Bullet "fingerprinting" at work!

[normiss 917]

FDLE / Orlando
I fully support tracing illegal gun use back to the criminal in possession of the weapon!

[quade 4]

So, you support micro-stamping technology and the possibility of a future requirement during the manufacture of new guns.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_microstamping

While not perfect, I think it is a step in the right direction. Certainly at some point a better technology will be found.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[normiss 917]

Only from the other end of the chain.
As a legal owner, I should not have to provide the fingerprints, just like an everyday citizen.
Once you become a criminal and are arrested with a weapon, fingerprints must be submitted, just like everyday criminals submit fingerprints and DNA.


edit to add one key word because my fingers are faster than my brain.

[kelpdiver 2]

the moment fingerprinting gains prominence is that day that bad guys start scattering casings they pick up from the range. Or swapping barrels. Nevermind what scumbag cops will do.

It's fantasy technology that will, without doubt, lead to false convictions.

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Only from the other end of the chain.
As a legal owner, I should have to provide the fingerprints, just like an everyday citizen.
Once you become a criminal and are arrested with a weapon, fingerprints must be submitted, just like everyday criminals submit fingerprints and DNA.

That's a very good point. I like the analogy. I'll probably borrow it.

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[Ron 10]

Quote

So, you support micro-stamping technology and the possibility of a future requirement during the manufacture of new guns.

I really do not have a problem with doing ballistics on the bullets, or on the casings. Mico stamping has several problems:

1. Does not work on non semi weapons. A guy could shoot you with a revolver and the brass is contained in the weapon.

2. It only goes to the last legal owner. A good number of weapons used in crimes are stolen. Criminals do not tend to buy from FFL's.

3. I am against registration. So while I could agree to stamping, I would only support its use in criminal investigations. In other words if I was found near a crime scene with a weapon of the same caliber, it should be tested. NOT I live in the same city as a crime and I have to have my gun registered.

4. Would you really want to leave brass after a trip to the range knowing that someone could pick it up and use it against you? They could just drop your spent casings at a crime scene and BAMN, you are a suspect.

5. Firing pins are easy to change. Some firing pins are easy to make. A file can remove the microstamp in a few strokes.

Do you think the police have the right to require that every citizen is fingerprinted? How about that the police collect DNA on everyone?

Think of the number of crimes that would be solved if every one of us, once we turn 18, had to be fingerprinted and had to submit a DNA sample!

Would you support that?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[quade 4]

I admitted up front it's not perfect, but I believe it is a step in the right direction.

Fingerprints today don't usually prove a person committed the crime. Usually they only prove there is a connection between that person and the scene of the crime. If you visited a person's home just before that person was murdered, the police finding your fingerprints there doesn't automatically convict you, they just mean that you were there at some point. Micro stamping of cartridges would be no different. I can't in my wildest imagination think that they would be the sole evidence used to convict someone, but I can absolutely see where they would be valuable in starting down a trail of people to look at.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I can't in my wildest imagination think that they would be the sole evidence used to convict someone, but I can absolutely see where they would be valuable in starting down a trail of people to look at.

I've read quite a few cases that were purely circumstantial, but because of the presence of DNA turned into convictions. I see the same happening here. DAs and cops will present this as hard science that proves something when it really doesn't.

[billvon 3,173]

>I've read quite a few cases that were purely circumstantial, but because of
>the presence of DNA turned into convictions.

True. Then again, far more convictions have been overturned/prevented by the advent of DNA testing than false convictions made.

[Ron 10]

Quote

I can't in my wildest imagination think that they would be the sole evidence used to convict someone, but I can absolutely see where they would be valuable in starting down a trail of people to look at.

You didn't seem to answer my question... So I will ask again.

Given how useful having everyone finger printed and with DNA samples on file could be to solving crimes... How do you feel about mandatory finger printing and DNA samples being taken?

And why?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[wmw999 2,644]

I think it's a decent analogy, personally. I don't have the same deep and personal attachment to guns that some seem to have, but to compare the taking of gun information with the taking of personal fluids does give me a pretty good idea of how seriously others take them. Makes them definitely more than a tool to those folks. I'm not sure how I feel about that, but that's not relevant to how others feel about it.

We have license plates for cars, though.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 23]

Quote

I think it's a decent analogy, personally. I don't have the same deep and personal attachment to guns that some seem to have, but to compare the taking of gun information with the taking of personal fluids does give me a pretty good idea of how seriously others take them. Makes them definitely more than a tool to those folks. I'm not sure how I feel about that, but that's not relevant to how others feel about it.

We have license plates for cars, though.

Wendy W.

I really feel that car lecenses are more of a mechanism to make sure registration and license fees are paid and wether the car is stolen.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Ron 10]

Quote

Makes them definitely more than a tool to those folks.

No, they are still just tools to me. Both however, IMO, are protected under the Constitution.

I would not support a database of legal owners guns, nor a database of legal citizens DNA and finger prints. I would like to hear the opinion of why gun registration is fine, but a database of DNA would not be fine. Both would help identify victims and criminals.

I think that guns are protected under the 2nd and DNA is protected under the 4th. I think both are voided when the person has committed a crime.

Quote

We have license plates for cars, though.

1. Cars are not protected under the Constitution.
2. You do not need to get a car registered to own it. You do not need a license to own a car.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[billvon 3,173]

>I really feel that car lecenses are more of a mechanism to make sure
>registration and license fees are paid and wether the car is stolen.

It is primarily for law enforcement. By ensuring that police can identify and track cars, simply running from police is not all that useful to avoid prosecution for a traffic crime - and stealing cars becomes a lot harder.

If you just wanted to ensure registration was paid, just have a colored sticker people put on their bumper. Problem solved.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

We have license plates for cars, though.

Wendy W.

But license plates are easily removed/replaced for short durations. Only if a cop did a lookup might he discover a model mismatch, and only by comparing the VIN could he detect the fraud if the plate was stolen from a similar model.

Guns are slightly harder to mislead. You can alter the gun, or put false evidence at the scene (keep your brass, throw down someone else's). If we presumed the ballistic matching was highly accurate (questionable), it requires advance planning. Still very easy for cops to cheat on.

DNA, otoh, isn't changeable, but still the potential for planting of evidence.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

FDLE / Orlando
I fully support tracing illegal gun use back to the criminal in possession of the weapon!

Your attached story didn't say they had done that. All it said was that they matched the casings at two different crime scenes, which might mean that the same person committed both crimes. Or it might mean that different persons committed the crimes with the same gun. Or it might mean that the lab comparison was faulty and that it was really two different guns. In fact, the story didn't mention a single solved case derived from this system. Certainly if there had been one, they would have highlighted it. Yeah, all of that is a big help!

Massachusetts has been doing this for years - all new guns sold there have to come with sample fired cases, which the police scan and put into a database. Despite all that money and effort spent, they have yet to solve a single crime with the system. Yeah, that's a big help! In fact, the state police who run the system have recommended to the politicians that they scrap the system as a waste of precious police resources.

You need a dig a little deeper into the actual effectiveness of these systems before you announce a tiny little "success" with such joy.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

While not perfect, I think it is a step in the right direction. Certainly at some point a better technology will be found.

And what would you consider to be steps taken all the way to a perfect system?

[Ron 10]

Quote

Massachusetts has been doing this for years - all new guns sold there have to come with sample fired cases, which the police scan and put into a database. Despite all that money and effort spent, they have yet to solve a single crime with the system.

Not that I doubt you... .But got any data to back that up?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

While not perfect, I think it is a step in the right direction. Certainly at some point a better technology will be found.

And what would you consider to be steps taken all the way to a perfect system?

A "perfect system" can't be designed. That, however, doesn't mean you can't continue to work towards that goal.

I think another step would be to ID the bullets themselves. While many are destroyed on impact, there might be some technology out there that would somehow tag the projectile itself in a traceable way. I'm not clever enough to know what that might be, but maybe somebody out there is.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[normiss 917]

There was zero joy in my post.

You've more than detailed why.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

A "perfect system" can't be designed. That, however, doesn't mean you can't continue to work towards that goal.

A system that leads to false positives scares me more than non action.

Quote

I think another step would be to ID the bullets themselves. While many are destroyed on impact, there might be some technology out there that would somehow tag the projectile itself in a traceable way. I'm not clever enough to know what that might be, but maybe somebody out there is.

Think about what the role of a bullet is - it's exploded through a narrow tube and then into something or someone. How do you uniquely tag such a lump of metal, and how without increasing the cost by an order of magnitude?

The personalized weapons (can only be fired by owner) have a similar problem. The gun is designed to have tens of thousands of controlled explosions. This isn't really compatible with electronics, unless reliability is not a concern.

[billvon 3,173]

>The personalized weapons (can only be fired by owner) have a similar
>problem. The gun is designed to have tens of thousands of controlled
>explosions. This isn't really compatible with electronics, unless reliability
>is not a concern.

I don't quite get this. I have a car whose engine has been through several million controlled explosions, controlled via electronics several orders of magnitude more complex. No problems yet.

Designing reliable electronics in a high vibration and shock environment is indeed an art, but is not all that difficult.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>The personalized weapons (can only be fired by owner) have a similar
>problem. The gun is designed to have tens of thousands of controlled
>explosions. This isn't really compatible with electronics, unless reliability
>is not a concern.

I don't quite get this. I have a car whose engine has been through several million controlled explosions, controlled via electronics several orders of magnitude more complex. No problems yet.

Designing reliable electronics in a high vibration and shock environment is indeed an art, but is not all that difficult.

Your car weights 1-3 tons. And in most failures, you don't die as a result.

not really the same now, is it?

[billvon 3,173]

>Your car weights 1-3 tons.

Right. And artillery shells weigh a few pounds - but they have electronics in em too. (And I guarantee you they see more acceleration than the gun they are fired from.)

>And in most failures, you don't die as a result.

Neither would a failure of the weapons electronics we are discussing here. A failure of an automotive controller means the car stops; a failure of a gun enabling system means the gun doesn't fire.

[downwardspiral 0]

lol you might want to reread what you wrote there.

www.FourWheelerHB.com