Hi. My local paper ran a front-page story today about ballistic fingerprinting. Neither good nor bad, just a story.
http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/5258368p-6264674c.html
Here's my letter to the editor:
This is regarding your front-page story on Ballistic Fingerprinting that ran today, Tuesday November 19, 2002.
Yes, firearms do leave certain marks on bullets and spent casings that could possibly be used to identify the gun that fired the bullets. However, implementing ballistic fingerprinting on a large scale and expecting any level of accuracy from it is impossible and foolish.
First, the parts that create the marks, such as the barrel and extractor, are just that; parts. They wear out, break, and can be very easily and quickly replaced. This has several ramifications: The fingerprint that is recorded when a gun is new will be vastly different from the fingerprint left by a gun over time as more rounds are shot through the gun. Also, the recorded fingerprint can be rendered void at any moment by either altering the parts that create the marks, or replacing them entirely. Alteration can be done with a simple file, and replacement parts for guns are quite inexpensive.
If fingerprinting were to be implemented, then what about the nearly 300 MILLION guns that law-abiding Americans already own? If it isn't a logistical impossibility to get 300 million guns fingerprinted, then nothing is. And that rests on the huge assumption that everyone will comply expediently. Ever been to the DMV? We all know how expedient the government can be...
Ballistic fingerprinting is a joke, a scam, a boondogle, that will do nothing but give people a false sense of security while wasting their hard-earned tax dollars.
Regards
http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/5258368p-6264674c.html
Here's my letter to the editor:
This is regarding your front-page story on Ballistic Fingerprinting that ran today, Tuesday November 19, 2002.
Yes, firearms do leave certain marks on bullets and spent casings that could possibly be used to identify the gun that fired the bullets. However, implementing ballistic fingerprinting on a large scale and expecting any level of accuracy from it is impossible and foolish.
First, the parts that create the marks, such as the barrel and extractor, are just that; parts. They wear out, break, and can be very easily and quickly replaced. This has several ramifications: The fingerprint that is recorded when a gun is new will be vastly different from the fingerprint left by a gun over time as more rounds are shot through the gun. Also, the recorded fingerprint can be rendered void at any moment by either altering the parts that create the marks, or replacing them entirely. Alteration can be done with a simple file, and replacement parts for guns are quite inexpensive.
If fingerprinting were to be implemented, then what about the nearly 300 MILLION guns that law-abiding Americans already own? If it isn't a logistical impossibility to get 300 million guns fingerprinted, then nothing is. And that rests on the huge assumption that everyone will comply expediently. Ever been to the DMV? We all know how expedient the government can be...
Ballistic fingerprinting is a joke, a scam, a boondogle, that will do nothing but give people a false sense of security while wasting their hard-earned tax dollars.
Regards
