The Great Gun Control Debate

[Fishbone Jones]

FA,
No need for a sample and rifling diagram. Quit adding to the bureaucracy.

 

[KevinB]

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/sout...ry/910739.html

Asked about the surge in gun permit applications, Gov. Charlie Crist said: ``I'm pro-gun. I think people ought to have the right to protect themselves, and if people want to get new certificates, that's their constitutional right . . . If they use those instruments responsibly and prudently and within the bounds of the law, everything should be fine.''

Damn I love Florida...  ;D

 

[chris_log]

[quote


Lets face it, Buying a Firearm is as easy as Buying Drugs, theres a Dealer on every corner.

Cheers.

I could, within a couple hours (if that), get my hands on an illegal handgun. All I've got to do is drive down to Kitchener or (easier and cheaper) head to the wild west that is the Six Nations native reserve.

I'm not a gun owner so I don't have much to contribute to this debate, but I just figured I'd toss out there the 'proof' that it's easy to get an illegal handgun...at least in S/SW Ontario. And I'm not a thug nor do I really have any 'criminal contacts'....imagine how easy it is for them.

I think your average Canadian sheeple would be horrified to know how many people regularily carry an illegal gun on their person (although thankfully the usage rate is pretty low, at least 'round here).

 

[zipperhead_cop]

I think your average Canadian sheeple would be horrified to know how many people regularily carry an illegal gun on their person (although thankfully the usage rate is pretty low, at least 'round here).

Hopefully they would be equally horrified at how unlawful many of the reservations are and what the actual state of our "precious indigineous persons" is. 

 

[FastEddy]

FA,
No need for a sample and rifling diagram. Quit adding to the bureaucracy.

Are you kidding me ?, either your very Stupid or very Ignorant to Investigative procedures and Ballistic recovery & Comparison. I would like to think its the later.

So for your information, the ability to immediately match a recovered Bullet, postmortem or Crime Scene with a Face and Weapon, would be a great asset and starting point to Investigators, regardless of possible variations since the original purchase.

Now the registry would serve a constructive purpose besides a fancy and Expensive Sales Record.

 

[zipperhead_cop]

Eeep!  "Stupid" is a rather strong word.  Most of these guys are actually really switched on and definitely law enforcement supporters.  Forensics isn't neccesarily what people think of first. 
Plus, illegal guns still wouldn't have any sort of AFIS-like patterns, so then we're back to the same old thing. 
How about put gun toting shitpumps in jail for a decade to start?  With hard labour and shitty food so they come back out mostly crushed?  They will cost us less on permanant disability. 

 

[Loachman]

Are you kidding me ?, either your very Stupid or very Ignorant to Investigative procedures and Ballistic recovery & Comparison.

Life is not a CSI episode.

Ballistic Imaging http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12162&page=R1

It's a long read. I've copied part of it here. Emphasis mine:

9–D
CONCLUSION
Conclusion: A national reference ballistic image database of all new and imported guns is not advisable at this time.

Three lines of reasoning have particular salience for this conclusion. The first has to do with the general use and role of ballistic imaging technology. The current technology in use for automated toolmark comparison, based on two-dimensional greyscale images, can be useful for gross categorization and sorting of large quantities of evidence. However, it appears to be less reliable for distinguishing extremely fine individual marks as is necessary to make successful matches in RBIDs, where large numbers of exhibits on file would share gross class and subclass characteristics.

Throughout the report, and particularly in Chapter 4, we make it clear that we view ballistic imaging as a form of computer-assisted firearms identification and advise against practices—like overreliance on “top 10” comparisons—that impute to ballistic imaging an unwarranted level of precision for identifying matches. The temptation to expect too much from a national RBID—to expect “hits,” and investigative leads to points of sale, with high frequency—is misguided given that the event of a single, particular new gun being used in committing a crime is relatively rare. The difficulty in achieving matches in an RBID is compounded by the gross sameness—in class and subclass characteristics—of large segments of the database exhibits. Ballistic imaging can be an effective tool for screening and filtering, and can be 70–95 percent successful in finding same-gun matches using cartridge case markings, as Nennstiel and Rahm (2006b:28) concluded. This is very good performance, but De Kinder et al. (2004) compellingly demonstrate that this performance can degrade in databases flooded with same-class-characteristic images; we saw much the same thing in our limited work entering exhibits in the New York CoBIS database (described in Chapter 8 ).

The second salient argument concerns the capacity of ballistic imaging systems to distinguish true matches from nonmatches, as described in Section 9–B.3 and Chapter 8: Basic probability calculations, under reasonable assumptions, suggest that the process of identifying a subset of possible matches, that contains the true match with a specified level of certainty, depends critically on as-yet-underived measures of similarity between and within gun type. The process may return too large a subset of candidates to be practically useful for investigative purposes.

We emphasize that we do not frame this argument strictly as a “breakdown” or massive degradation in matching capability with database size. Pure reliance on a numeric breakdown argument maligns all forms of ballistic imaging—a national RBID most immediately, due to the large choice of ammunition used in shooting. The potential large influence of ammunition type and variability is a significant source of error in identification. A standard, protocol type of ammunition could be specified in an RBID (as it is in NIBIN), but it may not correspond with the ammunition used in crime; the choice of protocol ammunition, or a requirement to use multiple ammunition types, could have significant financial implications for both ammunition and firearms manufacturers.

In addition to these three core arguments against a national RBID, other supplemental arguments contribute to our assessment that a national RBID is inadvisable. As indicated in Sections 9–B.1 and 9–B.2, too much remains unknown about the real costs of implementing collections for such a database in the context of the existing firearms manufacturing environment. Furthermore, the means for ensuring that the sample of casings included with a newly manufactured gun actually originated from that gun lies at the heart of the enterprise; the issue of chain of custody of the test fires in order to provide a legal linkage is a daunting challenge.

De Kinder (2002a:199–200) adds another argument against a national RBID, which is that—by construction—the content of an RBID is not truly representative of the firearms used in crime, the set with which RBID entries would ultimately be compared. Specifically, De Kinder reports the results of a limited test in Belgium, in which for 1 year police processed and imaged all ballistics evidence acquired by the police in one section of the country, crime-related and noncrime-related. The “firearms not directly related to crime” included “firearms which are in illegal possession for failing to comply with the current firearms law and firearms which were proactively seized after family problems.” This type of test is substantially weaker than the creation of a pure RBID—in the U.S. context, it would correspond to a relatively modest expansion of NIBIN’s scope rather than the imaging of all new and imported firearms. Still, the composition of the dataset after 1 year suggests a basic difficulty: the resulting set of images is inherently “bias[ed] towards other types of guns than those normally used at crime scenes.” That is, even when restricting searches by caliber and other demographic information, an RBID necessarily overrepresents some types of guns (e.g., those from smaller manufacturers, possibly more expensive and intricately machined guns) relative to their use in crime. The Maryland State Police, Forensic Sciences Division (2003:9–10), made the same observation based on the first 3 years’ experience of the Maryland RBID, comparing the common makes of guns entered in the RBID with ATF gun trace statistics. In particular, several revolvers are among the most frequently traced guns in Maryland (including the most frequently traced gun, a Smith & Wesson .38 revolver), which is inherently problematic for RBIDs since “revolvers are less likely to leave cartridge casings at crime scenes than are pistols.”

9–E
IMPLICATIONS FOR STATE REFERENCE BALLISTIC IMAGE DATABASES
Having concluded that a national RBID is inadvisable at this time, a natural follow-up question is what this conclusion means for the state-level RBIDs currently in operation in Maryland and New York and as may be implemented by other states. Although the core arguments that can be made against a national RBID can be applied to a state RBID, we conclude that the smaller-scale state databases are critically important proving grounds for improvements in the matching and scoring algorithms used in ballistic imaging. Indeed, they provide an ideal setting for the continuing empirical evaluation of the underlying tenets of firearms identification in general. The state databases can be a critical, emerging testbed for research in ballistic imaging and firearms identification.

Early in ATF’s work with the IBIS platform, Masson (1997:42) observed that as ballistic image databases grew in size, the IBIS rankings tended to produce suggested linkages that might look promising on-screen—and might also be tricky to evaluate using direct microscopy:

As the database grew within a particular caliber, 9mm for instance, there were a number of known non-matched testfires from different firearms that were coming up near the top of the candidate list. When retrieving these known non-matches on the comparison screen, there were numerous two dimensional similarities. When using a comparison microscope, these similarities are still present and it is difficult to eliminate comparisons even though we know they are from different firearms.

Far from undermining the utility of the system, Masson (1997:43) argued that this finding presented a critical learning opportunity. “In the past, best examples of known nonmatched agreement were collected from casework and thus, surfaced sporadically;” in addition to the potential for generating hits, Masson suggested value in studying misses. “Firearms examiners should take advantage of this current expanded database to fully familiarize themselves with the extent of similarities found in many non-identifications in order to hone their criteria for striae identification” because the “examiner’s power of discrimination can be heightened because of the experience.”

Even in the best of operational circumstances, RBIDs should not be expected to produce torrents of hits or completed matches. They are, at root, akin to detecting low-base-rate phenomena in large populations, and present particular difficulties because—by construction—such large populations contain a great many elements that are virtually identical in all but the tiniest details.

From another section of the document:

The ATF estimates about 4.5 million “new firearms, including approximately about 2 million handguns, are sold in the United States” each year (U.S. Bureauof Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, 2000:1). It is important to remember that these figures—and the coverage of a national RBID—include only the primary gun market, which covers sales from licensed dealers to consumers. Cook and Ludwig (1996) estimate that about 2 million secondhand guns are sold each year in the United States, from a mixture of primary and secondary sources (where the secondary gun market includes transactions by unlicensed dealers).

The answer to the question of how many guns would have to be entered into a newly established national RBID each year depends crucially on the exact specification of the content of the database—whether the database is restricted to handguns and whether imported firearms from foreign countries are required to be included. As we discuss further in the next section, we generally assume that a national RBID would—at least initially—focus on handguns, and hence an annual entry workload of 1–2 million firearms per year, depending on whether imports are included.

So for your information, the ability to immediately match a recovered Bullet, postmortem or Crime Scene with a Face and Weapon

This is anything but immediate. It is also an incredibly costly, labour-intensive, and time-consuming exercise, for incredibly little return.

And it doesn't even touch the couple of hundred million firearms in private hands in the US that will not get sold for years or decades and hence will not be in the system, even if it were created.

Maryland dumped their programme for just those reasons.

"either your very Stupid or very Ignorant to Investigative procedures and Ballistic recovery & Comparison."

I shall let others make the judgement on that.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

  With hard labour and shitty food so they come back out mostly crushed?   

Where is that jail??..................unless you mean somewhere you just got back from. :nod:

 

[FastEddy]

Eeep!  "Stupid" is a rather strong word.  Most of these guys are actually really switched on and definitely law enforcement supporters.  Forensics isn't neccesarily what people think of first. 
Plus, illegal guns still wouldn't have any sort of AFIS-like patterns, so then we're back to the same old thing. 
How about put gun toting shitpumps in jail for a decade to start?  With hard labour and shitty food so they come back out mostly crushed?  They will cost us less on permanant disability.

Your absolutely right, but it wasn't directed at the Membership and the quote IMO was Stupid, but went on to say he wasn't but suffers from a lack of knowledge of Investigative Procedures.(in harsher terms admittedly)

Good idea, possibly on a Road Gang in the Arctic.

As I mentioned, it would be a leg up if positive and if no match, opens another avenue.

"Loachman", Very intresting read. Yes your quite right, all that time and money for very little return. But it fails to mention that even if a fractional number of cases were solved through its use, its not worth all that time and money. I guess I forgot our Gun Registry is free and now provides us with so many tools and information as is, your right its always about the money verses return.

 

[KevinB]

I guess I forgot our Gun Registry is free and now provides us with so many tools and information as is, your right its always about the money verses return.

Sarcasm I trust...

http://www.afte.org/  I know some members, and consequently what to swap on my gun if I use it in a hit...  ;D

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Are you kidding me ?, either your very Stupid or very Ignorant to Investigative procedures and Ballistic recovery & Comparison. I would like to think its the later.

So for your information, the ability to immediately match a recovered Bullet, postmortem or Crime Scene with a Face and Weapon, would be a great asset and starting point to Investigators, regardless of possible variations since the original purchase.

Now the registry would serve a constructive purpose besides a fancy and Expensive Sales Record.

So, maybe I should just tell you to go sexually intercourse yourself and write you off as a wanker. Your caveat that it wasn't directed at the membership (me) is bullshit. If you think spending millions on a half baked idea (see Loachman chronicles) will help, you're the stupid ignorant one. Replace the billion dollar registry with another useless, expensive program. My comment was made, because I believe in less restrictions and money spending. Not some wishful program on YOUR part to make YOUR job easier. You have no idea what I know or my qualifications. As I-6 alluded to, there's many ways to easilly defeat your pet project. To call me stupid and ignorant only proves your the master on both accounts. Best pull in your neck before it gets chopped off.

I guess I forgot our Gun Registry is free and now provides us with so many tools and information as is

And you call me stupid and ignorant :.

 

[a_majoor]

I guess I forgot our Gun Registry is free and now provides us with so many tools and information as is, your right its always about the money verses return.

Our Gun Registry is a steal at $2 billion and counting, and to my knowledge no crime has ever been solved using the "tools and information" provided by the gun registry.

Money vs returns? What if the police forces had access to one billion of that money to catch criminals and the court system the other billion to clear cases quickly? The ROI would be outstanding in that case...

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Well, except that they would all walk as there would be no cellular accommodations available....

 

[chris_log]

Our Gun Registry is a steal at $2 billion and counting, and to my knowledge no crime has ever been solved using the "tools and information" provided by the gun registry.

Money vs returns? What if the police forces had access to one billion of that money to catch criminals and the court system the other billion to clear cases quickly? The ROI would be outstanding in that case...

Like I said before, while you guys argue the theories around this I can provide a wee bit of a ground level view on the issue, being in university and all 

I've argued the point made above many times....but because of information floating around like this;

http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/FAQ.html

Your average Canadian is given the impression that the system DOES work and IS a good use of money. You folks wouldn't believe that misconceptions that float around a university campus when you talk about firearms. It's incredible...even here where we have a large number of farmer's kids going to school (although they tend to avoid the university itself and stick to 'their side'...for good reason).

Question time. Can anyone point me to some good references that argue point by point (like the link I provided above) AGAINST the current system? By time here is drawing to a close, but it wouldn't hurt to get a few good zingers in on my fellow members of academia before I leave.

 

[chris_log]

Hopefully they would be equally horrified at how unlawful many of the reservations are and what the actual state of our "precious indigineous persons" is.

Actually, they're totaly ignorant. I pointed out a CBC (of all things) report from a year or so back when the police found that massive arsenal on a Mohawk reserve (including M203's with high-explosive rounds and automatic weapons) and the class dismissed it as 'racist government propaganda'. Not even cold hard facts will open people's eyes.

Or I could explain how my buddy's Mom's SUV, and his friend's SUV, and another friend's SUV and almost every other stolen vehicle in Guelph is found (yep, he found his Mom's truck) stripped and lying in a field in the Six Nations reserve. But again, blissful igorance.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Or I could explain how my buddy's Mom's SUV, and his friend's SUV, and another friend's SUV and almost every other stolen vehicle in Guelph is found (yep, he found his Mom's truck) stripped and lying in a field in the Six Nations reserve. But again, blissful igorance.

Just about every vehicle stolen for parts in SO ends up in THAT field........and all the local cops can do is bitch about the stupidity of it all.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Question time. Can anyone point me to some good references that argue point by point (like the link I provided above) AGAINST the current system? By time here is drawing to a close, but it wouldn't hurt to get a few good zingers in on my fellow members of academia before I leave.

These will give you a lot of the info you're looking for:

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/index.php
http://www.cdnshootingsports.org/
http://www.nfa.ca/
http://www.ofah.org/

 

[redleafjumper]

There is also some very useful information here:
http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/issues/guncontrol.htm

Cheers,

 

[Infanteer]

Are you kidding me ?, either your very Stupid or very Ignorant to Investigative procedures and Ballistic recovery & Comparison. I would like to think its the later.

"How to get people to take me seriously 101" by FastEddy.... :

 

[KevinB]

The chair is against the wall, the chair is against the wall. John has a long moustache. John has a long moustache.