault weapons” would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government.

·         Prohibits the domestic manufacture and the importation of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The 1994 ban allowed the importation of such magazines that were manufactured before the ban took effect. Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection. The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture.

·         Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm “overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose.” Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines “overwhelmingly chosen” by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds. Additionally, Feinstein’s list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection.

·         Contains a larger piece of window dressing than the 1994 ban. Whereas the 1994 ban included a list of approximately 600 rifles and shotguns exempted from the ban by name, the new bill’s list is increased to nearly 1,000 rifles and shotguns. Other than for the 11 detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles and one other semi-automatic rifle included in the list, however, the list appears to be pointless, because a separate provision of the bill exempts “any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action.”

The Department of Justice study. On her website, Feinstein claims that a study for the DOJ found that the 1994 ban resulted in a 6.7 percent decrease in murders. To the contrary, this is what the study said: “At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders. Our best estimate is that the ban contributed to a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders between 1994 and 1995. . . . However, with only one year of post-ban data, we cannot rule out the possibility that this decrease reflects chance year-to-year variation rather than a true effect of the ban.  Nor can we rule out effects of other features of the 1994 Crime Act or a host of state and local initiatives that took place simultaneously.”

“Assault weapon” numbers and murder trends. From the imposition of Feinstein’s “assault weapon” ban (Sept. 13, 1994) through the present, the number of “assault weapons” has risen dramatically. For example, the most common firearm that Feinstein considers an “assault weapon” is the AR-15 rifle, the manufacturing numbers of which can be gleaned from the BATFE’s firearm manufacturer reports, available here. From 1995 through 2011, the number of AR-15s—all models of which Feinstein’s new bill defines as “assault weapons”—rose by over 2.5 million. During the same period, the nation’s murder rate fell 48 percent, to a 48-year low. According to the FBI, 8.5 times as many people are murdered with knives, blunt objects and bare hands, as with rifles of any type.

 

Traces: Feinstein makes several claims, premised on firearm traces, hoping to convince people that her 1994 ban reduced the (relatively infrequent) use of “assault weapons” in crime. However, traces do not indicate how often any type of gun is used in crime. As the Congressional Research Service and the BATFE have explained, not all firearms that are traced have been used in crime, and not all firearms used in crime are traced. Whether a trace occurs depends on whether a law enforcement agency requests that a trace be conducted. Given that existing “assault weapons” were exempted from the 1994 ban and new “assault weapons” continued to be made while the ban was in effect, any reduction in the percentage of traces accounted for by “assault weapons” during the ban, would be attributable to law enforcement agencies losing interest in tracing the firearms, or law enforcement agencies increasing their requests for traces on other types of firearms, as urged by the BATFE for more than a decade.

Call Your U.S. Senators and Representative: As noted, Feinstein intends to introduce her bill on January 3rd. President Obama has said that gun control will be a “central issue” of his final term in office, and he has vowed to move quickly on it.

 

Contact your members of Congress at 202-224-3121 to urge them to oppose Sen. Feinstein’s 2013 gun and magazine ban. Our elected representatives in Congress must here from you if we are going to defeat this gun ban proposal. You can write your Representatives and Senators by using our Write Your Representatives tool here: http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-locally/grassroots/write-your-reps.aspx

Millions of Americans own so-called “assault weapons” and tens of millions own “large” magazines, for self-defense, target shooting, and hunting. For more information about the history of the “assault weapon” issue, please visit www.GunBanFacts.com.

 

The Battle is Not Coming–It is Here! You Must Remain Engaged!

From NRA-ILA

Posted on December 21, 2012

NRA initially withheld comment about the horrible crime that took place in Newtown, Connecticut last week, out of respect for the families of the crime’s victims and other residents of that community, and while law enforcement officials there conducted their investigation.  However, President Obama and a usual cast of characters, in keeping with their longstanding practice of not letting any crisis go to waste, quickly used the tragedy to push their gun ban agenda.

Obama took to the national airwaves to plead his case for additional gun control laws, and appointed longtime gun control supporter Vice-President Joe Biden to head a task force to formalize the president’s gun control plans by no later than January.

The administration’s efforts are being aided and abetted by their anti-Second Amendment allies in Congress, particularly Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).  As we previously reported, Sen. Feinstein’s crusade to ban more guns preceded the Newtown shootings.  As early last month, Feinstein started to refine her most recent “assault weapons” bill that “would ban pistol grips and ‘high‑capacity’ magazines.”  Though the public has not seen the final wording of her impending legislation, there is no question what the zealous senator would do, if she could.  After getting her first “assault weapon” and “large” magazine ban imposed in 1994, she told a reporter, “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them – Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in – I would have done it.”

And, if you think the latest gun control debate will be limited solely to legislation to ban semi-autos and “large capacity” magazines, think again.  Calls have already been renewed to subject all private sales of firearms to background checks, even among family members and friends, and to end mail-order sales of ammunition.

We knew that this fight was coming.  But it’s now crystal clear that this latest round is on an expedited track and the corresponding rhetoric has been amped up exponentially.

And the fight is not limited to the U.S. Congress; anti-gun action has already begun at the state level, with several states already jumping into the fray.  New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) went so far as to say “Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option…”

Our formula for success will remain unchanged and your activism will remain key.  NRA’s four million members and the tens of millions of other law-abiding American gun owners must stand united and stay active!  NOW is the time for you to contact lawmakers in Washington, D.C., and in your state, and let them know that gun bans and other restrictions on our Second Amendment rights are not the solution.

To find contact information for your elected officials, use the “Write Your Reps” feature at www.NRAILA.orgClick here for tips on effective communication with your lawmakers, and don’t forget to visit www.GunBanFacts.com for the FACTS on semi-auto bans.

This battle will determine whether our lawmakers have the backbone to implement solutions that will provide immediate dividends and safety, or whether they will go back in time and focus on the failed policy of gun bans.

If our opponents succeed, our rights won’t be affected simply for a few years, but for generations to come!

 

Texas 30.06 Signs

Have you gone somewhere while carry your concealed weapon and just as you come to the door you see the 30.06 sign prohibiting you from legally carrying your weapon inside? It’s frustrating and annoying, and if it’s somewhere you must go to do business, you must leave your weapon locked in your car. I personally believe that if you can, you should go elsewhere to do conduct your business, but if you are at Time Warner, for instance, you most likely must conduct your business there. There is a web site I recommend in all my classes that you should register on. It is www.texas3006.com and when you register you are notified every time someone updates the website. Before leaving for a destination, you should check the site to see if your destination is listed and if so, is it with a legal sign. If your destination is not listed, but when you get there you find a 30.06 sign posted (or a 51% sign), as soon as possible, log onto the web site and update the listing to include your recent destination. Soon, you will be saving time and aggravation by avoiding those places with the 30.06 sign or at least being prepared by arriving without your weapon…

 

Obama Administration Endorses New U.N. Arms Trade Treaty Negotiations

From NRA-ILA 11/09/2012

Just as NRA warned would happen, following the election, the Obama administration has moved forward with its plans to support a United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. On Wednesday November 7, the U.S. Mission to the U.N. made clear its support for renewed ATT negotiations, casting a vote in favor of resolution A/C.1/67/L.11. The resolution calls for a “Final United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty” to be held in New York City from March 18-28.

Undeterred by the failure of July’s U.N. Conference on the ATT, in recent months the global civilian disarmament groups and their patron governments have been working nonstop to revive the treaty. Most visible were the attempts made by participants at the Second Review Conference of the UN Programme of Action on Small Arms and Light Weapons. At the conference, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon used his time to state, “an arms trade treaty is long overdue… I urge you to redouble efforts to agree on a robust ‘ATT’ as soon as possible.”

The resolution notes that at the March conference, the last draft from the July conference will be the starting point for new talks. Among the draft’s most onerous requirements are those intending to burden and keep records on “end users,” or gun owners. The draft states that “Each State Party shall maintain national records… Such records may contain… end users” and that “Records shall be kept for a minimum of ten years.” If this obligation were to be enacted and followed, it could result in registration for any American that purchases an imported firearm.

Despite the insistence of a U.S. State Department official this summer that ammunition controls are not feasible and would have “significant administrative and financial costs,” ammunition remains within the scope of the working draft. The draft states, “Each State Party shall establish and maintain a national control system to regulate the export of ammunition for conventional arms.” In the explanation of its vote in favor of the resolution, Mexico made clear that it will continue to pursue its goal of including ammunition within the scope of the treaty.

As in past negotiations, the March conference will require consensus on the treaty’s text. This is an important requirement that has served to protect the U.S. from a U.N. tyranny of the majority. However, Mexico has attempted to undermine this vital condition. In a statement during the meetings in which the November 7 resolution was passed, Mexico’s representative said, “the goal of consensus should not be interpreted as a right of one or a few delegation to impede a general agreement.”

Further, despite the already restrictive wording of the draft treaty, some global gun controllers have insisted it doesn’t go far enough. The umbrella ATT group known as the Control Arms Campaign (which includes Amnesty International, the International Action Network on Small Arms and Oxfam International, among others) states that an ATT “must include all weapons, all transfers, and all transactions,” and has constructed a wish list to make the treaty more prohibitive. Their stated goal of “finishing” the current draft is even more ominous when you consider that in the past Amnesty International has made clear that “The ATT should not exempt certain small arms (for example, sporting or hunting firearms) from its scope of application.” With several nations supporting this position and negotiations over the final text remaining fluid, there is a possibility that the final treaty could be far worse than the current draft.

During the July negotiations, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre made clear to the assembled U.N. delegates that, “Any treaty that includes civilian firearms ownership in its scope will be met with the NRA’s greatest force of opposition.” The speech was bolstered by letters from a majority of U.S. Senators and 130 Representatives, making clear to President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton their opposition to a treaty encompassing civilian arms. Several writers noted NRA’s opposition as key to the failure of the July conference. Needless to say, our position will remain the same on any treaty that could adversely affect the rights of American gun owners.

 

Microstamping, A New Assault On Gun Ownership

MICROSTAMPING SHOULD CAUSE GUN
MAKER TO MOVE, SAYS CCRKBA

BELLEVUE, WA – An effort by lawmakers in New York to require microstamping that now has Remington Arms reportedly considering a move to another state would be justified for business reasons and a victory for common sense, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

Recent reports indicate that the legendary American arms maker may move west over the microstamping measure.

“Not only would that be a smart business move,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, “but it would also affirm that Remington is run by people with common sense; people who know microstamping is a costly requirement that amounts to a bogus panacea to violent crime.”

Microstamping, also called “ballistic imprinting,” laser-engraves tiny identifying marks on the firing pin. Theoretically, this would help police track guns used in crimes to their owners. However, Gottlieb pointed to several misconceptions about microstamping.

“For starters,” he said, “police have to recover shell casings at a crime scene, and that doesn’t happen if a criminal uses a revolver. Secondly, it’s easy to replace or deface a firing pin in most semi-automatics so the micro stamped part is removed or altered.

“The unmentioned detail in this mandate,” he added, “is that this system would require nationwide gun registration in order to have the remote potential to succeed. This is a little detail nobody wants to talk about.

“With somewhere in the neighborhood of 300 million guns already in private hands,” Gottlieb observed, “the notion that microstamping will help solve crimes is a fairy tale at best.

“Why should firearms manufacturers tolerate this sort of intrusive, feel-good legislation when they can easily relocate to states with more friendly business environments,” he challenged. “American gun makers have every right to simply walk away from such nonsense and take their revenue and jobs with them. New York’s loss would be someone else’s financial gain, and ultimately, the beneficiaries would be American consumers, whose privacy will not be penalized in the interest of utopian political correctness.”