New tagging technique for bullets shoots holes in "fingerprinting"

MachineDesign.Com ^ | May 8, 2003 Issue | Machine Design News editors

[Constitution Day]

 

New tagging technique for bullets shoots holes in "fingerprinting"

Embedded microembossing technology marks cartridge casings as they are ejected from the firearm.

Ballistic fingerprinting has its critics. Used for years, it involves analyzing the unique markings of fired bullets and empty shell casings and then matching them to specific firearms. Proponents say ballistic studies help law officers match guns with crime-scene evidence. Critics, on the other hand, claim the technique is just a way to register and eventually confiscate all lawfully owned handguns. They also say ballistic markings can be easily altered, essentially making the "fingerprints" useless.

One company aims to change that with an alternative tagging technology said to be proof positive. NanoVia LP, Londonderry, N.H. (www.nanovia.com), has developed a microembossing technique that stamps each cartridge casing as bullets fire. The microscopic code can be made up of encrypted symbols, bar codes, or simple alphanumeric codes, such as the make, model, and tracking number. Manufacturers can access the code to find out a firearm's serial number and purchasing history. The company says these identifiers, called NanoTag Ballistic ID Tags, would immediately lead investigators to a specific gun without requiring the extra manpower and expense associated with trying to match "scratches and dings" that can be easily altered. The technique uses imaging equipment found in local, state, and federal forensics labs.

NanoVia is working with the State of California Department of Justice to test various code configurations and to see where the embossing surfaces should sit within the firearms for forensic value and repeatability.

[in the Arena]

>>Can you say "reloads"? Good, I knew you could.

From what I read, the function of the NanoVia technology is to mark the shell casing with an "index". Currently they use identifying marks generated by unique manufacturing/tool marks of the firearm itself...the new technology would use an easily identifiable mark (the mark is registered in a database, a bar-code or some alpha-numeric) imprinted by the firearm itself. Any case ejected from the firearm would be marked, regardless of reload or factory ammo.

The abuse of the system is immediately apparent: Go to the range and pick up the brass from someone you don't like then spread it around a crime scene...use the range ammo as reloads in your firearm...effectively marking the case twice with different identifiers...etc...

The real crime is that the company involved in developing the technology is going to be involved in writing the legislation for using it...they could conceivably write the law to allow themselves to be sole provider of the nano-horse manure...

[FreeRadical]

California really can not, no way no how, slide into the ocean soon enough.

[PatrioticAmerican]

Any, I repeat, ANY, physical device can be altered to prevent identification, regardless of technique.

[newgeezer]

How about "revolver"?

I wonder whether Dubya would sign a revolver ban.

[TexanToTheCore]

Bullet Phrenology?

[45Auto]

They will simply make it illegal to alter your gun and you will have to subject your gun for periodic testing just to make sure that you haven't been monkeying with it. No problem, except the back log will mean that your gun will be in the hands of the government for about 5 months a year.

That's only part of it. First off, we have to understand, that, just as you say, this is about much more than a silly idea; and its not about crime or criminals, unless we are referring to the bastards in the Cal DOJ and the Cal legislature who want to put this nonsense into law.

Its about yet another cascade of laws designed SOLELY to hamper or stop the law-abiding citizen from exercising his/her Constitutional rights under the 2nd. Such a cascade, ushered in by any ballistic fingerprint mandate would have to include: only the sale of semi-autos that have the fingerprint technology would be legal; periodic testing (like the damn smog laws) to make sure you have not altered your weapon; felony penalties for alteration; serial numbered gun parts; a total registry of gun owners; making it illegal to conduct private party sales, unless the gun is again tested ; requirement of certified labs to conduct the periodic testing. Probably there are many more that a resourceful legislature could come up with. All of this crap is unconstitutional, but in the land of the 9th Circuit Court, there will be no stopping these miscreants.

[El Gato]

If you've picked up brass that someone else has shot, then their gun's marks will be on the rounds that you reload and shoot.

Until you deprime the case. The mark (of the beast?) seems to be put on the fireing pin, which transfers it to the primer. As someone else pointed out. A polished firing pin, or a new one, will fix the problem. Put in a fireing pin from some other gun, or one you got at the show for a "spare", do the deed, and return the original firing pin to the gun. Of course crooks aren't that smart or patient. They just steal the gun, or buy a stolen one, then do the deed, then throw the gun away, or sell it to someone dumber than they are, well the less dumb ones do.

This is a solution to the wrong problem. The gun doesn't commit the crime, the shooter does. This is even worse than stoplight cameras, since at least some of those show who was driving, this

[45Auto]

None of this crap has anything to do with crime-solving; it has everything to do with finding new, creative ways to prevent the citizenry from exercising a Constitutional right.

[El Gato]

The argument (on their web site) that no registry will be required is false of course. Without one there will be no way to trace the brass to a particular handgun.

I think what they meant was no registry tying gun owners to particular guns. Once they tied the marks to the gun, then they could use the same trace process as exists today. That is from the manufacter, to the wholesaler, to the retailer, to the first buyer. After that they lose the trail. Needless to say, criminals don't buy their guns from legitimate retail dealers. No telling how many times a gun could have changed hands before it fell into those of a criminal.

It seems to me that the real problem the "system" has is not catching criminals, but rather convicting and sentencing them in a timely manner and then keeping them locked away from decent folk until they are no longer a threat.

[45Auto]

It seems to me that the real problem the "system" has is not catching criminals, but rather convicting and sentencing them in a timely manner and then keeping them locked away from decent folk until they are no longer a threat.

Of course, but that's not what this crap is about - its about screwing the law abiding gun owner, once again. No gun law has ever disarmed a criminal - its about finding creative ways to make a mess for the law abiding citizen wishing to exercise Constitutional rights. These laws produce a "chilling effect" as the lawyers say, on people who want a gun but when they find out what a hassle it is to get one, simply give up. That's how it is in California with the may issue CCW laws; in my county, I don't bother to even consider applying for a carry permit. The legislature wants to create a mountain of BS piled on top of a Constitutional right so that no one (outside of the elites) will be able to surmount it.

[Travis McGee]

If you have a Model 1911, barrels, firing pins and extractors are readily available, easily changed and cheap.

Doing so will be a felony without filling out a truckload of legal paperwork and having your gun retested at a state testing lab.

The backlog will be about a year, but that's your problem.

[Travis McGee]

If it comes to this, then it is way past talking time and getting perilously close to shooting time.

[Travis McGee]

The real crime is that the company involved in developing the technology is going to be involved in writing the legislation for using it...they could conceivably write the law to allow themselves to be sole provider of the nano-horse manure...

Of course they will. That's the point.

And that's why I say BLOAT, cache, and TAKE NAMES!!

[Black Agnes]

Dangit. I was gonna suggest 'forging' someone elses firing pin ID. Great huh? Or, better still, make up one of your own...say...a screaming eagle logo.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

I didn't know until now that tag lines are audited.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

Aw, heck, stupid as ozzy, without thirty years of drug abuse, for an excuse.
Looking at the wrong page.

[Redcloak]

The point may indeed be to legislate a system that's doomed to fail. Once it's shown to be ineffective, a new legislative "solution" is proposed. It's the governmental version of planned obsolescence. And at each turn we have less freedom.

[Ursus arctos horribilis]

Amen, and bless them all as they slip beneath the waves.

[Tunehead54]

I am not an expert ballistics "person". Still I wonder what condition a slug is in after hitting a wall, breastbone or any bone for that matter - is the cute 'lil id mark going to be recognizable? Probably not. Anyone else?

---

[DakotaGator]

Concur with your post # 40.

This technology has absolutely nothing to do with the manufacturing process (inventory, quality control, etc.) or operation of a firearm. It won't enhance safety. It won't deter a single criminal. And it's of dubious use in catching criminals.

But it sure will interfere with law-abiding citizens exercising their Second Ammendment right.