Gun 'fingerprints' could be coming

[Desertdog]

Gun 'fingerprints' could be coming
http://nwitimes.com/articles/2007/01/18/sports/outdoors/b53863609520b0938625726600222bef.txt


MIKE SCHOONVELD
Times Correspondent

Now that the Democrats are back in control of Congress, look for bills aimed at dismantling our Second Amendment rights to start popping up like dandelions on a spring lawn.

One of the first schemes planned is a law requiring every gun in America to be "fingerprinted." Called "ballistic imaging technology," it's based on the presumption that every gun leaves unique, identifiable marks on a bullet casing fired from that gun.

Imaging laws would require every person who owns a rifle or pistol to go out and shoot it, then send the empty case to the government so the empty cartridge can be scanned into a computer database. Additionally, all new guns would be fired at the factory and the manufacturer would send in the empty case, thereby starting a paper trail of sorts which would lead to whomever ultimately bought the gun.

Sound far-fetched? California's Department of Justice studied the idea to see if the system would work on a state level. The research determined that the automated computer matching systems do not provide conclusive results.

Moreover, the study predicted that attempting to increase the number of shell casings through mass sampling of firearms sold in the state would overload their computers.

Maryland introduced its own ballistic imaging system in 2000. Every new handgun sold in the state must be accompanied by spent shell casings for input into the imaging network.

According to Maryland budget figures, approximately $15 million has been spent on the system, which now contains over 15,000 imaged cartridges. In six years, the system has been queried less than 200 times and has yet to be responsible for solving a crime.

Now there's money well spent.

One state, focusing only on new handguns, millions of dollars sunk into the program and zero results so far. Expand it to all states, all new guns and all existing guns, and you can see the potential bureaucratic mess which is likely to result.

And for what? Though guns do make marks on bullet casings, those marks, unlike fingerprints, may or may not be unique. About the best an expert could do is say a particular casing probably came from the same gun.

Human fingerprints don't change. A person with a bit of acid or a small file can change the "fingerprint" of a gun in seconds.

A system already exists to ID guns used in crimes. Called the National Integrated Ballistic Information Network and administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the program analyzes spent bullet casings found at crime scenes to determine if the gun had ever been used in a crime previously. Linking two or more crimes together is a solid clue that can be used to catch the criminal.

Mandatory gun "fingerprinting" is simply another way to lean on legal gun owners and create more governmental bureaucracy

 

[Manedwolf]

1. Replacement barrels and firing pins. Nobody's heard of that?
2. Revolvers don't drop brass.
3. Neither do autos with a baggie over the ejection port.
4. Has this EVER been used to solve any crime?

bullet casing fired from that gun

I see the reporter is typically well-versed in terminology.

Imaging laws would require every person who owns a rifle or pistol to go out and shoot it, then send the empty case to the government so the empty cartridge can be scanned into a computer database.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! *cough*

Yeah, all the gangstas will be right on that.

 

[Sistema1927]

Imaging laws would require every person who owns a rifle or pistol to go out and shoot it, then send the empty case to the government so the empty cartridge can be scanned into a computer database.

I wouldn't want any technicians fingers to get dirty, so I will make sure to tumble mine prior to sending it in.

 

[Waitone]

Old news. It used to be called "Ballistic Fingerprinting". It was implemented in NY and MD IIRC. It is expensive and utterly ineffective. The CAli DoJ issued a report on the technology calling it unworkable and a serious diversion of personpower and financial resources from reasonable police work.

 

[Caimlas]

This is simply an attempt at registration. Instead of registering the firearms themselves, they're registering the ballistic fingerprint of the gun - which is linked to the owner. Nevermind that ballistic fingerprinting doesn't work.

The words I'm thinking can't be posted here, so I'll leave it at that...

 

[Kali Endgame]

I thought 85% of guns used in crimes were stolen or bought off the street. IMO, only using this technology to possibly solve 15% percent of the crimes, is a retarded way of thinking. The data base has only been accessed, on average, less than forty times per year. Over two million dollars, on average, spent each year, to not solve a single crime. I wish I had that contract. All failure, no success and still get paid. Sign me up.

 

[Tbu61]

Has anyone heard that they are going to pass legislation that makes it unlawful to steal firearms and use them in the commission of a crime?????

That should put an end to firearms violence all by itself.

What a novel approach!

Ballistic fingerprinting is a total waste of time and money, but it gives uneducated society-at-large the impression that someone is doing something about crime. Pure political fluff that "Dont mean nothin"

 

[6_gunner]

So...basically they've found one more way to waste tax money and harass gun owners.
I'm sure they're throwing a party.
Paid for by more tax money.

 

[pax]

It's not a fingerprint, people. It's more like trying to identify people based on their hairstyle.

Fingerprints never change.

Hairstyles do change, both by intent (get it dyed, get a perm, get it cut) and by just normal living (it grows).

The ballistic markers change both by intent (swap barrels, firelap, drop in new parts) and by normal wear and tear.

Every shooter who has ever fired a gun has altered the gun's "fingerprint."

So it's not a fingerprint at all. It's a hairstyle.

pax

 

[Standing Wolf]

There's no such thing as an idea too stupid for the leftist extremists to uphold as a so-called "solution" to the problem of so-called "gun violence."

 

[thexrayboy]

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
It never ends...it never ends!!!

 

[Ryder]

Coincidentally I just read an article regarding the subject. It's about a standard bullet they've designed to certify their equipment.

They'll be creating a bunch of these. Oddly enough they won't use a firearm to make them but a diamond tipped machine for better repeatability (haha).

Here's the bullet-



Here's the story -
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/01/070119164400.htm

 

[White Horseradish]

Fingerprints never change.

As one who has removed a thumbprint and grew a different one, I beg to differ.

 

[Zoogster]

This is simply an attempt at registration. Instead of registering the firearms themselves, they're registering the ballistic fingerprint of the gun - which is linked to the owner. Nevermind that ballistic fingerprinting doesn't work.

That is the purpose, pure and simple.
They know it won't work. CA DOJ that is very unfriendly to guns already deduced it would be inneffective in the entire state of CA nevermind the entire United States. The markings are not that unique, the computer simply flags a number of possible matches which must then be investigated and test fire once again by hand. The possible matches that live closer to the crime being investigated will likely be hit first. Another good reason for no knock raids on potential suspects that are known to be heavily armed! You may be innocent, but they cannot even narrow down if your 'hairstyle' is a close match until after they test it by hand. So until they test it by hand they must consider you a potential suspect, and obviously since you own a gun, and one that may have been used to kill meaning you could possibly be dangerous. Sounds like it warrants the SWAT team!
Oh an accidental convictions based on circumstantial evidence are even more likely. Expert tells jury it is perfect science, gives a lab setting example to prove it, jury believes it, you happen to not have lived in the wrong place, your out of luck. Your future is being decided by people just told it was a match.
Criminals and gang members often sell the same weapon, trade it for drugs, etc so even finding someone in possession of a murder weapon does not even mean they are the killer. They may even be in some way connected to the victim because many in inner cities are in some way connected or know someone that knows someone. So you can have opportunity, and murder weapon and still it means nothing in the type of enviroment most murders occur in. Combine that with the constantly changing print of the firearm and you have a seriously pointless system.

 

[Desertdog]

From Ryder's posting at http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0119164400.htm

Earlier efforts at standard bullets produced by real guns could show minute changes in signatures due to gun wear and environmental conditions.

They even realize that the markings change but won't give up.:banghead:

 

[wacki]

3. Neither do autos with a baggie over the ejection port.

Do they even make these for handguns? Heck, I've never seen one for a rifle.

 

[Soybomb]

Do they even make these for handguns? Heck, I've never seen one for a rifle.

They do, and now you have

 

[S.P.E.C.T.R.E.]

If I recall correctly, and I'll have to double check the DOJ report, they fired 10 bullets from 10 guns and then fired another bullet from one of the guns and gave it to the technicians. The techs never identified the correct gun.

But of course that doesn't matter to the anti-gun crowd.

Edit: Here's an awesome article that tears it all apart:

The Smallest Minority

 

[Desertdog]

From the Smallest Minority story

http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2005/01/why-ballistic-fingerprinting-doesnt.html

The Brady Center says much the same:

In the Maryland sniper shootings, police rapidly matched bullet fragments from each victim to prove that the same gun was used in all of the shootings. The technology to match bullets to firearms is known as "ballistic fingerprinting." It worked and provided police with important crime leads. But what was missing, what police desperately needed, was a nationwide database of the ballistic fingerprint of every gun before it is sold so that police could determine not just that the bullets came from the same gun, but which specific gun - manufacturer, model, serial number - the bullets were fired from. That would have helped police trace the sniper after the very first victim.

If I recall correctly, when the gun was recovered and traced back to the store, it was reportedly stolen. So much for; "That would have helped police trace the sniper after the very first victim".

 

[carebear]

Easy to fix. We'll just make it a felony for a store owner and his employees to not have all of their thieves fill out a 4473 for each firearm stolen.

That will ensure all the guns are trackable to their first acquirer, lawful or not.

I don't know why you guys think this registration should be so hard.

 

[gyp_c2]

yup...

...it's all...about the databases...

Now that all the alphabet guys are plugged in together, they want more and more stuff to play with...a little here, a little there...who knows which combination will be the wiener...

One thing's for sure, they're gonna' keep trying to fill in the blanks...The more digital things become, the easier it will be to access...If you make things difficult, then make it just a little easier, there's less complaint about the fact that it shouldn't have happened at all... just a thought...

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

I call BS on this, we were told by various THR members that the Democrats would not seek gun control if they got power, and that the newly elected Democrats are pro-gun conservatives, so even if it did come to a vote, the real gun-grabbing bad Democrats are still in the minority thus making passage of gun control an impossibility.


I wonder where these DU'ers with THR accounts are now?

 

[jeepmor]

Okay, as a semiconductor failure analysis technician who works with scanning electron microscopes and high grade optics, this won't work.

Take your new gun to the range, fire a round, pick up the case and image it.

Now, fire another 50 rounds through it and image the 50th case. With powder fouling and such, the cases will be different. Unless your firing pin has a particularly unique mark it makes, forget it. Powder fouling will make each case slightly different as the chamber and action become dirty and fouled.

Same for identifying the bullet, but not as drastic. The 1st bullet out of a clean gun will not match the 50th bullet out of the same gun. Copper and powder fouling will foil it yet again. You could gather some data, but really about all your going to be able to conclude is twist rotation, rate, and caliber. You could tell if it came from a polygonal barrel versus a standard rifled barrel. And again, if your rifling has some particularly unique marks they will show. 1000 rounds later, not so much.

A few rounds of the abrasive bullets for breaking in a gun. A good scrubbing of the bore with an abrasive bore paste and things of this nature will change the fingerprint each and every time.

Fortunately for the .gov types, criminals are usually quite dumb and will never think of these things.

Analysis like this is exceedingly time consuming and expensive. But hey, it gives the .gov dorks something to do with all our money.

 

[Cosmoline]

It's a back door to registration, not to mention new laws outlawing components and making any change in the barrel or its "print" a federal felony. If they push this through, the time will have come to raise the black flag.

 

[Kbaker]

Black flag?

So, New York's Sullivan Act wasn't time to raise the black flag?

The 1934 NFA wasn't?

The 1968 GCA wasn't?

The 1994 AWB wasn't?

Door-to-door gun confiscation in New Orleans wasn't?

But ballistic fingerprinting (and backdoor registration) is?

Don't make me laugh. If the flag goes up, nobody'll salute.

(My apologies for the snark, but I've been in a really crappy mood recently.)

And S.P.E.C.T.R.E., thanks for the link to my piece on Ballistic Fingerprinting.