Baloney Ballistics

[dihappy]

http://www.reason.com/news/show/130311.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

aloney Ballistics
Gun databases fail

Brian Doherty | January 2009 Print Edition
Seven years ago, New York started a database of "ballistic fingerprints" for all new handguns sold in the state. The bill's backers sold it as a crime-solving device, arguing that the state would now have a sample of a spent shell and bullet for every new gun sold (anyone got a Kimber :)). This, they said, would help police connect future evidence from crime scenes to specific guns.

Since then, the authorities have entered 200,000 newly purchased guns into the database and spent $1 million dollars a year on the system. Yet it hasn't led to a single solved crime. The only other state with such a database, Maryland, can attribute at least one conviction to the system since it was created in 2000-more than zero, but few enough that the state's own Police Forensics Division has suggested scrapping the program because of its demonstrated lack of benefits.

This hasn't come as a surprise to gun rights activists, who pointed to several potential problems when the databases were originally debated. Among them: The markings left by a gun are not guaranteed to be the same over the long term and can be deliberately changed with simple expedients such as filing inside the barrel; the vast majority of guns used in crimes are stolen or otherwise obtained in a black market, not used by their original legal owner; devoting so much record keeping to every gun sold guarantees wasted effort, since less than 1 percent of all guns sold will ever be used in a crime.

In 2003 a report from the California Attorney General's Office recommended against launching such a program because of its likely ineffectiveness in crime solving. And a March 2008 study from the National Research Council recommended against a national version of the New York and Maryland databases. In addition to noting the obvious ways in which such a program could be easily circumvented by criminals, the study said the theory behind the ballistics databases—that every gun marks shells and bullets in specific, stable, identifiable ways—has not been scientifically proven.

italics added by me

[CopOnce]

Ballistics work great when you have the suspect in custody and a weapon has been recovered to show the bullet came from the gun. Assuming a weapon was used in a crime, I'll about guarantee you that the gun that is being tested isn't that of the original owner. Most likely a theft report will be found on it through NCIC/TCIC.

I can't for the life of me understand the thinking of some people. The creators of these programs must know that a law biding citizen will never come up in their data base. They should understand that Mr. Crook doesn't give a hoot about it either, unless he/she gets caught with it.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

In a way you have to hand it to the creators of the programs. I too think that they are useless and quite stupid but they made a system that would "catch the bad guys". They had a good marketing plan and sold it to people who were just ingorant in this field or they just got too excited about a new program to make their job easier and more effective. The creators more than likely knew that there were ways around the system and that most of the time law abiding citizens who originally purchased the gun would not be the person they were after. However they pitched it anyway, sold it and I am sure they made good money off the program. Its sad that there are business out there that say they are for the good but really they are just there for their good.

[WildBill]

I can't for the life of me understand the thinking of some people. The creators of these programs must know that a law biding citizen will never come up in their data base.

Follow the money.

[HankB]

I can't for the life of me understand the thinking of some people. The creators of these programs must know that a law biding citizen will never come up in their data base.

Follow the money.

That could be the mantra for almost any government program, from biofuels to illegal alien detention; all those taxpayer dollars are going into SOMEONE's pocket.

[The Annoyed Man]

(anyone got a Kimber :)).

italics added by me

Yes, I do, and the fired case came with the gun, so it isn't in anybody's possession except mine, and the gun wasn't sold in New York. It was sold in Texas. I don't understand the point, as long as Texas doesn't do like New York does.

[SlowDave]

Yes, I do, and the fired case came with the gun, so it isn't in anybody's possession except mine, and the gun wasn't sold in New York. It was sold in Texas. I don't understand the point, as long as Texas doesn't do like New York does.

Well, you've got the CASE, not the bullet (projectile), which is the part that is pertinent to ballistics.

I can't remember the reasoning behind all this, but there was some paperwork with the last guns I have purchased that said something like, "Since some states require this, we do it for all our guns." I guess they fire a test round from every gun and only turn in the projectiles for the ones sold in the noted states. Seems like it would be a huge paperwork hassle for the mfg'er though. You'd have to keep all the fired projectiles, and then track where each gun was sold, and if it was sold in one of "those" states, you'd have to ? mail the projectile to the gov't agency along with the gun's serial number? Sheesh. Wonder who's paying for all that? Oh yeah, you and me.

[Liberty]

Yes, I do, and the fired case came with the gun, so it isn't in anybody's possession except mine, and the gun wasn't sold in New York. It was sold in Texas. I don't understand the point, as long as Texas doesn't do like New York does.

Well, you've got the CASE, not the bullet (projectile), which is the part that is pertinent to ballistics.

I can't remember the reasoning behind all this, but there was some paperwork with the last guns I have purchased that said something like, "Since some states require this, we do it for all our guns." I guess they fire a test round from every gun and only turn in the projectiles for the ones sold in the noted states. Seems like it would be a huge paperwork hassle for the mfg'er though. You'd have to keep all the fired projectiles, and then track where each gun was sold, and if it was sold in one of "those" states, you'd have to ? mail the projectile to the gov't agency along with the gun's serial number? Sheesh. Wonder who's paying for all that? Oh yeah, you and me.

The states involved collect the brass, and maintain a database on the brass not the bullet. No one is collecting lead to classify a database. When you register the gun you turn in the brass.

[fredtubbs]

Darn, I thought this post was going to be about shooting into large chucks of bologna. Oh well, I can still dream.

[Liberty]

Darn, I thought this post was going to be about shooting into large chucks of bologna. Oh well, I can still dream.

Wow! that sounds like a lot more fun than that jello stuff they use.

[KD5NRH]

Ballistics work great when you have the suspect in custody and a weapon has been recovered to show the bullet came from the gun.

Do they? The last study I looked at showed a 28% false positive rate using FMJ .38s into ballistic gelatin, thus pretty much ideal conditions, (slow, hard, bullet into clean, uniform recovery medium, with both the "control" and "test" bullets fired under identical conditions - besides having only 30-40 possible guns to match) and nothing near the variables that would be added in for bullets used in real-life situations.

[KD5NRH]

Darn, I thought this post was going to be about shooting into large chucks of bologna. Oh well, I can still dream.

Well, if I ever have a large amount of bologna go bad, I'll recap the orange disposal day. It ought to be a good setup for coyote hunting that evening, too

I just wish I'd had a video camera around back when I was blasting some past-date blocks of cream cheese.

[SlowDave]

The states involved collect the brass, and maintain a database on the brass not the bullet. No one is collecting lead to classify a database. When you register the gun you turn in the brass.

Are you sure about that? Can anyone else confirm? I've seen stuff on matching the rifling marks on bullets but have no knowledge of anyone "fingerprinting" a gun from the cartridge case. What gun-specific marks would be on the case, other than the hit on the primer, which seems like it would be very consistent from one serial number to another (of an identical model/lot)?

I didn't think they were necessarily collecting the lead, but at least collecting photographs of the bullet.

You have surely piqued my interest.

[Liberty]

The states involved collect the brass, and maintain a database on the brass not the bullet. No one is collecting lead to classify a database. When you register the gun you turn in the brass.

Are you sure about that? Can anyone else confirm? I've seen stuff on matching the rifling marks on bullets but have no knowledge of anyone "fingerprinting" a gun from the cartridge case. What gun-specific marks would be on the case, other than the hit on the primer, which seems like it would be very consistent from one serial number to another (of an identical model/lot)?

I didn't think they were necessarily collecting the lead, but at least collecting photographs of the bullet.

You have surely piqued my interest.

I am sure about it.
Yes, ballistics involving matching the bullet is done buy comparing bullets of suspected gun. There is no government database of bullets from new guns. New York and Maryland are the the only states that have fallen for this cockamamie scheme. It isn't surprising you haven't heard of any reports of any crimes being solved with these million dollar databases, cause there haven't been any.
The brass has lots of microscopic markings that suposedly is unique in every gun. The firing pin isn't the only thing that marks the case. The extractor and the chamber itself will leave unique marks also. The problem is these markings will change as the gun is used, and can be intentionally changed by a user.

[Lodge2004]

The problem is these markings will change as the gun is used, and can be intentionally changed by a user.

Seems to me this is about as smart as taking car tire or shoe imprints and storing them in a database for future use by law enforcement to locate a specific vehicle or person. After a couple thousand miles or months of walking around the imprints would change dramatically. Then you have the problem of people changing tires or shoes when something breaks or they just feel like it and you have a totally worthless database that eats millions of tax dollars but allows the database creator (and their government patron) to purchase a nice summer home.