Random acts of violence and guns

[Alex Franke]

We lost the president of our student body here the other day -- shot several times, at least once in the head, first thing in the morning, and for apparently no reason whatsoever. (http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/03/06/...led/index.html)

This kind of thing just makes me sick.

*edited at the request of the original poster*

Why shouldn't weapons or the marks on them be trackable back to the person who purchased them? Add an RFID to every weapon, or catalog the unique physical or chemical "fingerprints" on the weapon before the weapon is sold... you wouldn't stop the most determined criminals from being unidentified, but my guess is we'd catch a lot more than we do now. At least the cops would have a lead in this case... :sigh:

-Original content appears below in order to preserve the context of this thread-

Why shouldn't bullets or the marks left on them by gun barrels be trackable back to the person who purchased them? Add an RFID to every bullet, or catalog the "fingerprints" left by gun barrels before the gun is sold... you wouldn't stop the most determined criminals from being unidentified, but my guess is we'd catch a lot more than we do now. At least the cops would have a lead in this case... :sigh:

[crokett]

We can already match bullets to weapons - rifling marks. Besides which, adding RFID to a bullet is only good if the bullet survives. Same limitation of rifling marks. And of course you have to find the gun to check for a match anyway.

[mschrank]

I just heard a story on NPR a couple days ago addressing your point. From what I recall of the story, the technology is not quite there. It's not quite like they show on CSI, where the computer spits out a 99.99% match in a matter of seconds.

Once a bullet is recovered, software exists to generate a list of possible matches based on the rifling marks. A technician must then examine each possible match.
As it is now, with all guns/rifling marks used in a crime cataloged, a technician may have several to a more than a dozen possible matches. If all guns were put in the registry prior to purchase, the number of possible matches would skyrocket and make it practically impossible to match.

Here's a link to the audio of the story:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...=1151961#share

[Ed62]

It's unfortunate our world has come to that. She sounds like a really nice girl, who had a bright future to look forward to.

What's happened to the world we live in? When I was her age, you almost never heard of a murder of any kind, unless it was in the big cities. Even then, it wasn't every day.

Ed

[maxparot]

It isn't that these type of things never happened years ago. What has happened is that we get more complete news and it is reported faster. Actually statistics show a decrease in violent crime in relation to the size of the population.
As for bullistic fingerprinting as stated the technology isn't ready. Plus it wouldn't do a thing to prevent shootings. New laws and restrictions will just keep guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens that wouldn't commit a crime with them anyway. A look at cities with complete gun bans show the problem, ban guns and criminals will ignore the laws (as criminals do) and law abiding citizens won't be able to defend themselves. Many people say the police would defend them but you don't have a police officer assigned to each citizen and they don't travel instantly when you call.
So what that leaves you is defending yourself. This is basic nature but also a right but how can you if you aren't equipped to do so? The answer isn't more restrictive laws it is putting people on a equal footing so a criminal must fear instant response to their actions. This fear will keep most in check but in the event of a defective mind on a rampage it will have the effect of limiting casualties.
That having been said with gun ownership comes responsibilities and those are to seek out proper training in it's use and keeping the weapon safe and secure. Of late I've heard the arguement that police arriving at a scene wouldn't know how to respond. This arguement really doesn't hold water since a trained citizen and police are both taught how to respond in this case. The citizen would follow police orders putting down their weapon and the police would take control of the scene and sort things out. Hopefully by this time the criminal would be dead and witnesses would step forward to tell or the heroic citizen. Otherwise is may take a bit longer to sort out.

[Alex Franke]

New laws and restrictions will just keep guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens that wouldn't commit a crime with them anyway.

How about this: When a gun is manufactured, it's fired three times and the rifling marks stored in a database. (Yes I understand the technology is not quite there yet, but it might be in the future, so why not start cataloging rifling marks now?) I can't see that raising the price of a gun all that much, and it certainly wouldn't make it harder for law abiding citizens to get one.

Or even better: When a bullet is manufactured, it gets an RFID, so just in case it survives, it can be used to track the person who bought the bullet. I can see this increasing the cost of bullets, but I don't think it would make them prohibitivly expensive.

If I were about to use a gun in a crime, either (a) i'm too stupid to care if the rifling marks have been cataloged and the bullet can be traced back to my (or at least the person I stole them from, which is at least a start -- or a lead), or (b) I have to invest extra time and money in non tracable bullets or guns, (c) I have to recover my bullets when I'm done with my crime.

If I'm using the gun to defend myself or family, then I don't care if the gun/bullet is tracable because I'm using it in self defense, and I'm not trying to hide that fact.

Sure someone who really wants to shoot someone else is still going to do it, but at least things like this would give law enforcement something to go on... Even if the rifling marks match 1,000 different guns, you can at least filter down that list to those purchased in the area of the crime, etc. It's not perfect, but it's a start. It's a lead -- something to go on, somewhere to start.

I agree what with gun ownership comes responsibility. People who kill other people are probably a lot less responsible than people who indend to use the guns legally. I think part of that responsibility is in helping to mitigate gun crime in general. If I buy a car I'm paying extra for seat belts to keep my passengers safe, crumple zomes to help keep safe anyone that my car might hit, VIN numbers inscribed everywhere, and sometimes even kill-switches that can stop the car if it's being used to commit a crime. If I wanted to comit a crime with a car I'd have to be too stupid to care, or I'd have to figre my way around all these things.

[crokett]

Please be careful. The technical aspects of tracking a gun are fine to discuss, as is the terrible tragedy that started this thread. Discussing gun control in general drifts this thread towards politics.

[os1kne]

I'm sorry for your loss.

I've been an avid shooter for most of my life, and am irritated every time I hear of a crime committed with a gun. Probably around 99.9% of gun owners are law-abiding and never commit an act of violence with their guns, yet a small number of people commit some horrible acts that cause new laws to be made (which have very little impact on the people who commit crimes, as these people were law-breakers to begin with.)

Anyway, the long and the short of ballistic fingerprinting is that it just isn't very accurate on a practical basis - under perfect conditions it has shown a fair level of accuracy, but perfect conditions rarely exist. Maryland has been using ballistic fingerprinting to build a database for about 10 years - and have yet to solve a single crime with it.

If microstamping is perfected, it could be much more useful at solving crimes - but it isn't nearly there yet either (and there are some simple things a criminal could do to thwart this.)

I sincerely hope that they catch the guy who did this and he is punished severely.

[Uncle Cracker]

How about this: When a gun is manufactured, it's fired three times and the rifling marks stored in a database. (Yes I understand the technology is not quite there yet, but it might be in the future, so why not start cataloging rifling marks now?)

I think this may be going on now, to a limited degree. I know the last Glock I bought new came packed with spent casings from test firings at the factory. I had heard that spent rounds from the test firings were tagged with the serial number and cataloged in some fashion.

I realize that this is a passionate issue with many, and I have no desire to initiate a pissing contest here, but the major problem I can see with this system is that there is no way to prove that the original purchaser of the weapon fired it in the commission of a crime, or even owned the gun at the time of the offense. A investigative starting point, perhaps, but I personally would not want to endure having to defend myself or my reputation if a weapon I might have sold or given away years ago had put a hole in someone in the hands of possibly its tenth owner, particularly if an over-zealous prosecutor with a yen to make a name for himself is involved. We have all seen cases where people's lives have been ruined just by being investigated, much less falsely accused, of a crime.

[Ed62]

It isn't that these type of things never happened years ago. What has happened is that we get more complete news and it is reported faster. Actually statistics show a decrease in violent crime in relation to the size of the population.

Better news coverage is certainly responsible for our hearing about it. From a local viewpoint, I can tell you that there are a lot more killings now than there was when I was a young man, in my twenties. Maybe violent crime is down nationally from 10 or 15 years ago, but I feel pretty certain it is way up from what it was 45 - 50 years ago.

Ed

[jessrice]

I think this may be going on now, to a limited degree. I know the last Glock I bought new came packed with spent casings from test firings at the factory. I had heard that spent rounds from the test firings were tagged with the serial number and cataloged in some fashion.

The glock rounds and casing are normally kept for Law enforcement records to determine shots fired by police officers and the "damage" inflicted. In this manor a department can determine which officer fired which shots.

In our local bi county area, when ever an officer is involved in a shooting, he trades his issued weapon in as evidence, and gets another immediately, and then testing is done on the recovered rounds, and compared to the originals supplied, and possibly to test rounds created after the fact. Even in these limited known circumstances cases, matches aren't always easy, and having a nationwide database would be even harder to match.

Plus that doesn't eliminate shotgun rounds, that leave no rifling marks. And if I read correctly last week, the shotgun is the 4th most used weapon in NY to commit crimes

Jesse

[Black wallnut]

Please be careful. The technical aspects of tracking a gun are fine to discuss, as is the terrible tragedy that started this thread. Discussing gun control in general drifts this thread towards politics.

Thanks David!!!

RE: RFID tags...... I'm a shooter. In times past when I was actively competing in pin shooting I'd practice at a rate of in excess of 1000 rounds per week. This does not even count .22 rimfire. In a match if things were going good for me I might burn through 100 rounds. This was weekly. Most all of my ammo was reloaded by myself and later in my shooting habit most of the bullets for practice were those I cast my self. I still cast but simply do not have the time to shoot as much these days. There are many others just like myself that shoot just as much. Adding to the cost of bullets is simply not an option.

RE: rifling marks..... every single round fired changes the barrel! AFAIK every single manufacturer test fires every single rifle or pistol before it leaves the factory. They fire into a bullet trap which likely deforms the bullets beyond any usefulness to ballistics techs for reference. To be useful for comparison I think I've read that they would need to be fired into ballistic gelatin or water.

RE: laws..... If only the laws that are currently on the books were enforced..... Why not register criminals rather than bullets, shooters or guns.

Every single time I read or hear on the news one of these sad stories it is only through my FAITH that there is a purpose to everything that I am able to not give up on my fellow man! I pray those close to the incident receive their needed comfort and support. True understanding likely will never come to them. Throughout our existence on this planet we as a species have done horrendous things to one another. I do not see any laws somehow performing a miracle and stopping the hurt.

[Hellrazor]

This whole topic reaks of big brother, politics, etc. and does not belong here.

Until current laws are enforced, do not try to make new ones. Do not dream up new laws to hinder normal citizens because of a few sociopathic individuals.

[Alex Franke]

This whole topic reaks of big brother, politics, etc. and does not belong here.

Then why stoke the fire?

Until current laws are enforced, do not try to make new ones. Do not dream up new laws to hinder normal citizens because of a few sociopathic individuals.

I think people are trying to enforce current laws (at least in this case I know they are), and I don't think anyone here is trying to dream up new laws to infringe on people's rights. In fact I think it's a good idea to keep ideas of "law" (and rights, etc) out of this topic altogether. It's not my intention to spark a political debate. To be perfectly clear: I'm not suggesting in any way that person, group, object, or technology should take any blame here, except for the murderer.

Back to the point of this topic: It makes me sick to see random acts of violence like this. It looks like the murderer left only a few bullets behind, and I sure wish there were a way to find out who might have put them in her body. If it were a knife or a hammer I would think the same thing.

I wouldn't mind if this topic were locked.

[Black wallnut]

How about this: When a gun is manufactured, it's fired three times and the rifling marks stored in a database. (Yes I understand the technology is not quite there yet, but it might be in the future, so why not start cataloging rifling marks now?) I can't see that raising the price of a gun all that much, and it certainly wouldn't make it harder for law abiding citizens to get one.

So who pays for this database? Sounds like you are advocating new legislation.

Or even better: When a bullet is manufactured, it gets an RFID, so just in case it survives, it can be used to track the person who bought the bullet. I can see this increasing the cost of bullets, but I don't think it would make them prohibitivly expensive.

Who is going to finance the R&D that would be needed to insure that these RFID tags do not effect bullet performance? Who is going to pay for the tooling necessary to install these RFID tags? What makes you think it will be reasonable? Perhaps the cost matters little to you since you are not the one buying ammo for legal purposes. Shooters will not pay this additional cost out of the goodness of their hearts since it clearly has no direct benefit to them. For this new technology to happen I think you would need new legislation and the costs would be passed on to the consumer!

If I were about to use a gun in a crime, either (a) i'm too stupid to care if the rifling marks have been cataloged and the bullet can be traced back to my (or at least the person I stole them from, which is at least a start -- or a lead), or (b) I have to invest extra time and money in non tracable bullets or guns, (c) I have to recover my bullets when I'm done with my crime.

This assumes record keeping and a database not currently existing... Who pays for it?

If I'm using the gun to defend myself or family, then I don't care if the gun/bullet is tracable because I'm using it in self defense, and I'm not trying to hide that fact.

Really???

Sure someone who really wants to shoot someone else is still going to do it, but at least things like this would give law enforcement something to go on... Even if the rifling marks match 1,000 different guns, you can at least filter down that list to those purchased in the area of the crime, etc. It's not perfect, but it's a start. It's a lead -- something to go on, somewhere to start.

You are assuming gun registration and tracking. In most states and cities this is simply not current law. Are you advocating that we make it law? Law enforcement already has plenty to go on in most cases. Adding a huge database that only covers current manufacture will not help. What about all the millions of guns that are currently legally owned that are not in the database, many likely to never be in a database without significant cost and legislation. Who is going to pay for this? The lawful gun owner when there is not direct benefit to them?

I agree what with gun ownership comes responsibility. People who kill other people are probably a lot less responsible than people who indend to use the guns legally. I think part of that responsibility is in helping to mitigate gun crime in general. If I buy a car I'm paying extra for seat belts to keep my passengers safe, crumple zomes to help keep safe anyone that my car might hit, VIN numbers inscribed everywhere, and sometimes even kill-switches that can stop the car if it's being used to commit a crime. If I wanted to comit a crime with a car I'd have to be too stupid to care, or I'd have to figre my way around all these things.

Probably!?? Are you kidding me, probably? Criminals who murder other citizen ARE not responsible! Citizens who lawfully own firearms for the most part are very responsible. In some locals citizens must already prove their responsibility to their local or state government prior to purchasing, owning, transporting or using guns. Cars cost more because of safety devices mandated by law but you are not advocating(see below) that guns also cost more so as to be cataloged in a giant database, along with ammo and buyers? It sure seems like you are advocating it to me!

Then why stoke the fire?



I think people are trying to enforce current laws (at least in this case I know they are)....

People do not enforce laws Law enforcement officers do! When people enforce laws it is called vigilante justice.

...., and I don't think anyone here is trying to dream up new laws to infringe on people's rights. ....

I think you are trying to dream up new laws that surely will trample on my rights. Your ideas if implemented will cost me money or reduce my ability to consume ammo.

In fact I think it's a good idea to keep ideas of "law" (and rights, etc) out of this topic altogether. It's not my intention to spark a political debate. To be perfectly clear: I'm not suggesting in any way that person, group, object, or technology should take any blame here, except for the murderer.

You opened this can of worms in your OP! You asked why not gun, projectile and purchaser database that would be available to LEA's.

Back to the point of this topic: It makes me sick to see random acts of violence like this. It looks like the murderer left only a few bullets behind, and I sure wish there were a way to find out who might have put them in her body. If it were a knife or a hammer I would think the same thing.

If this is the main point of your post you could have, perhaps should have edited your OP to exclude that which seems to be advocating certain elements of gun control!

I wouldn't mind if this topic were locked.

Your wishes may indeed come true! As you have read through my lengthly reply please consider this as coming from just another fellow forum member. My opinions in this case are my own and may not be the opinion of the ownership of this site. I as Admin see that this topic could be steered back on track. Early on a Moderator (Crokett) warned that this topic needed to narrowly focus on the OP of the needless loss of life at the hands of a criminal.

Lets keep the politics of gun control out of this discussion! Both sides are unlikely to sway the other sides thoughts or feelings! The only sure outcome is frustration and anger, and the locking of a topic! Lets rather focus on the terrible loss of a persons life! I would much rather remember Eve Carson for the person she was rather than reduced to a footnote in the gun control debate! I pray her family and friends, and I bet she has many, find comfort and support in this sorrow filled time!

If you are unwilling to stick to how this needless loss makes you feel then do not post! If your feelings lead you into a discussion of the politics of gun control take your comments elsewhere! I only like locking topics started by trolls or spammers!