Doofus alert - NRA helped the Washington sniper

aikidoka - mks

New member
Philadelphia Daily News
Thu, Oct. 10, 2002

WASHINGTON SNIPER HAS A FRIEND IN NRA
HOW THE ORGANIZATION HAS UNWITTINGLY HELPED A FIEND

FORGET HANNIBAL LECTER, the embodiment of evil in its purest form is roaming the Washington, D.C., area right now, killing and wounding adults and children with cold dispatch.

We don't know his name, but we do know this: The mystery sniper who has all of Washington hiding under its covers has an identifiable partner in crime who should be held nearly as responsible for these reprehensible acts as the shooter - the National Rifle Association.

Because of the NRA, police are having a harder time catching this crazy than they should.

Other than a chilling tarot card depicting death and bearing this handwritten message "Dear Policeman: I am God," investigators have found only one other kind of clue to track this monster down: bullet fragments.

Ballistics have long allowed police to link a bullet to a particular gun. So if they ever find this killer and his weapon, they can clearly connect rifle and crime.

But what if you could reverse the process and link a gun to a particular bullet? The technology now exists for every gun's ballistic "fingerprint" to be kept on file. In this way, police could instantly know which specific gun was used in the commission of a crime and track down the owner.

But who has opposed this sensible idea? The NRA. The organization has bullied Congress into refusing to set up a national registry of guns.

A federal program is needed because a piecemeal effort won't be enough. Maryland, where many of these shootings have been committed, requires gun manufacturers to submit ballistic fingerprints of guns sold in the state. But that information is useless if the weapon was purchased in another state, or before the requirement went into effect.

Experts believe the weapon being used is either an assault rifle or a hunting rifle. A hunting rifle, in particular, will be difficult to trace because the NRA has been very effective in keeping any information about hunting rifles away from law enforcement officials.

We're all for privacy, but it's reckless to put privacy of gun ownership above human lives. If the government has a compelling reason to know what car you drive, what home you live in and how much you earn, shouldn't it also know what kind of gun you own?

Nothing will bring back the six lives - or possibly a seventh victim gunned down last night - that have been lost, or spare the pain and terror a 13-year-old felt when he was cut down by a .223 caliber bullet. But maybe this horror in the nation's capital will finally force Congress to ignore the dangerous rhetoric of the NRA.

----------

Have it at everyone!
 
Blame the NRA. :rolleyes: Might was well blame auto mobile mfgs for giving him the mobility he needs to do his crimes. Blame his doctor for slapping his bottom. Blame the farmer for growing the wheat for his bread. Blame God for the water he drinks.
 

Jonbenjon

New member
I may be wrong about this, but it seems to me if you took a cartidge & rolled the bullet in some lube and 600 grit abrasive you'd change the 'signiture' of the barrel after a couple rounds...

It's the kind of thing folks do for accurizing all the time.

A few minutes with a polishing compound and I expect you'd get the same result in the chamber as well.

Not something I've heard discussed in conjunction with this kind of noise before.

John
 

bastiat

New member
I'm sure someone else will provide more info, but changing the barrel signature is supposed to be pretty easy - just shoot it a bunch, or use some bore paste on it (never used it, so I'm not familiar with it). Also, the primer marks on the casing can be changed with a file.

But if it helps solve a crime, I think we should all line up for fingerprinting and give DNA samples, too. At least those can't be changed. It's for the children.
 

foghornl

New member
a Dremel "moto-tool", any metal polish, and 5 minutes. Signature [ballistic fingerprint, if your prefer] changed.

++++++++++++IDIOTS++++++++++++
 

Fred S

New member
Funny that this is the thried or so "editorial" on this I've seen and they are all very similar. The anti's fax and email netwrok must have been humming last night.
 

BayouBlaster

New member
Establishing a ballistic fingerprint database makes about as much sense as creating an automotive footprint agency to record the tire tread of every new car sold in this country.
 

answerguy

New member
One oversight everyone. This is assuming he's using HIS OWN rifle. He may be a whacked out SOB but I doubt if he's using his own store bought gun.
 

Russ

New member
I think you compliment them by calling them Doofuses. They are far more pathetic than that. However, given the limitations of the board regarding profanity, its a pretty good description and is good for a laugh.
 

WyldOne

New member
A similar (though less inflammatory) article appeared in today's Boston Globe. I read it, knowing that you guys disapproved of it, but unable to articulate why.

But what if you could reverse the process and link a gun to a particular bullet? The technology now exists for every gun's ballistic "fingerprint" to be kept on file. In this way, police could instantly know which specific gun was used in the commission of a crime and track down the owner.

Don't get me wrong--I'm not advocating for this kind of thing. I just lack the experience to know why this would be a bad (unrealistic?) idea.

Someone care to walk me through this? :)
 

Fred Hansen

New member
Someone care to walk me through this?
I'll take a stab at it. Ballistic "fingerprinting" is meaningless. As stated above, a person with 5 minutes to spare out of their criminal day can quite easily alter the factory "fingerprint" signature of any gun just before they bust a cap in someone's a$$.

Also, let's say a criminal like Sarah*cough, cough*Brady makes a strawman purchase as she did for her son and his "High-powered .30-06 sniper rifle", and she were to succumb to lung cancer before that rifle was used in a crime. She is (hypothetically) dead. The rifle (for the sake of argument no one has tried to alter it's "fingerprint") is traced to her. Again, for the sake of argument, she took the knowledge of the strawman purchase to her grave, no one knows she bought it for her son. And so, we have a rifle that can be followed as far as the dead woman who bought it. Not very useful information, is it?

Wyld, you live in one of the crime capitals of the U.S. How many burglaries would you say go unsolved? So my rifle is stolen, it gets used in a crime, they trace it to me. So what? How does that get them closer to the person that committed the crime if they can't even figure out who broke into my house, much less the names of the 2-5 people whose hands it passed through after the theft?

This is just another example of how weak-minded the liberal left in this country is. They make the fruitiest proposals without giving the implications and consequences of their brain-damaged ideas a moments thought. they make me want to :barf:
 
Last edited:

flinch_of_gt

New member
The idea behind "ballistic fingerprinting" is this: a fired case has unique marks from the extractor, ejector, and breechface. A bullet fired through a barrel also has unique rifling marks. If you store the information in a central database, you can link a firearm back to the owner.

There are two problems. A ballistic fingerprint is a one-time snapshot of a gun. Ejectors, extractors, and barrels all suffer wear through normal use, and all can (and should) be replaced at regular intervals. Change one part, and the fingerprint is useless.

There are other ways to defeat the program. Replacement barrels are common for all firearms. Coating the barrel with a mild abrasive and firing rounds through ("fire-lapping") changes the rifling marks. I can swap uppers on my AR-15 with a friend, and the authorities would have no idea what had just happened.

It's typical, unthinking, feel-good bliss-ninnyism at work.
 

Russ

New member
Ballistic fingerprinting every gun is tantamount to REGISTRATION. If you have to get the government's approval to have a gun, then it's not a right anymore. It won't work anyway. As I understand it, around 20,000 guns have been sold that have gone through this process in NY and MD. Not one of these guns has been traced to a crime. I'm willing to bet that at least one of those guns has been used in a crime.
 

dischord

New member
Ballistic fingerprinting has very limited use and need for a huge cost.

USE

A large number of factors all must be present for ballistic fingerprinting to be useful. If any one is missing, it won't be useful.

1) You must recover a bullet (and/or casing).

2) The bullet/casing must be in a condition to read. Bullets can be severely deformed and even destroyed.

3) The print must not have been altered (purposely or through wear).

4) The gun must be in the system. You know there will be a black market of non-system guns.

4b) The gun must be owned legally. This knocks out a huge swath of crime guns -- in D.C. Chicago, etc. the guns will be outside the system.

5) The gun still must be owned by the person who registered the fingerprint, and that person must be the perpetrator or tied to the perp.

6) The gun must be recovered in the possession of the perpetrating owner. "Gee officer, that gun was stolen six months ago" -- indeed, a savvy perp will make such a report ahead of time to cover his tracks. (this is different from #5 -- ownership vs. possession)

NEED

1) The crime must have no witnesses who can identify the perp -- if there are such witnesses, then the fingerprint is moot.

2) Of the unwitnessed crimes, there must be no other readily available ways to tie the perp to the crime. For example, a woman is shot, and her estranged husband slips town. Again the fingerprint is moot in identifying him to aprehend/question.

COST

For comparison, consider the FBI's computerized (real) fingerprint database -- Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS). It cost $640 million to just implement about 34-35 million records (source).

Thats about $19 per print just to set up the system. Just getting the estimated 200 million guns into the system would cost $3.8 billion (some estimates go up to 250 million guns = $4.75 billion).

Now let's talk maintenance costs.

While I can't find what FBI spends a year to maintain IAFIS, the system is significantly cheaper to maintain than a ballistic fingerprint system would be for two reasons:

1) Real fingerprints do not change form over time. There would have to be a system to update the ballistic fingerprints every so often, or the records will become useless (see number 3 above). That updating is unneeded with IAFIS.

2) Real fingerprints do not change owners. There would have to be a system to change the ownership records. (Yes, this would be de-facto national registration).

Incidentally, the system would have to be run by the federal government. The reason we got IAFIS was that the state-level and regional fingerprint systems did not speak to each other.
 
Last edited:
The idea of more gun control to catch this guy is redundant. The rifle this guy is running around with is a banned weapon in all the areas the shootings have occurred, Washington DC has an all out gun ban, anyone this sick is about guaranteed to have a history of mental illness and/or a criminal record which in theory is supposed to prevent him from ownership of a firearm. Ballistic fingerprinting would be a waste in this case as it's a foregone conclusion that this rifle was not purchased though official channels.

BTW, anyone want to take bets this guy is ex-military?
 
Top