Microstamping Ammunition in California: LAW

I've spent 3 days, and exposed myself to no small amount of embarassment trying (and failing) to establish whether a current California law exists which mandates "Microstamping Ammunition".

I have finally established that such a law exists. It was difficult to find because the actual law does not include the word "Microstamping".

Search Parameters
I searched "California Law" for "Microstamping", with no hits.
Then I brought up all California Laws under the google "Find California Code" and got a list of the 10 most recent bills.

From that list, I worked from the top down and searched each for the literal "MICROSTAMPING". Because I typed the search argument (CTRL/F) as I typed the literal, I got a hit on "MICRO" under the category "PENAL CODE SECTION 12125-12133".

And here, in an (undated, of course) section 12126(b)(7) I found the following:

12126. As used in this chapter, "unsafe handgun" means any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 12001, for which any of the following is true:
...
(b) For a pistol:
...
(7) Commencing January 1, 2010, for all semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it is not designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters that identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol, etched or otherwise imprinted in two or more places on the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and that are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is fired, provided that the Department of Justice certifies that the technology used to create the imprint is available to more than one manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions. The Attorney General may also approve a method of equal or greater reliability and effectiveness in identifying the specific serial number of a firearm from spent cartridge casings discharged by that firearm than that which is set forth in this paragraph, to be thereafter required as otherwise set forth by this paragraph where the Attorney General certifies that this new method is also unencumbered by any patent restrictions. Approval by the Attorney General shall include notice of that fact via regulations adopted by the Attorney General for purposes of implementing that method for purposes of this paragraph.

The microscopic array of characters required by this section shall not be considered the name of the maker, model, manufacturer's number, or other mark of identification, including any distinguishing number or mark assigned by the Department of Justice, within the meaning of Sections 12090 and 12094.

I leave it up to the reader to search for the cited sections of California Law. And I wish you luck, because that entire range of bills which should include 12090 and 12094 are missing from the website.

12131, however, IS available:

12131. (a) On and after January 1, 2001, the Department of Justice shall compile, publish, and thereafter maintain a roster listing all of the pistols, revolvers, and other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person that have been tested by a certified testing laboratory, have been determined not to be unsafe handguns, and may be sold in this state pursuant to this title. The roster shall list, for each firearm, the manufacturer, model number, and model name.

To summarize, it is indeed not legal in California to purchase (as of 2010) a firearm which

"...is not designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters that identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol, etched or otherwise imprinted in two or more places on the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and that are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is fired, provided that the Department of Justice certifies that the technology used to create the imprint is available to more than one manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions.

Whether the Attorney General (and/or the Department of Justice) can certify that the technical requirements are able to be met ... well, that remains to be seen. Given the current political climate in California, one may be forgiven for assuming that the qualifications will be judged on the widest possible criterea. That is to say, the DOJ will not insist on rigorous testing to confirm that the tracking of handguns based on Microstamping will be 100% infallible, only that it be shown that a certain percent (whichever prevails after cursory testing) be demonstrated 'on occassion'.

If I seem dubious as to the rigor of application of criterea, that's only because I assume that the Great State of California is less concerned with "apprehension of criminals" than with "eliminating private possession of handguns by insuring that law-abiding citizens are denied access, by fiat".

In the meantime, I do heartily render apologies to those who have asserted that "Microstamping" requirement have been enacted into law in California. In particular, I offer "Mea Maxima Culpa" apologies to the Pennsylvania Firearms Owners Association (PAFOA) for a comment doubting a 10/13/2007 thread on "CA: Microstamping Bill Passed"

KiethPA was right; I was wrong.

Sorry about that.