TexasCHLforum.com

Actually, not all handguns, apparently:

Smith & Wesson will continue to sell revolvers, bolt action rifles and its newly-launched Shield and SDVE pistols in California.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... z2rGClUpQT" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

But the majority of semi-auto handgun models, it appears. I wonder two things: 1) is there an exemption from the microstamping law for firearms sold to state and local government agencies?, and 2) if so, will S&W continue to sell handguns to them?

I'm glad I don't live there. Maybe this will attract legal gun owners to leave. Thus all that will be left will be sheep and armed criminals.

philip964 wrote:I'm glad I don't live there. Maybe this will attract legal gun owners to leave. Thus all that will be left will be sheep and armed criminals.

It would be better if they stayed and changed the laws.

Would it be legal to refuse to sell to law enforcement?

Personally I would like to see gun manufacturers not only refuse to sell in/to these states but I would like to see them move their factories to gun friendly ones.

If they don’t find the courage to take a stand now, the com-uh-liberal states will slowly pick them to pieces. Death by a thousand cuts.

A few years ago Ronnie Barrett, yes that Ronnie Barrett, told California his rifles would no longer be sold to anyone in CA, to include LE. He also told the Law Enforcement community none of the rifles they own would be accepted for service. STI has also stopped sales in California. Now two heavy hitters in the industry are following the lead of these two brave small companies. Good!

MoJo wrote:A few years ago Ronnie Barrett, yes that Ronnie Barrett, told California his rifles would no longer be sold to anyone in CA, to include LE. He also told the Law Enforcement community none of the rifles they own would be accepted for service. STI has also stopped sales in California. Now two heavy hitters in the industry are following the lead of these two brave small companies. Good!

I'm of mixed opinion here. I could see this as exactly the intent of lawmakers.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

MoJo wrote:A few years ago Ronnie Barrett, yes that Ronnie Barrett, told California his rifles would no longer be sold to anyone in CA, to include LE. He also told the Law Enforcement community none of the rifles they own would be accepted for service. STI has also stopped sales in California. Now two heavy hitters in the industry are following the lead of these two brave small companies. Good!

I'm of mixed opinion here. I could see this as exactly the intent of lawmakers.

Let the LEO offices get their hardware the hard way. Online only. Require a Background Check for every officer that is going to get a firearm. Hold up the whole order for 'discrepancies'.
Then let us see who complains.

I just read about this earlier today. Law enforcement guns are exempt from the requirement. The law went into effect in May of 2013. Here are some interesting points I found that make the law ridiculous:

• Stamped casings can only be traced to the last registered owner, not necessarily to the person who used the gun in a crime. In the case of a stolen gun, as is the case for most firearms used in crime, the stamped case would not lead to the criminal.
• Unscrupulous individuals could collect discarded brass from a firing range and salt crime scenes with microstamped cases, thereby providing false evidence against innocent people and increasing the workload for investigators.[7]
• High costs for testing the efficacy of the technique must be passed on to customers, increasing the cost of firearms for those who obtain them legally.[7]
• Microstamping is easily defeated. Diamond coated files are inexpensive and will remove microstamping. Firing pins are normally replaceable and can be changed with simple tools or without tools. Firing a large number of rounds will wear down the microstamp.[7] Marked components such as slides, barrels, firing pins and ejectors are all easily and commonly replaced items.[8] Later on the law will likely be amended to require firing pins to be replaced only with the correctly coded pin from the manufacturer.
• Microstamping is an immature, sole source technology, and has not been subjected to sufficient independent testing. Transfer of microstamped marks to the cases is less reliable than proponents claim.[7]
• Microstamping would be irrelevant/non-applicable for implementation of revolvers as these types of weapons do not eject shell cases necessarily.
• Ejected casings can be easily collected and removed from a crime scene.

Someone should post the appropriate e-mail addresses then all of us get as many as possible to send them an e-mail stating our support.

I would do the research myself but I’m not feeling well this evening.

I will send e-mails to the companies as soon as I feel better.