I grabbed this off of the
ScopeNY Yahoogroup page...
Interesting bill from Sen. Golden requiring a study of microstamping technology to determine whether the technology is practical, useful, tamperproof and many other issues. See the text below:
STATE OF NEW YORK8456
IN SENATEJune 10, 2008
___________
Introduced by Sens. GOLDEN, GRIFFO, PADAVAN -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Rules
AN ACT relating to requiring the superintendent of the state police to examine microstamping technology available for certain firearms and to report certain findings to the legislature; and providing for the repeal of such provisions upon expiration thereof.
The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows:
Section 1. Legislative intent. The legislature finds and declares that it is imperative that law enforcement agencies in this state have available to them the latest and most reliable technologies to aid in identifying evidence that will help them jail criminals who engage in gun-related violence.
The legislature further finds that such evidence technologies should be tested and proven useful, reliable, and durable before public investment is made in them and before being required for use by law enforcement, in order to assure that the technology is not merely a diversion, or a wasted expense of monies and effort, or an ineffective mandate on law-abiding citizens.
The legislature therefore declares that the purpose of this act is in every sense in the public interest, for it requires a study of microstamping technology which imprints shell casings with a gun-specific serial number each time the gun is fired, creating evidence that can be gathered at crime scenes to help law enforcement identify the owners of guns by tracking the serial numbers through state and federal databases.
§ 2. Microstamping technology report. The superintendent of the state police shall examine and report on microstamping technology, and, if appropriate, other new technologies, for possible use and application in this state, to determine whether such technology meets the requirements of being useful, reliable, durable, and available, pursuant to standards established in this act and such additional standards as may be devised by the superintendent, and to determine further and recommend whether the benefits of implementing such technology at the state level outweigh cost, inconvenience, and potential impairment or increase in danger due to the refitting or retrofitting as may be necessary of any firearms.
1. As used in this act, (a) "Semiautomatic pistol" or "pistol" means any pistol that is semiautomatic as defined in subdivision twenty-one of section 265.00 of the penal law, and (b) "Microstamping technology" means a technology which etches or otherwise imprints the make, model and serial number of a semiautomatic pistol in two or more places on the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol so that they are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the pistol is fired.
2. The superintendent shall consider and provide a report to the governor and the legislature not later than January 31, 2010, which addresses each of the following issues:
a. Durability. Whether microstamping is a durable technology in a semi automatic pistol, that can survive repeated firings and usage and wear of the parts;
b. Tampering. Whether microstamping can be defeated by the owner of a semi automatic pistol using tools that would be available to a gun-owner or average citizen, or by such means as replacing a firing pin or other gun parts, or using such items on the microstamping as diamond coated files;
c. Accuracy. The reliability of the transfer of microstamp marking to the bullet casings over time and usage of the pistol;
d. Permanency. Whether the microstamping would have a negative effect on the stability and integrity of the weapon or of the bullets;
e. Training. The level and amount of training that would be necessary to train individuals to effectively use microstamping;
f. Cost. The cost of implementing the technology for new pistols and of retrofitting existing pistols, and an assessment of additional costs including the public and private costs of testing, storage, database creation, and other costs that would be borne by the public and private sectors to maximize the usefulness of the technology;
g. Counterfeiting. The ability of individuals to thwart the usefulness of microstamping by planting counterfeit evidence of shell casings from another weapon at a crime scene, thereby providing false evidence against innocent people and increasing the workload for investigators;
h. Efficacy. The ability of technology, whether microstamping or other, to link a microstamped casing to individual bullets fired from a gun in a crime, or to the person who fired the gun. Efficacy should be compared to other technologies or methods of identifying bullets fired in a crime and individuals who criminally fired guns;
i. Availability. Whether the patent has been licensed to a sufficient number of manufacturers to provide competition in the marketplace, and assure that purchasers of microstamped guns, whether public or private, are not being forced to pay monopolistic prices because of the restricted availability of the technology;
j. Alternatives. Whether there are competing technologies that provide a more accurate and useful means of identifying those who commit gun crimes, and how they compare to microstamping;
k. Coverage. The percentage of guns in New York that would not be included in microstamping requirements if the technology applies only to each of the following categories: new pistols sold in New York; to all pistols sold in New York; to pistols lawfully owned in this state. This category should include an estimate of the numbers of illegal guns in New York. It should also include an estimate of the numbers of guns sold outside of this state and brought into New York, and unregulated gun sales;
l. Replacement. Whether, if implemented, microstamping could replace or result in the elimination of other means and methods of evidence technologies which are current requirements in New York;
m. Exceptions. Any exceptions to the requirement for microstamping that the task force would recommend; and
n. Other. Such other items of consideration and testing as the task force shall determine.
§ 3. Pre-emption. In the event that any branch of the federal government, or any agency thereof, directly or indirectly authorizes or requires a study of microstamping technology which focuses on all or a majority of the items proposed for study by this act, the requirement created by this act for a study and report of microstamping technology by the superintendent of the state police shall be deemed null and void, as having been superseded by such federal study, and the superintendent shall provide any data and information collected to the authors and researchers of any such study and report authorized by any branch of the federal government, or agency thereof.
§ 4. This act shall take effect immediately and shall be deemed repealed on and after February 1, 2010.
