This would be futile with a revolver. You can get 9 and .40 and .45 ACP moon clip revolvers, no shell left behind.
Removing the microstamp might be as illegal as removing the serial number from the receiver.
The Truth About Microstamping
Posted on August 29, 2011 by Nick Leghorn
Drawback #1: Stamps Wear Out and Disappear
Drawback #2: Revolvers and Polite Criminals
Drawback #3: Registered Owner or Shooter?
Drawback #4: Salt
Drawback #5: A booming used gun market
Right now, the only effect that microstamping would have on firearms is raising the price and inconveniencing law abiding citizens. That’s not a “minor” inconvenience either, especially when the possibility of being wrongly accused for a murder is only one lazy range trip away.
READ AT:
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/08/foghorn/the-truth-about-microstamping/
What about normal wear? Would that gun now be illegal without the stamp? How would you know it's worn off? Would you have to have it inspected by the 'authorities'? The idea just sucks anyway you look at it.
Who's to say that you removed the microstamp? Maybe your shot a lot of shells, or you inserted a metal "dummy" shell that had a primer that was much harder than the primer used in acutal shells? The microprint will wear, just like any other metal part of a gun.
Many people use the metal "dummy", to check to see if they are flinching or jerking the gun - shooting live rounds, then hitting a "dummy" is a good indicator as to your shooting style. Some of those dummy rounds are just bullet shaped chunks of iron. I can see demand for iron dummies becoming more prevalent.