Bullet "fingerprinting" at work!

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

If you don't commit any crimes with your guns then you have nothing to worry about.

unless you like to practice at the range and not pick up every piece of brass.

[billvon 3,173]

>Then I guess you are OK with manditory ADD usage?

For students (and perhaps people to a certain license level) yes.

[billvon 3,173]

>And if you never lost altitude awareness or the rare loss of consciousness,
>the AAD would never come into effect.

I can think of several dozen people who would disagree with you.

[Ron 10]

Quote

Question; of the number of rounds you've ever fired, how many of them are rounds that you had to fire or your life would have ended?

None, but that does not mean that it is worth taking the chance that it could fail "just because".

Quote

Obviously this is different for law enforcement and military vs others.

When it is safe enough for the military, then it is safe enough for others use, not the other way around. Unless you think that a citizens life is not worth as much as a cops.

You still have not answered 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?

In fact, DNA and finger print databases could solve MORE crimes than any bullet tracking, PLUS, the technology already exists.

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

[Ron 10]

Quote

>Then I guess you are OK with manditory ADD usage?

For students (and perhaps people to a certain license level) yes.

Why not every single jumper? Remember, it will save lives just like your claims of "smart guns".

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

[Ron 10]

Quote

I would object to having my DNA collected just for the hell of it

But you are fine with me having to register all my guns "Just for the hell of it"?

Quote

However with registration and fingerprinting a lot more can be done to track down the source of illegal weapons.

DNA and fingerprint databases would solve many more crimes than gun fingerprinting.

So if you really wanted to cut down on crime, you would support manditory DNA and fingerprinting.

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

[billvon 3,173]

>Remember, it will save lives just like your claims of "smart guns".

You're replying to the wrong person.

[Ron 10]

Quote

>Remember, it will save lives just like your claims of "smart guns".

You're replying to the wrong person.

You don't approve of smart gun technology?

You seem to be supporting it in this post:

Quote

No, we'd all be jumping with AAD's, which are complex electronic devices that are required to work in an extreme environment and which, if they malfunction, can kill you. Why, they might even record your last skydive so as to remove your privacy as well as your safety! I certainly hope you have the courage of your convictions, and try to talk everyone you know (especially the more gullible newer jumpers and students) out of using this failure-prone, unproven, deadly and intrusive technology. With more people like you, we can head off a future of seeing every skydiving student jumping with a combination bomb and camera on their backs!

and in this one:

Quote

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.

and here:

Quote

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.

So do you support smart gun technology? Do you not think it will save lives?

Do you not think that DNA databases will save lives and help catch criminals?

You seem to think DNA testing has saved lives here:

Quote

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

So do you support smart gun technology? Do you support DNA databases?

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

[billvon 3,173]

>You don't approve of smart gun technology?

?? Sure, I approve of it. Sounds like a great idea. I approve of AAD's, airbags and reserves, too.

>So do you support smart gun technology?
>Do you not think it will save lives?

It will probably save a few once it's perfected.

>So do you support smart gun technology?

Sure, go for it.

[Ron 10]

Nice way to half answer:

Do you not think that DNA databases will save lives and help catch criminals?

So do you support smart gun technology? Do you support DNA databases?

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

[billvon 3,173]

>Do you not think that DNA databases will save lives and help
>catch criminals?

I do think DNA databases will help catch criminals.

Now a question for you - do you support AAD's? Do you support reserve parachutes?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

>So do you support smart gun technology?

Sure, go for it.

>Do you not think that DNA databases will save lives and help catch criminals?

I do think DNA databases will help catch criminals.

Do you support making smart guns mandatory on all new guns from here on out?
Or do you think the consumer should have a choice of which type of gun to purchase?

Do you support mandatory collection of DNA samples from every single citizen for a national database?

At what point do you draw a line and say "No!", because individual freedom and privacy are more important than the ability for police to quickly catch criminals?

[billvon 3,173]

>Do you support making smart guns mandatory on all new guns from
>here on out?

Nope. Technology's not there yet.

>Or do you think the consumer should have a choice of which type of gun
>to purchase?

Yes.

>Do you support mandatory collection of DNA samples from every single
>citizen for a national database?

No.

Now, do you support mandatory use of AAD's for students? How about mandatory reserve usage for every skydiver?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

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?

I remembered the state wrong - it's Maryland.

Maryland State Police Report Recommends Suspending Ballistics ID System

"A law requiring Maryland State Police to collect ballistics information from each handgun sold in the state should be repealed because the expensive system is flawed and has not helped a criminal investigation since it was adopted in 2000..."

http://www.officer.com/web/online/Laws--Legislation-and-Court-Decision-News/Maryland-State-Police-Report-Recommends-Suspending-Ballistics-ID-System/6$20408

[Ron 10]

Sorry double post. iPhone issue

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

[Ron 10]

skydiving is not in the BoR.

Do you support gun registration?

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

[billvon 3,173]

>So, do you support gun registration?

I've answered six of your questions. How about you answer mine? Do you support mandatory use of AAD's for skydiving students, and mandatory usage of reserves for all skydivers?

[rushmc 23]

From your link

Quote

Guns used in crimes are not the ones being entered into the system, the report found.

This fact will not change under any program.

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

[skybill 22]

Quote

Quote

Quote

It always amazes me how easily some people are willing to give up rights that others have died to protect.
Disappointed really.

Who exactly has dies to protect your right to own guns?

It started with these men, in Lexington, 1775:

ROBERT MUNROE
JONAS PARKER
SAMUEL HADLEY
JOHN BROWN
ISAAC MUZZEY
CALEB HARRINGTON.
JONATHAN HARRINGTON
JEDEDIAH MUNROE
JOHN RAYMOND
NATHANIEL WYMAN

"Lay down your arms, you damned rebels, and disperse!"

"Stand your ground. Don't fire unless fired upon. But if they want to have a war, let it begin here."

Every serviceman swears an oath to uphold the Constitution, which includes the 2nd Amendment. Even Barack Obama had to swear this oath.

Thanks John for "Tellin' it!!" Least we forget, hell, they didn't forget, they never got it!!

"God, Guns and Guts Keep America Free!!!" For now.

BTW Fayetteville NC (C&E Gun Show) this weekend 7-8 feb C-U-there.

SCR-2034, SCS-680

III%,
Deli-out

[Ron 10]

Sure Bill, how about I answer them like you do?

I don't support reserves or AAD's for base jumpers.

Still waiting to see where you found skydiving in the BoR.

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

[billvon 3,173]

>I don't support reserves or AAD's for BASE jumpers.

OK, so you won't answer the question, I suspect because it will reveal your basic disconnect on this issue. I pretty much suspected that.

[JohnRich 4]

>> Do you support making smart guns mandatory on all new guns from here on out?

> Nope. Technology's not there yet.

>> Or do you think the consumer should have a choice of which type of gun
>> to purchase?

> Yes.

When the technology "is there", then would you support making ONLY smart guns available for all new purchases? Or would you still prefer that buyers have the free choice of which type of gun to choose?

If adults with children want a "smart" gun to help make their home safe, that should be their choice.
However, someone like me, as an adult with grown kids and now living alone, I should have the choice to buy a purely mechanical gun for increased reliability.

Ironically, the gun-o-phobes are pushing this idea because they see it as a way to further restrict gun ownership. When actually, it will cause MORE people to buy guns, like those aforementioned parents with kids at home. They may have been too afraid before, but this technology will make them feel safe with a gun in the home.

And, the law of unintended consequences may then come into play. Those parents with kids may leave the gun laying around unsecured thinking that the kids can't shoot themselves. But kids have a knack for figuring out how to get around dad's security procedures, by borrowing the enabling ring, or whatever. And therefore, there may actually be MORE kids getting accidentally shot because of this technology.

> Do you support mandatory use of AAD's for students?
> How about mandatory reserve usage for every skydiver?

AAD's for students? Yes.
But not for experienced jumpers - they should have free choice.

I suppose you'll take those replies and suggest then that first time gun owners should then be required to have a "smart" gun... And if you do, then we'll have to allow them to test out of that requirement if they can show they know what they're doing.

Should we have mandatory throttle speed restrictions on cars driven by teenagers?
Mandatory home visits by social workers for first time mom's?
How far do you want to take this assumption of irresponsibility with big brother?

Mandatory reserves? I'm okay with the current situation on that. For skydivers, yes. For BASE jumpers, optional.

But that doesn't mean that a "smart" gun is the equivalent of a reserve parachute.

[Ron 10]

Quote

OK, so you won't answer the question, I suspect because it will reveal your basic disconnect on this issue. I pretty much suspected that.

No Bill, I just gave you the same type of answer you give all the time.

I am STILL waiting for you to show me where skydiving is in the BoR.

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

[Ron 10]

Quote

Should we have mandatory throttle speed restrictions on cars driven by teenagers?

Heck, why not put them on all cars and also make alcohol breath test interlocks mandatory as well?

Those two would save FAR more lives than smart guns and the technology is already available.

But people like Bill and Quade would scream against those, but are fine stepping all over the 2nd.

They want gun databases claiming how many crimes would be solved, but oppose DNA databases that would solve FAR more crimes.

I would not approve of speed limiters, DNA databases, interlocks, OR gun databases.

I wonder why they are opposed to almost any intrusion into privacy and rights except when it comes to gun owners?

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

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

I wonder why they are opposed to almost any intrusion into privacy and rights except when it comes to gun owners?

Excellent post, and it echoes my sentiments exactly. Somehow every inconvenience and intrusion is acceptable against gun owners, but not when it comes to other things that kill far more people. It's part of the mindset of illogical gun-o-phobes.