The sponsor of the Oneida microstamping resolution Councilman Michael Kaiser wrote a letter to the Oneida Daily Dispatch, “Micro-stamping issue should be discussed“:
“… A few weeks ago I received a mailing from Mayors Against Illegal Guns, an organization that advocates measures that they feel will help reduce crimes involving firearms. The mailing was seeking support for NYS Senate Bill S6005, a bill requiring micro-stamping capability on all semi-automatic handguns in New York State by 2012. I believe the other councilors and the mayor received this mailing as well …”
I knew Bloomberg was behind this.
“… I wasn’t familiar with the issue …”
This was his first mistake.
“… and wanted to learn more, so the first thing I did was read the bill … The bill is only four pages long and pretty straight forward …”
It is 4 pages long and pretty straight forward if you understand firearms technology and the mentality of the politicians pushing the bill. This is the second mistake. Did you notice it refers to making imprints on two places on each shell casing? One can assume the firing pin would make the first impression. Where’s the second one? The bill doesn’t say. The antis in the legislature think it would be done inside the chamber when the round is fired. Seriously.
“… I did a little more research to try to understand the arguments supporting and opposing the bill by individuals and organizations on both sides …”
Google is your friend. A search for “firearms” and “microstamping” would have brought up enough information to show the unproven science behind the technology and that the bill amounts to a defacto ban on new handgun sales in New York.
“… When the Oneida Common Council agenda was made public and the resolution item was listed, I began to receive e-mails and phone calls regarding the issue. I believe the other councilors and the mayor received them as well …”
Yep, that was me.
“… Most of the e-mails and phone calls were opposed to the resolution. I wasn’t surprised at the responses as I know people feel strongly about this issue …”
Third mistake, bringing up an issue you know is going to piss people off. Not surprisingly it did.
“… Caitlin Traynor of the Oneida Daily Dispatch wrote an article on July 6th regarding the action, or lack of action, taken by the council at our last meeting on this issue. Caitlin wrote “Inaction by the Common Council sent a message in itself that city leaders do not support microstamp ammunition legislation.” I disagree with Caitlin, who is a fine writer and reporter, on this point. I think the message from the council was “we don’t want to talk about this.” …”
I think the message was “we’re smart enough not to get involved in this.”
“… One councilor who told me in the morning that he would be voting for the resolution apparently changed his mind by the time of our 6 p.m. meeting …”
Good move.
“… Although I understand the politics involved, I’m disappointed that we didn’t get to discuss this issue, but I won’t be deterred from bringing issues of public policy to the council that I think are important and worthy of discussion …”
Assuming this is true, then he made the fourth mistake by making a conscious decision to insert himself into a political fight outside the domain of the Common Council. This issue will come up again when he is up for re-election next year.