Massachusetts went full buck-wild last year with their version of a Bruen-response law. The entire process in the Bay State has been a quagmire. Governor Maura Healey signed an emergency preamble after the law was passed and enacted. Healey committed this usurpation of the democratic process when the citizens fighting to stall the date of effect were closing in on victory via a petition process. Nothing has been above the fold. A recent revelation about the president of a company that offers so-called “microstamping” technology ended up on the Commonwealth’s microstamping commission. Conflict of interest, anyone?

The “Special Legislative Commission on Emerging Firearm Technology” in Massachusetts is the group working to find viability in microstamping. While New Jersey declared microstamping viable in 2024, there has yet to be an instance of this technology working. If it were, California would be a shining example of success.

Digging into the members of the commission, one name stuck out that’s worth bringing up. Todd Lizotte, the president of a company that alleges to specialize in the technology. Lizotte is said to be the co-inventor of “intentional firearm microstamping” and the company he’s leading is TACLABS.

Getting testimony or a statement from someone in the alleged industry makes sense. But should they be a member of the actual commission? Naturally, Lizotte’s own statements to the commission prods them to come to the conclusion that the – his –  technology is viable:

We urge state officials to act swiftly in affirming the general viability of IFM, establishing initial performance standards, allowing the industry to start with a single surface to reduce their perceived cost limitations and implementing this technology to ensure California is prepared for the upcoming mandate that all semi-automatic handguns sold include microstamping capability.

But could this be seen as a conflict of interest?

We reached out to TACLABS and asked them about Lizotte’s relationship with the commission and his work there. Specifically, TACLABS was asked if Lizotte and or the company could financially benefit from his association and work with the commission.

Our request for comment went unanswered.

Similar queries were sent out to Massachusetts House Speaker Ronald Mariano. Mariano is pivotal when it comes to the formation of these commissions. Speaker Mariano’s press office failed to respond to four requests for comment on the topic.

The appropriateness of having an industry member who would personally – and whose company would – financially benefit from serving on such a commission needs to be called into question. Given the way Massachusetts’ entire ruling class has been ignoring the Constitution, this move should come as no surprise.

The lack of leadership from Speaker Mariano is deafening, as he won’t speak towards anything concerning the commission. Further, Mariano was invited to give comment, open ended, to which, again that correspondence went unanswered.

As for TACLABS and Mr. Lizotte, their failure to address valid concerns shows a total and complete lack of courage and moral fiber.

“The debate over reliability should not be about whether microstamping works—it already has, informally, for over a century,” Lizotte said in his filed statements to the commission. “Instead, the focus should be on whether the firearm industry is willing to take the lead in modernizing forensic analysis to combat firearm trafficking.” Not shockingly, Lizotte pegs the “firearm industry” as potentially not being willing to adopt a technology he holds patents in.

Lizotte’s report continued, “IFM simply refines an existing forensic tool, turning a century of unintentional microstamping into a proactive, structured methodology that enhances crime scene investigations and public safety.” But how such technology will “enhance … public safety” was not outlined.

The vulnerabilities on measures such as microstamping go beyond what the alleged intentions are. There’s no actual viable path forward to make this mandatory and easily achievable. Much like other progressive measures, it’s probable this is another antic to make the cost of doing business outrageously large for a disfavored industry – while TACLABS, Lizotte, and the like benefit from the grift.

We’ll be watching the progress of this commission. We’ll also report back should Speaker Mariano find the fortitude to address our queries – as well as TACLABS, who too remain silent.