Scientists reject bullet-mark database

J Bloe, Noware, Mississippi — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 17:51:58 GMT

Before the government implements this plan I sincerely hope they make sure it works. The last thing I want is a SWAT team descending on my house in the middle of the night because of a faulty computer match.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Real Texan, Dallas, Texas — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 17:56:18 GMT

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." -- 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights

I think the point of the above is that "The People" (you and I) should be free to own and bear firearms, with one of the purposes being to safeguard against tyranny (in our own federal government, should that ever arise).

To give the government more power to track and limit and prosecute (and persecute) only undermines that very freedom.

Besides, firearms change owners several times during their lifetime. Every firearm I have ever owned, except for the last two, now belong to some other person who bought them from the gun store I sold them to.

Am I to be held suspect for the misuse of a firearm I no longer own? That would be like getting traffic tickets for a car you sold years ago (that happened to me once, by the way. Was a pain to clear up.).

We do not need more Orwellian law enforcement practices or procedures. Already, "big brother" is becoming more a threat to our freedoms, privacy, and maybe safety than the criminal elements in our society.

Seriously, I no longer fear crime as much as I fear an overwatchful, overpowered centralized government.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Teri T — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:07:48 GMT

With such a huge budget deficit, this is what our federal government feels the need to spend money on?

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Perry Blowitz — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:30:48 GMT

re: Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Mr. Williams ignorance about fire arm technology is breath taking.

The firing pin does not "punch a hole" in the base of the cartridge, it leaves a dimple when it strikes the primer.

The bullet doesn't "scrape" the interior of the barrel. It spins, due to the lands and groves, and this action leaves stirations, not "scratches".

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

(lillian cooper, norfolk,va.) bibershane@verizon.net — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:41:51 GMT

I write, and more successfully, read a lot of mysteries. I've never been willing to have one of my villians convicted as a result of ballistic fingerprinting. Seems just too good to be true!

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Bill — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:47:58 GMT

So, what happens when you change barrels, which is a common practic even with "legal" weapons?

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

john doe, san antonio — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:53:55 GMT

All too easly altered to be reliable. It is not the gun but the shooter.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Richard, Germantown, Maryland — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:58:24 GMT

A new gun goes through a 'break in' period where it changes the marking left on the bullets through a gradual process. After a new gun has had a few hundred rounds fired through it, this database becomes useless. The wear points have made the original bullet or casing 'prints' impossible to match with the latest cases and bullets fired.
On top of that, changing firing pins and barrels on a semi-automatic handgun is as easy as cleaning it, changing the markings yet again.
If you check, you will find out that Maryland's fired case database has solved ZERO cases in the years it has been in operation.
It is a waste of time, money and resources to build such a database.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

M, Logan, Ut. — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:07:19 GMT

It is a good thing that technology can not keep up with the people that want to run your life. If technology could track every single firearm in America, there are still enough firearms in the hands of the criminal elements of society currently, that they wouldn't be traceable anyway.
Now, if you took every firearm that is used in a legitimatly convicted criminal act, after the need for evidence is no longer necessary, and destroyed it,(unless it was stolen from a legitimate owner) then you could start to make a dent in crime. Everyone else, be responsible!

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Dan Cantrell — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:09:15 GMT

Nice pipe dream! Did you forget the billions of firearms already in existance? They just don't go away. And almost all guns last for a couple of hundred years if properly cared for with cleaning, maintenance and oiling. Improve the fingerprint and DNA knowledge instead.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Dan Cantrell — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:15:12 GMT

Not gonna work! Waste of time and money. Most barrels and firing pins can be changed fairly easy. Millions of people reload their own ammo. Many make their own bullets. Is Uncle Sam going to deprive Americans of this right?

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

bugs in pcfl — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:48:20 GMT

Even if you do have the "fingerprint" of a certain barrel, barrels are easily replaced.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

john norris, keno, oregon — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 21:12:06 GMT

Just one more step to prevent people from owning firearms for self protection, and it has many faults. Some criminal shoots someone, keeps his empty shells & throws a handful of shells recovered from a range. The judges let criminals that use firearms off with light sentences. That must be reversed with mandantory long sentences for commiting an offense using a firearm.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Keith Mathis, Bloomington, IN — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 21:27:03 GMT

I support the National Academies of Science' recommendation for a cautious approach to establishment of a nationwide database of firearms markings on bullets. I think it's necessary to further study, particularly to see the affects on the bullets from long-term firing and use of handguns. We don't want to see ballistics "experts" saying that a gun was used to the exclusion of all others when it wasn't. Good call NAS. Now let's hope the DOJ listens and accepts their recommendations.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

A. Kunz, McHenry, IL — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 21:43:45 GMT

As there is but ONE company that holds the patents to the "microstamping" of firearms & cartridges, they are pushing members of Congress to promote this technology(sp). It is not proven & could easily be defeated by simple means. It will only add another burden to legitimate firearms enthusiasts, while doing nothing to eliminate criminals from obtaining firearms.
It is a worthless waste of time & money that could be better spent on other ways of fighting crime, such as removal of weak judges from office & further enforcement of EXISTING firearms laws.
The firearms industry is the most heavily regulated legitimate business in the world, more encroachment of law abiding citizens is NOT the answer.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Jim Thomas, Baker City, Oregon — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 22:11:57 GMT

About time someone with common sence weighed in on this issue. Science can do some great things, but don't try to push science and technology past reasonable or realistic bounds.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Dan Cantrell, Olympia, Washington — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 22:30:03 GMT

Their are billions of guns in existance! And they last for hundreds of years with proper cleaning, oiling and maintenence. Millions of people load their own ammo. Improve DNA and fingerprinting. Why punish guns? The common criminal is responsible for all crime!

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Joe C, Midland, TX — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 23:16:38 GMT

Microstamping. Easily defeated, wears out quickly, and is single sourced. In fact, the overshelming major proponent of microstamping is the vendor. Another application that will only apply to the law abiding.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Vic Hinze, Bangor, Wisconsin — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 00:49:42 GMT

Thomas Jefferson’s commitment to liberty extended to many areas of individual freedom.
In his "Commonplace Book," he copied a passage from Cesare, Marquis of Beccaria related to the issue of gun control. The quote reads,

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes ... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Mike J, Nipomo CA — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 00:54:12 GMT

I find it enlightening that every response on this blog finds fault with the foolishness of pursuing this technology. In addition each response has been well stated and articulate. NBC has never stood out to me a "voice for freedom" in regards to 2nd amendment issues. Yet my fellow readers appear to share a sensible understanding of the traditional constitutional interpretation of freedom and indepedence. Cheers guys!

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Nic Mertes, Rochester, NY — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 01:09:06 GMT

Despite the evidence that makes it somewhat apparent that he's not particularly familiar with firearms, he's right about the size of the database, and potential mis-matches. He also forgot to mention cost. New York state has had a system like this working for years now, oddly enough the company is run by the a former BATFE director (kickbacks, corruption). Having a larger database would only increase the time it took to search, as well as the number of incorrect matches. Now, the database in New York has come up with two hits, and while that's potentially two criminals behind bars, that's not the case here. It turns out it was two people completely unrelated to the crime who were prosecuted on a shred of falsified evidence, just because some scratches on a casing from a crime were remotely similar to ones on a gun that they have. Now another thing this article fails to mention is wear. Every time that pistol closes on a cartridge, there's going to be some wear on the parts that are touching the cartridge. Using inexpensive steel-cased practice ammunition will further speed the wear of the chamber, feed ramp, and other parts contacting the cartridge. Also, the firing pin will round off slightly as time goes by.

Many of the shortcomings with this are also present in the ammunition microstamping, as well. If we look at the company who holds the patent on microstamping ammunition, we'll see it's run by two advocates for gun control. While they did do experiments to see if it's possible, they were loading single rounds at a time, and have no idea how to implement this in a manufacturing process. If this is ever implemented, all ammunition sold will put cash right into their pocket, as well as rob hard working Americans by severely increasing the cost of ammunition, and will cost jobs when manufacturers are closed down due to loss of sales of ammunition, and the increased cost. There's no evidence that stamped ammunition would even keep the stamp readable after being fired, or that, in the process of manufacturing hundreds of thousands of rounds in a single day, that every bullet and cartridge in a given box would match the serial on the box, or that criminals wouldn't lurk at firing ranges picking up spent brass to for false evidence to implicate an innocent citizen in a crime.

All this ammunition control is marked by corruption, and no real world way to make it work.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Robert, Claflin, KS — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 01:28:07 GMT

I still don't understand why the idiots in D.C. can't propose enforcing the laws already on the books. By the time THEY get done, the only thing I'll have with which to protect my livestock will be a stick. I suppose my entire purpose in life will be to raise wild animal food.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

John Doe, Anyplace Illinois — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 01:40:42 GMT

Just another way to infringe upon the rights of the law abiding. Why don't we enforce the laws that are already in place. Oh, but then there wouldn't be a way to persecute the law abiding. Stop throwing the criminal back into the very society they have taken something from. Wrong is wrong no matter how you approach it.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

John S. Boise, ID — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 02:01:37 GMT

Why a handgun registry? Why not all guns? A .30-06 "hunting" rifle is much more powerful and deadly than an "evil" handgun. Quite simply because this is all window dressing, mostly at the bequest of people who don't understand guns and therefore fear them, and by categorizing "handguns" and "assault rifles" as somehow inherently evil, distracts from the real problem, the criminal (who was probably the product of his abusive environment).

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

William, Indiana — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 02:56:19 GMT

Why do we continue to waste money on stuff like this? There are too many ways for this to be inaccurate. Too many easy ways to make the bullet fired today no longer match the original fingerprint. Also, anybody who knows anything about statistics will tell you it's a time waster because it is just too imperfect. It will just produce fairly large groups of possible matches. Would you then use it to prove a non-match/innocence? I think that would be a mistake. This is junk science.

Fairly recently the FBI has abandoned a so called technology of matching bullets based on their chemical composition. This has been scientifically proven to be invalid. For decades this was used as evidence and hundreds of people have been convicted with the help of this "technology". Some of these people could be innocent if that played a major role in their conviction. Others, even guilty ones, may now have a valid case for appeal. This was junk science. But it was believed for quite some time.

Spend the money supporting better police work, rewards for proven information and protection of witnesses.

Maybe if the average citizen new a bit more about science we wouldn't be doing crazy things like this or at least they wouldn't be believing in some magic infallible correlation. Why is it that people want to believe that there is no way two things could appear exactly the same? As a juror we want someone to tell us, don't worry about making a mistake, the evidence is flawless. That takes away the responsibilty of making a serious decision. It lets prosecutors off the hook for putting together a strong case.

This is a case of people seeking the "Magic Bullet", (pun intended), for solving crime. Who will benefit from it besides the people trying to sell the "technology"?

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Freedom-Socialist State of NY — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 11:14:24 GMT

One more liberal press attempt to restrict our rights

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

James M., Pensacola, FL — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 12:09:24 GMT

It is possible, and not illegal, to build your own firearm for personal use. This would completely defeat the database for anyone so determined.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

JW Binghamton, NY — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 12:55:53 GMT

This board seems to be more about gun control than bullet markings so I'll throw in my two cents. On one hand I am against gun control but on the other hand I'd like to point out that when some nut goes on a rampage with a few semi automatics, he winds up killing or injuring crowds of people. It just seems that guns are responsible for more killings of innocent people than they are for saving innocent people. I know the old saying about guns don't kill people, people kill people, but people with guns that can rapidly fire huge clips seem to kill a lot of people and no one seems to have a solution except to take our guns away. The two sides of this issue are so far apart I don't see an answer coming anytime soon.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Larry in Central, Il. — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:26:34 GMT

After the imprint of the new gun is made, it can
be altered with nail, small file or anything that
will scratch or engrave marks of ay kind inside
the barrel, now changing the original imprint.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Tony,, Colorado — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:32:57 GMT

While I can see the value if such a database for forensics and such, I cannot see it as a practical step in law enforcement. Bullets aremade by many manufacturers and each hasc characteristics that would leave a different type of ballistic fingerprint, due to construction, powder, and bullet composition. For instance a copper jacket, vs a teflon armor piercing jacket vs. a steel jacket. Criminals often modify barrels of their fireaarms to mask the ballistics, too. Illegal firearms are often used in crimes. These have serial numbers removed.

And... what about shotguns? these have no ballistic fingerpirnt.

I see the problems far outwieghing the benefits. Catalog them as the come in , and confiscate those used in crimes. Don't penalize the public for Artice 2 of the Constitution.

For you gun control freaks, I would remind you that no gun ever walked up and killed anyone. It took a person who intnded to harm another to do the job. Take guns away, and they'll use knives, chains, bat, or pipes to do the job. I respect your right to choose not to own a firearm, so please respect my right to choose t ownone responsibly.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

ron gillis, tianshui, gansu province, china — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:39:03 GMT

this is a great idea. im sure that the fbi is now negotiating with the bloods, crips, and montana milita to arrange for all of their guns to be included in the database.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Randell Rogers, Leesburg, Virginia — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 14:54:48 GMT

That's all very interesting but there are thousands, and perhaps tens of thousands, of handloaders here in the United States. Not only do we reuse brass that we pick up at the range from other shooters but some of us even manufacture our own lead projectiles from items as common as car wheel weights. I'm very curious as to how they are going to go about this. Here is an idea, perhaps in this country you are innocent until proven guilty and at that time you will be embedded with an RFI chip to track your movements and ongoings instead of assuming the law abiding American Citizen is going to be guilty. Oh but wait, it's far too difficult to take away the rights of criminals and too easy to take away the rights of law abiding citizens. What was I thinking?

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Mike McInnis, Olive Branch, MS — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:35:02 GMT

All forms of pre-emptive attempts to prevent or solve crime are destined to impose their burden only on the law abiding citizen. They have no other real purpose than control of the people by the state and its minions. People who develop hair brained schemes like bullet marking always excuse their attempts as being for the public safety, or to protect the children or some such drivel. In reality, they always turn out to be an approach to arms control on a tangent designed to snooker the population into giving away another increment of personal freedom.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

John Allen, Sedalia MO. — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 03:45:56 GMT

For all the pink fuzzy bunny crowd out there instead of looking at law abiding folk with firearms as the problem why not have a look at the criminal justice system and how less than 10% of violant offenders serve a full sentance? Didn't know that? Hmm, "average joe gun owner" has no say in that arena. Defective projectile marking devices or related legislation will not change the mentality of the criminaly inclined. Complete removal from society worked in recent history and the calender moving forward does not seem to have civilized this element in the least. Lets go back to individual responsibility for individual actions!

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Pete Farris, St. Michaels, MD — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:04:18 GMT

Maryland uses this system. To date, no crimes have been solved through the use of the handgun fingerprint database. Neither have any been solved using the database in NY. I'm referring, of course, to a new gun database, not one generated from crime scene recoveries.

Scientists reject bullet-mark database

Mike — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 23:31:45 GMT

Another waste of time and effort again. The problem with microstamping ammunition is that it's only unique to one round or one gun. And, that one gun and one round could easily have changed hands away from the original owner or creater. The marks on the ammunition are not unique to a person like the way a person's DNA is unique to them. This is why it's not a slam dunk like the way human DNA is nearly a perfect match to someone. The government should focus on improving its criminal justice system and law enforcement programs, not go after law-abiding citizens.