Posted on 10/26/2002 9:14:03 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
Proposals for a Ballistics Imaging and Comparison national database has drawn fire from the Fraternal of Police (F.O.P.) which warns that the technology has multiple drawbacks that make it unwise to implement it and the national firearms database the plan would require.
Anti-Second Amendment forces aided by the largely pro-gun grabber media have exploited the tragic Washington area sniper shootings to justify creating the database that would, in effect, accomplish their longed-for goal of national gun registration despite the fact that as an effective law enforcement tool, such a program is shot full of holes.
The F.O.P. describes the ballistics imaging and comparison technology, as one which "electronically records and compares the marks or impressions on the cartridge case and projectile of a round of ammunition fired from a handgun or rifle." Although it is "an important law enforcement tool, like most tools, its use is limited by circumstance and the peculiarities of a specific investigation."
According to the F.O.P.'s report on Ballistics Imaging and Comparison Technology "The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) maintains a National Integrated Ballistic Information Network (NIBIN), which is restricted to the ballistic imaging of data associated with crime guns. This has proved to very effective to investigators, enabling them to link multiple shootings in which the same firearm was used, as is the current case with the serial sniper operating in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, and to definitively connect recovered firearms to a particular shooting and/or crime.
"We must keep in mind that there are limits to the utility of this information with respect to investigating firearms crime and prosecuting criminals who use guns."
The F.O.P. cites these limits:
In all cases, it is necessary that investigators recover a bullet or shell casing from the crime scene which is intact enough to allow forensic analysis to be able to identify the ballistic markings. The firearm must then be recovered in order for the gun and the bullet or shell casing to be conclusively linked. Thus, this tool is often just as useful for excluding potential suspects as identifying those already in custody. In order to make a case, investigators must discover a chain of evidence: an intact bullet or shell case needs to be recovered from the crime scene, then linked to a gun and then the gun linked to a shooter. Ballistics imaging and comparison technology is very limited in accomplishing the latter.
In the wake of the serial shootings in the Washington, D.C. there has been a renewed call for a ballistics 'fingerprint' database. The F.O. P. believes that several questions must be answered. First, since ballistic imprints, unlike fingerprints and DNA, can be altered, either deliberately or simply through normal use, how will we ensure the validity of the findings?
Second, how would such a database be compiled and what would be the cost to create and maintain it? The F.O.P. does not support any Federal requirement to register privately owned firearms with the Federal government. Without Federally-mandated registration of the more than 200 million firearms in the U.S. today, such a database would be no more effective than the current NIBIN maintained by ATF.
Even if such a database is limited to firearms manufactured in the future, the cost to create and maintain such a system, with such small chances that it would be used to solve a firearm crime, suggests to the F.O.P. that these are law enforcement dollars best spent elsewhere.
There are limits to technology, especially in a free society. Like other technological breakthroughs achieved in the last 25 years, they can be invaluable to State and local law enforcement officers as they endeavor to solve horrific crimes, but that being said, this technology is a tool only, and not a substitute for good, solid boots-on-the-ground police work. The F.O.P. concluded by stating that, like the Bush White House, it favors greater study of this issue, so as to learn how better to employ the technology we possess to help solve and prevent crimes.
Prior to setting up a national database of ballistic "fingerprints" as a revolutionary advancement in law enforcement technology, the F.O.P. says "we would be wise to study its efficacy in the field with a view to reaching a supportable conclusion as to how, and under what legal circumstances, we can best use this very promising tool."
Echoing the F.O.P.. the Wall Street Journal also looked askance at the thinly disguised demand for what amount to national gun registration.
According to the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), the so-called "ballistics imaging" - a national "gun fingerprint" database that could be constructed if gun manufacturers were required to submit a spent shell casing from each new gun. Each gun leaves distinct markings that could be matched against the database and enable police to trace guns used in crimes.
NCPA cites the Journal as reporting that in New York and Maryland, which already have ballistics-fingerprinting laws, more than 17,000 shell casings have been compiled over two years, producing two matches, no convictions, and not a single crime prevented or solved.
While manufacturers typically test-fire guns, the problem according to the Journal, is that casing marks produced by firing a new gun can differ significantly from later firings due to normal wear and tear. And altering the markings is a "relatively easy affair" that "required less than five minutes of labor."
NCPA cites what it calls "The most comprehensive ballistics study, conducted last year by the California Department of Justice, which found that the number of potential matches generated that would require manual review "will be so large as to be impractical and will likely create logistic complications so great that they cannot be effectively addressed."
Finally, a central ballistics database would only help track a gun to its original owner, whereas the overwhelming majority of criminals use stolen guns.
Once again, hysterical gun-grabbers have labored mightily and produced a blank cartridge.
The important point to remember is that the supporters of this database don't care whether it ever solves a crime. If the database allowed police to detain, question, and issue warrants against the original owner of every gun ever used in a crime scene, it would make gun ownership more of a hassle. If a gun was stolen from someone and used in a crime, the police could harass the original owner. If someone sold a gun to a friend who sold it to another friend who sold it to someone else and so on until it was bought or stolen and used in a crime, the police could harass the original owner. The effect of this harassment and potential harassment would be to discourage people from owning guns or to discourage them from ever selling the guns that they have. If they can't sell, they are less likely to buy, and the effect is less gun ownership.
Those who would push this scheme are our enemies, and we must fight them at every turn.
WFTR
Bill
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.