Mass Gun Owners Beware
 

Well I wasted no time yesterday, and sent out an email, to Sen Barrios the sponser of the bill. He responded right back:



Bill,
I have come to conclude that you are accurate in your assessment of ballistics databases, and I am no longer including that in the bill. Please forward this back to the GOAL/NRA folks to let them know, although I have told their lobbyists up here already.
Jarrett



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bill [mailto:mitsdog@verizon.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:47 PM
To: Barrios, Jarrett (HOU)
Subject: Bill 1331


Dear Senator Barrios,



Currently there is a bill in the senate, no. 1331 an act to Reduce Gang Violence. While most of the bill is good legislation, I disagree with the ballistic fingerprinting. Ballistic fingerprinting has been around for awhile, it is expensive to keep up to date, and has yet to solve a single crime. It is another waste of taxpayer funds. Most of the guns obtained by gangs are illegal, and therefore would probably never be identified to the criminal. This state already has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the USA. The chapter 180 laws have done nothing to reduce shootings, and have only put unnecessary restrictions on lawful gun owners. I am enclosing a link to a story on ballistic fingerprinting, I hope that will take the time to read it, and educate you. I also hope that you would move to amend this bill, or vote against it.



Here are a couple of excerpts from the story:



When cartridges from the same manufacturer were test-fired and compared, computer matching failed 38 percent of the time. With cartridges from different manufacturers, computer matching failed 62 percent of the time.

"Automated computer matching systems do not provide conclusive results" requiring that "potential candidates be manually reviewed," said the experts.

But the experts estimated a California database would grow by about 108,000 entries every year for pistols alone. "This study indicates that this number of candidate cases will be so large as to be impractical and will likely create logistic complications so great that they cannot be effectively addressed," they said.



The test-firing results only scratch the surface of ballistic finger printing’s problems.

The experts concluded it's unknown whether cartridges fired after typical firearm break-in and wear can at all be matched to the cartridge fired when the gun was new.

"Firearms that generate markings on cartridge casings can change with use and can also be readily altered by the users," said the experts. "They are not permanently defined like fingerprints or DNA."

A file may be used to make scratch marks in a barrel or a breech face, and various parts may be replaced to give a firearm a completely new ballistic identity. Bullets may be treated to alter the machining marks in a barrel.

Not all guns even generate markings on cartridge casings.



The story can be found here:



http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,66007,00.html

I'm impressed with the pull you have Billy.

Could you dumb down the basic outline of the bill for me?

Sorry I am too smart to do that.....

:jester:

Did you mail those envelopes?? If you did you should be good to go

I did mail them. If I get a chance I'm going to talk to the man this week.

I wasn't kidding about dumbing that down. Me no understand. I'll read it again.

Sorry Chris, there is a section in the bill where they were going to require ballistic fingerprinting on all new handgun sales, and any private sales between individuals starting in 2007. They finally realized it was'nt cost effective, and not very accurate either so they are dropping it out of that bill.