Glock has been busy horsetrading away your 2A rights


PDA

Boats
February 11, 2003, 01:24 AM
But what did you expect?

Congressional Record
BALLISTICS, LAW ASSISTANCE, SAFETY TECHNOLOGY ACT
October 10, 2002
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sen. Kohl, (D) Wisc.

Mr. President, I rise today with my colleagues Senator Feinstein, Senator Schumer, and Senator Reed to introduce BLAST, the Ballistics, Law Assistance, and Safety Technology Act.

Never before have the tremendous law enforcement benefits of ballistics testing been so apparent. We have the technology to "fingerprint" every new gun, and if we were using it today, we would be well on our way toward stopping the serial killer who even now is preying on the residents of suburban Washington.

Every gun has a unique "fingerprint" - the distinct patterns left on spent casings and bullets after it is fired. What we need to do is create a comprehensive library of the ballistic images of all new guns sold in the U.S. as they come off the assembly line and a library of the images of all guns used in crimes. With those libraries in place, new technology would allow us to compare those gun prints with bullets found at crime scenes - bullets like those found from the Washington area sniper's gun.

By keeping a computerized image of each new gun's fingerprint, police can compare the microscopic differences in markings left by each gun until they find a match. Once a match is found, law enforcement can begin tracing that weapon from its original sale to the person who used it to commit the crime.

Police tell of solving multiple crimes simply by comparing bullets and shell casings found at the scene of a crime to a gun seized in a seemingly unrelated incident. Let me explain how ballistics testing works and how our measure is crucial to the fight against crime.

The only evidence at the scene of a recent brutal homicide in Milwaukee was 9 millimeter cartridge casings -- there were no other clues. But four months later, when a teenage male was arrested on an unrelated charge, he was found to be in possession of the firearm that had discharged those casings. Ballistics linked the two cases. Prosecutors successfully prosecuted three adult suspects for the homicide and convicted the teen in juvenile court.

On September 9, 2000, several suspects were arrested in Boston for the illegal possession of three handguns. Each of the guns was test fired, and the ballistics information was compared to evidence found at other crime scenes. The police quickly found that the three guns were used in the commission of 15 felonies in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. This routine arrest for illegal possession of firearms provided police with new leads in the investigation of 15 unsolved crimes. Without the ballistics testing, these crimes would not have been linked and might have never been solved.

Mr. President, since the early 1990's, more than 250 crime labs and law enforcement agencies in more than 40 states have been operating independent ballistics systems maintained by either the ATF or the FBI. Together, ATF's Integrated Ballistics Identification System (AIBIS) and the FBI's DRUGFIRE system have been responsible for linking 5,700 guns to two or more crimes where corroborating evidence was otherwise lacking.

While success stories are increasingly frequent, the potential of ballistics testing is still untapped. One way that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms is making ballistics testing more accessible to state and local law enforcement is through the installation of a new network of ballistics imaging machines. The final introduction of the machines across the country is almost complete and, once it is, the computers will be able to access each other and search for a greater number of images. The National Integrated Ballistics Information Network, better know as "NIBIN," will permit law enforcement in one locality access to information stored in other gun crime databases around the entire country. This will help law enforcement exponentially in their efforts to solve gun crimes.

But ballistics testing is only as useful as the number of images in the database. Today, almost all jurisdictions are limited to images of bullets and cartridge casings that come from guns used in crimes. Our bill would dramatically expand the scope of that database by mandating that all guns manufactured or imported would be test fired before being placed into the stream of commerce. The images collected from the test firing would then be collected and accessible to law enforcement - and law enforcement only - for the purpose of investigating and prosecuting gun crimes.

As local, state and federal law enforcement authorities search for the deranged murderer who has been terrorizing the Washington D.C. metropolitan area, they are using ballistics testing to determine whether the bullets and shell casings found at the scene of each crime are from the same gun. They can then identify the gun, giving them a better idea of what - and who - they are looking for in their manhunt. Had the gun used in these crimes been subject to a test fire before being placed in the stream of commerce, authorities would be able to identify the gun based on the bullets and casings. With that information, law enforcement could then trace the sale and transfer of the firearm in an effort to identify the owner of the gun and solve the crime.

Today, police can find out more about a human being than they can about a gun used in a crime. Law enforcement can use DNA testing, take fingerprints and blood samples, search a person's health records, peruse bank records and credit card statements, obtain phone records and get a list of book purchases to link a suspect to a crime. Yet, the bullets found at the scene of a crime often cannot be traced back to the gun used because our ballistics images database is not comprehensive. We are unnecessarily limiting law enforcement's ability to track the criminals who have used guns in the commission of a crime. The BLAST bill will change all that. By making gun crimes easier to solve, all of us will be safer.

The burden on manufacturers is minimal -- we authorize funds to underwrite the cost of testing --and the assistance to law enforcement is considerable. And don't take my word for it, ask the gun manufacturers and the police. Listen to what Paul Januzzo, the vice-president of the gun manufacturer Glock, said in reference to ballistics testing, "our mantra has been that the issue is crime control, not gun control . . . it would be two-faced of us not to want this." In their agreement with the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Smith & Wesson agreed to perform ballistics testing on all new handguns. And Ben Wilson, the chief of the firearms section at ATF, emphasized the importance of ballistics testing as a investigative device, "This (ballistics) allows you literally to find a needle in a haystack."

To be sure, we are sensitive to the notion that law abiding hunters and sportsmen need to be protected from any misuse of the ballistics database by government. The BLAST bill explicitly prohibits ballistics information from being used for any purpose unless it is necessary for the investigation of a gun crime.

Mr. President, the BLAST bill will enhance a revolutionary new technology that helps solve crime. BLAST is a worthwhile piece of crime control legislation. I hope that the Senate will quickly move to pass it.

I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the legislation be printed at the conclusion of my remarks.

As far as I am concerned, Glock is breaking bread with the enemy in common cause against our rights. :fire:

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock has been busy horsetrading away your 2A rights" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
EJ
February 11, 2003, 01:30 AM
Glock, Smith and Ruger--


I'm glad I got what I want already -- gun wise--

fastbolt
February 11, 2003, 01:43 AM
Things are heating up a little over on Glock Talk about this subject.

http://glocktalk.gunserver.com/showthread.php?threadid=133977

EJ
February 11, 2003, 01:47 AM
The thread at GlockTalk looks to be more of a weasel-- Poor Misunderstood Glock ETC ETC to me----:rolleyes:

It is really interesting that all this never came out untill the 60Min piece--

WonderNine
February 11, 2003, 02:10 AM
Glock, Smith and Ruger--


I'm glad I got what I want already -- gun wise--

Ya, but what about all the people like me who always like to try new stuff :(


This coming from a self-confessed striker-fired combat tupperware hater AND worshipper of Browning Hi-Powers/Browing rifles and Winchester rifles....

:D

Guntalk
February 11, 2003, 05:56 AM
Yeah. We always did trust 60 Minutes to give us the truth on gun issues, right?

Boats
February 11, 2003, 09:28 AM
It would be interesting to have you explain the Jannuzo quote above from October 2002, some three and one-half months before 60 Minutes "misquoted" him.:rolleyes: It can't help but be funny.

10-Ring
February 11, 2003, 10:01 AM
What would you exect from a company that caters to LE in a PC world trying to maintain market share? If Glock is financially hit by this actions, they'll understand he wrong they're committing!

Remember, they're a for profit company. Letters & phone calls may not sway their actions, just what there bottom line dictates! Stop buying GLOCK products :banghead: :cuss:

gun-fucious
February 11, 2003, 11:45 AM
one wonders if the Faustian stick in this deal is a Smith & Wesson style
"Prefered Supplier' status

as in
No LEO contract sales if they don't provide civilian BF data

I would expect FeinStein/Schummer to propose something along those lines

The end result?
LEOs gets what ever they want, civilians get angry and lop off another manufacturer's nose

Sarah Brady gets all giddy as overall sales of "Plastic Pocket Rocket" handguns decrease

Maybe if sales of another manufacturer went dramaticallyt up, we might be able to salvage the bargain

anyone remember ths chestnut?
VII. Most favored entity.
If the manufacturer parties to this Agreement enter into an agreement with any
other entity wherein they commit to institute design or distribution reforms
that are more expansive than any of the above-enumerated items, such reforms
will become part of this Agreement as well.
In addition, if firearms manufacturers that are not party to this Agreement
agree to design or distribution reforms that are more expansive than any of the
above-enumerated items, and if the manufacturers who are party to the other
agreement(s) with more expansive terms, in combination with the
manufacturer parties to this Agreement, account for fifty percent or more of
the United States handgun sales, manufacturer parties to this Agreement will
agree to abide by the same design and distribution measures.

Tropical Z
February 11, 2003, 01:04 PM
:cuss:

SkySlash
February 11, 2003, 01:20 PM
I'm not liking this very much.

I had a Glock 19 on the horizon for next month, and until my concerns are laid to rest on this issue, I'm not going to make that purchase.

-SS :(

MitchSchaft
February 11, 2003, 01:43 PM
Yeah. We always did trust 60 Minutes to give us the truth on gun issues, right?

You haven't been paying attention, have you?:scrutiny:

biere
February 11, 2003, 02:05 PM
I have another link over at glock talk, but for all you want to read about the vp of glock type in "glock" and the vp's name( I forget how it is spelled) and you will get around 2.5 pages with some stuff he has done. My original search was simply glock and fingerprint and that turned up pages of stuff and even got into getting latent fingerprints off shells. Try different search engines for different results. Play around and you will get some variety of stuff.

I read a lot of the articles and some stuff that he did, I agree with. Some of the articles contradict what he has said if you click over onto the gssf websight, they have an updated statement that is after their statement about the 60 minutes stuff. I am not sure that the news articles are true or false, read for yourself and decide for yourself.

Overall I fall into the gap of having plenty of glocks and am no longer worried about what their next new release will be.

Maybe I am wrong to want someone to be really vocal about stuff, what I have read sounds iffy to me and will cost me too much in tax dollars to be worth the expense when there are still homeless shelters in every major city.

Either glock needs to be vocal, and say it in simple terms or I won't spend my rare hundreds of dollars on their products.

Bainx
February 11, 2003, 06:38 PM
I just purchased a Glock 30 model. Scraped, borrowed and begged for the money.
Now, I find out the SOBs have sold us out.

Take this to the bank...."Glock will suffer more than S&W"

You hide and watch:fire:

El Tejon
February 11, 2003, 06:45 PM
Second Amendment? There's no Second Amendment in EastEmpire!!!:confused:

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock has been busy horsetrading away your 2A rights" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!