Tenney Adamantly Rejects Microstamping
Failed microstamping technology fails American freedoms and local businesses
June 19, 2012
Assemblywoman Claudia Tenney (R,C,I-New Hartford) today stood up against nonsensical technology intended to facilitate crime investigation – microstamping – the imprinting of alpha numeric codes on spent shell casings from semi-automatic firearms. “National studies have unequivocally found microstamping to be flawed and easily circumvented by criminals. New York State has given up on similar programs such as the New York Combined Ballistic Identification System (CoBIS), because the program did not solve a single firearm-related crime and cost taxpayers over $44 million,” said Tenney. The vast majority of firearm-related crimes are committed with illegally obtained guns. Microstamping will not have the intended effect of tracing a firearm back to the person who committed the crime. “Attempting to adopt microstamping into New York State law attacks residents’ constitutional rights, local businesses and a law-abiding citizen’s choice of personal protection,” said Tenney. “Our New York State firearm businesses, Remington Arms and Kimber, know that microstamping has no effect on crime or public protection, and has only the negative consequence of increasing the cost of their manufacturing,” said Tenney. “These businesses will leave New York State if microstamping is mandated.” “Upstate New York will be devastated if Remington Arms uproots to continue manufacturing their world-renowned products in a more business-friendly state. Thousands of families in and around Ilion, NY will lose their jobs because politicians believe in this failed microstamping system,” said Tenney. “Adopting microstamping in New York will effectively ban all semi-automatic firearms throughout the state,” said Tenney. In effect, by banning these firearms in New York, law-abiding citizens will have lost a means to protect and defend themselves and their families from criminals who will not be affected by any firearm regulation or prohibition. “It is rash for New York State to remove the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens and to directly and knowingly attack venerable heritage companies who have historically shown and proven a commitment to keeping their manufacturing within the state,” concluded Tenney.