Re: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
First off, a large number of guns used in homicides are revolvers or derringers (anyone got the numbers?). These guns don't spit out the shells. So, it would be utterly useless to do so.
The shells are removed sometime or other. Nothing is a 100% solution but anything that gives the criminal an extra thing to worry about improves the chances that a mistake is made. Many people go to jail because of fingerprints on shell cases.
The second problem is the number of shells expelled in the US every day. I doubt there's enough room on the butt end of a shell to print that number (it couldn't be printed on the sides, as this would screw up the fit of the shell, and possibly weaken it).
I doubt that more than 32 bits of info will be required. Thats not that difficult to imprint.
And, it'd be almost impossible getting gun manufacturers to pay for the equiptment that it would take to emprint serial numbers.
Not a problem, that type of machinery is a standard type of industrial machine. Might be expensive to adapt the lines but I doubt it.
The third number is that cartridges are recycled. Aside from reloading your own, there's a large number of people that sweep up brass from gun ranges to reload themselves. The idea that someone swept up the brass could get almost anyone off.
Not an issue. A person may have an excuse that explains why the blood is in his car or his fingerprints are on the knife but a conviction depends on more than one piece of evidence. If there is information that gives the police a lead it is usefull. At present the police are investigating the purchase of white powder - checking each purchaser out who fits the Olympic bomber profile. That is a lot of work for a much weaker lead. If a person says that they fired at a range then you have narrowed the search scope to the guys at the range.
The final problem is the paperwork. Cops today can barly keep up with the paperwork involved with the Brady Bill. Could you imagine if they had to keep track of AMMO purchases?
Not a problem, thats an opportunity. I build very large, very high reliability computer systems. I can build machines that deal with several million transactions a day for less than a million and run them for less than a quarter million a year. That is cheap when one considers the cost of investigation saved.
The provision to give people the means to commit treason against the government are in the Constitution. That's why the second amendment is there -- to empower the people to protect themselves against the government.
Making that argument defeats your case. Irespective of the framers of the constitution nobody in Congress or the Administration believes that you have a right to take up arms against the government. In fact they are scared of the militia movement and the NRA. Every time you make that argument you make it harder for people to accept your case. Its like hearing a Marxist spout stuff from Capital to support a civil liberties. Regardless of wether the content makes sense the form of the argument is a complete turn off. I used to side with HCI before I started talking to the talk.politics.guns people. That convinced me that they were a threat to the security of the country - even before McVeigh sent me a mail defending his 2nd ammendment rights that looked very much like yours. Regardless of whether he is guilty or not I still regard him and those that hold his views to be as serious a threat to the USA as the Red Army Faction were in Germany, or the Red Brigades in Italy or the IRA in the UK. If people carelessly justify terrorism they are fueling that fire. Up until now the US has not had a serious terrorist problem. If terrorism becomes widespread then don't imagine the constitution will be a protection. Thomas and Reinquist are not going to stop measures to "protect the nation" even if like the WWII internement of Japaneese nationals they are in gross violation of the constitution. If you think the wiretap bill is bad think on this, all guns of all types banned except where held by special license. Checkpoints at major road intersections. Stop and search patrols in city centers and the army on the street. Its not at all far fetched, the UKgovt took less than a year to introduce such measures in Northern Ireland. Constitution or not, don't expect that the US Congress won't make a similar response. Phill
On Mon, 05 Aug 96, hallam@Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote:
The shells are removed sometime or other. Nothing is a 100% solution but anything that gives the criminal an extra thing to worry about improves the chances that a mistake is made.
Many people go to jail because of fingerprints on shell cases.
If the shell cases are NOT left at the crime scene, there is NO link between them and the crime. You are suffering from cranio-rectal inversion.
I doubt that more than 32 bits of info will be required. Thats not that difficult to imprint. [snip] Not a problem, that type of machinery is a standard type of industrial machine. Might be expensive to adapt the lines but I doubt it.
That doesn't address the fact that (1) there are billions of unstamped shell casing extant, (2) stamping the side of a case will weaken it and be a significant safety hazard, (3) stamps in the head of the case can be filed/scraped off, (4) cases not left at the crime scene have no value as evidence, regardless of any serial stamps, extractor marks, etc. Even if you can prove a shell was fired in a particular gun, if there is no link between that gun and the crime, the "evidence" is worthless. You are suffering from cranio-rectal inversion.
Not an issue. A person may have an excuse that explains why the blood is in his car or his fingerprints are on the knife but a conviction depends on more than one piece of evidence. If there is information that gives the police a lead it is usefull.
See above. You are suffering from cranio-rectal inversion.
At present the police are investigating the purchase of white powder - checking each purchaser out who fits the Olympic bomber profile. That is a lot of work for a much weaker lead.
That's BLACK powder, stupid! Also, profiling a bomber requires more than one crime. A profile is a psychological analysis of the patterns in a criminal's handiwork, and patterns cannot be clearly deliniated with a single crime.
If a person says that they fired at a range then you have narrowed the search scope to the guys at the range.
Huh? Smoke another one, Beavis!
Not a problem, thats an opportunity. I build very large, very high reliability computer systems. I can build machines that deal with several million transactions a day for less than a million and run them for less than a quarter million a year. That is cheap when one considers the cost of investigation saved.
Yeah, and lets make it mandatory for everyone to accept subcutaneous transponder implants monitored by your system. Can anyone say BIG Brother? Regardless of the system, some poor schmuck (or an army of them) is going to have to do the data entry work for your computer, or it is worthless. Remember the GIGO concept?
Making that argument defeats your case. Irespective of the framers of the constitution nobody in Congress or the Administration believes that you have a right to take up arms against the government. In fact they are scared of the militia movement and the NRA. Every time you make that argument you make it harder for people to accept your case.
The fact that the current government despises the intent of the people who wrote the Constitution and tries to circumvent and negate it to the maximum extent possible is the root of much of the disillusionment with and distrust of government in America today.
Its like hearing a Marxist spout stuff from Capital to support a civil liberties. Regardless of wether the content makes sense the form of the argument is a complete turn off.
I used to side with HCI before I started talking to the talk.politics.guns people. That convinced me that they were a threat to the security of the country - even before McVeigh sent me a mail defending his 2nd ammendment rights that looked very much like yours. Regardless of whether he is guilty or not I still regard him and those that hold his views to be as serious a threat to the USA as the Red Army Faction were in Germany, or the Red Brigades in Italy or the IRA in the UK.
Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than Tim McVeigh's guns.
If people carelessly justify terrorism they are fueling that fire. Up until now the US has not had a serious terrorist problem. If terrorism becomes widespread then don't imagine the constitution will be a protection. Thomas and Reinquist are not going to stop measures to "protect the nation" even if like the WWII internement of Japaneese nationals they are in gross violation of the constitution.
If you think the wiretap bill is bad think on this, all guns of all types banned except where held by special license. Checkpoints at major road intersections. Stop and search patrols in city centers and the army on the street. Its not at all far fetched, the UKgovt took less than a year to introduce such measures in Northern Ireland. Constitution or not, don't expect that the US Congress won't make a similar response.
See my sigfile. These are shining examples illustrating why an armed populace is critical to freedom, even if some people do misuse firearms. I would rather be armed and take my chances against a crackhead looking for someone to mug than be disarmed and take my chances against government thugs who have discovered that they can act against the populace with impunity. Jonathan Wienke "1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future!" --Adolf Hitler "46. The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. ...Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government." --The 29 Palms Combat Arms Survey http://www.ksfo560.com/Personalities/Palms.htm 1935 Germany = 1996 U.S.? Key fingerprint = 30 F9 85 7F D2 75 4B C6 BC 79 87 3D 99 21 50 CB
Contrary to reports of some sort of inversion it is not the case that shell cases need to be found at the scene of a crime to cause an arrest and conviction. There are many people who are serving time after having left their fingerprints on shell cases found in a gun recovered after a crime. If the gun can be linked to a crime scene via balistics reports and the shells in the gun to an individual via fingerprints that is circumstansial evidence. Of course nobody gets sent to jail on a single piece of questionable evidence (at least if they have a decent lawyer). But a weak piece of evidence is sufficient to lead to a conviction if it is a lead. Anything that reduces the search space for an investigating team is an advantage for the police. Phill
Phil, The Japanese were not interned in the State of Kansas. The people wouldn't permit it and the FBI just quietly backed down. The Nazis couldn't enforce the Yellow Star in Denmark. The people wouldn't permit it. I can't speak about what people in the UK will permit. If they're all like you, they'll permit anything. Oh the Administration and the Congress don't agree that we have a right to defend our freedoms, if necessary, against them? I work in a military base in the heartland, not a computer lab in Cambridge - and I think you're wrong about that - I don't think you could get enough American troops to perticipate in disarming innocent civilians. And the Congress and the Administration DO know it and are scared to death of it. Anyway, Phil, I was trying to ask your opinion about something.... Is there any freedom for which you would personally risk your life for?
On Mon, 5 Aug 1996 hallam@Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote:
weaken it). I doubt that more than 32 bits of info will be required. Thats not that difficult to imprint.
You haven't spent a lot of time with guns & ammunition have you? The most common size round (from what I have seen) is a .22, .25s & .32s are also very common. That isn't a lot of room.
government are in the Constitution. That's why the second amendment is there -- to empower the people to protect themselves against the government. Making that argument defeats your case. Irespective of the framers of the constitution nobody in Congress or the Administration believes that you have a right to take up arms against the government. In
It's the truth. If you can't stand the truth, get out of the gene pool. Petro, Christopher C. petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff> snow@smoke.suba.com
participants (4)
-
Alan Horowitz -
hallam＠Etna.ai.mit.edu -
JonWienk＠ix.netcom.com -
snow