Bill Would Put Serial Numbers on Bullets

MountainPro

This measure is designed to help reduce street crime in California by making it possible to 'trace' a patricular bullet to a gun owner.

Seems like a good idea? But this would be very easy to abuse. Are all shooting in Calif committed using legal registered guns? If not then this is useless.

My first thought when i read this was of the traceability of bullets used during war. If a civillian woman or child is killed by a stray bullet the soldier, in theory, could be held to account. This means that the military itself could divorce itself from blame in these situations and leave the soldier to take the rap all by himself.

This would be great when a war crime has been committed however... how easy would it be to obtain a non army issue gun from a dead insurgent and shoot people with those? No serial number, no nothing...

I am not singling out any particular nation here as this is purely speculative.

what do you think?



Bill Would Put Serial Numbers on bullets



Wednesday April 27, 2005 3:46 AM



SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - A state Senate committee approved a proposal Tuesday to put a serial number on every handgun bullet made or sold in California.

The measure cleared the Senate Public Safety Committee on a 4-2 vote over opposition from manufacturers, firearms dealers and sport shooters.

The technology exists to laser-cut bullets with a number that police could use to trace who purchased bullets used in crimes, said Democratic sponsor Sen. Joseph Dunn.

Purchasers would pay up to a half a cent per bullet to fund record-keeping by the state Department of Justice. Vendors would pay up to $50 a year.

``We'll solve a lot of crimes if this becomes law,'' said Attorney General Bill Lockyer. If approved by the Legislature, the law would take effect in July 2007.

lumpy

Sounds like a good idea to me. Of course it would trace the bullets back to the purchaser, not necessarily the shooter, but I'm for it.

FredC

Don't need it because every bullet fired will have a barrel/ rifling mark which is like a fingerprint, the police firearms forensics division in the UK have been using it for years.

__________________
The media is a self perpetuating publicity stunt.

lokstah

They use those techniques here as well; have for years. The idea behind the bullet-tagging is that it would provide an additional layer of audit-trail for crime investigators to follow. If it can be funded effectively, I find it difficult to argue with.

__________________
...


i relish complicating the obvious and trivializing the stupendous

FredC

We, having to have firearms licences must produce them when buying ammo. No problem. All gun owners in the states should have to have a licence. Yes, I know it's a big issue with your gun lobby.

__________________
The media is a self perpetuating publicity stunt.

lokstah

The gun lobby is one of the most deep-rooted, well-resourced and outright powerful political influencers in the US. It's likely they'll defeat this California proposal, or at least come close to it.

Moderate and liberal politicians in this country have been attempting different legal angles like this one for decades; a little creativity is called for. We'll see how it goes.

__________________
...


i relish complicating the obvious and trivializing the stupendous

jaguar75

Here's a deep seeded issue for discussion...ehh Lok?

As an avid gun owner/collector I am very strongly opinionated about this subject, however, I do have some insight. My sister, who is a cop in South Carolina used to be attached to crime lab here in New Orleans where you can imagine they evaluate a lot of bullets and guns. The process of matching "witness" marks on bullets to the rifling in guns is the same as matching the "witness" marks on the back of the shell casings to the marks of the firing pin and breech. All of the marks are unique as under a micro scope the imperfections of the metals help this unique-ness.

So #'ering the bullets is a costly and useless endeavor. There is another piece of technology called "IBIS" (International Ballistics something something). The New Orleans crime lab is one of the test cities for this new machine, again you can imagine why, it is 1000 times better and more accurate than a guy sitting infront of a microscope. This machine is also supposed to be way better at matching the use of the same gun in multiple crimes. My sister showed it all to me one day...facinating stuff...

The point is all of this technology, though necesasary, still does not Guarantee a shooter!!!

__________________

"Perseverance is more prevailing than violence; and many things which cannot be overcome when they are together, yield themselves up when taken little by little" - Plutarch (46 AD - 120 AD)

davidmc

"Licenses, we don't need no stinking licenses." No, seriously, you're asking for trouble, least-wise over here, when you float that suggestion. It's a "3rd-rail" (highly contentious) issue.

__________________
I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death.
George Carlin
US comedian and actor (1937 - )

FredC

That's why I raised it.

__________________
The media is a self perpetuating publicity stunt.

davidmc

Silly me. I forgot I was in the soap-box

__________________
I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death.
George Carlin
US comedian and actor (1937 - )

lokstah

Jag, I don't disagree with anything you've written here, except for the "useless endeavor" bit. The suggestion shouldn't be that numbering bullets will solve crime; the suggestion should be that numbering bullets simply provides another layer of audit-trail for investigators to follow. In a complex investigation, this sort of information could prove helpful, period. It might not always yield anything useful; think of it as one tool.

Costly? Less than .5 cents cost per bullet (consumer) / $50.00 per year (vendors) doesn't seem too steep to me, but then again, I'm not arguing money. I stated earlier that I think it's a fine idea provided it's economically sound.

__________________
...


i relish complicating the obvious and trivializing the stupendous

lumpy

Don't the police need to have a suspect gun and do a test fire to compare the marks left from the rifling?
If someone is shot, and you don't know who did it, how would you trace the bullet? Guns aren't first test fired and bullets collected by the police before the gun is sold. There is no database of bullets for every ones gun.
Having the bullet numbered would allow investigators to at least trace who bought the bullet.
It sounds like a good idea to me and I don't see what any law abiding citizen would not like about helping police catch criminals.

jaguar75

Actually...Lumpy you are correct!!! The IBIS system will be the new finger printing system for guns...ultimately the government will pass a law that requires all manufacturers to log into the IBIS system the rifiling finger print and tag it to the serial number of that gun. It is another step in controlling weapons that I don't disagree with. Every manufacturer test fires the guns before being boxed for sale. The shortcomings of this are barrels are interchangeable, similar to changing the license plate of a get away car...kind of logic. And you know that when criminals start getting convicted because of this there will be a significant increase in the number of legal guns stolen.

The other thing that IBIS will do that I think is the real benefit of this system is when you pull a bullet and scan it and log it and in 6 months you pull a bullet from another crime and scan it the IBIS system searches its database of already scanned bullets and if they match you now know that that same weapon and possibly even the same person was involved in another crime.

It really is one more simple step. It will not take or cost much to perform this duty, however, I still feel that the government is heading in the wrong direction with gun control.

__________________

"Perseverance is more prevailing than violence; and many things which cannot be overcome when they are together, yield themselves up when taken little by little" - Plutarch (46 AD - 120 AD)

Dark Alley Dan

Sadly, folks, we're headed in the wrong direction with laws like this for two reasons:

1) Practical considerations - Those who propose such things are woefully ignorant of the realities of what they're proposing. It's like the Amish designing the Motor Vehicle Act. The paperwork involved in serial numbering the millions of bullets produced annually by a single large firms like Hornady, Speer, or about six others would make this economically unworkable, and force such companies out of business (the cynical amoung us might suggest that this is the actual purpose of such a law). Consider also that as a person in possession of several hundred pounds of scrap lead and a small melting pot, I am capable of manufacturing altogether servicible bullets in my garage. It seems unlikely that I'll make a point of assigning each a serial number, documenting that number, and sharing my "casting log" with the authorities. We should also consider that bullets lead a brief but exciting life, with much heat and agitation. Engraved serials on the bases of bullets seem unlikely to survive the use of the bullet. Engraving numbers elsewhere would disturb the carefully engineered balance of the bullet to the point where it'd be useless for its intended purpose.

2) Ethical considerations - I appreciate the toll that gun crime takes on society, and appreciate the controls that we, as a society, have placed on criminal misuse of firearms. We all live under laws that forbid shooting folks for no good reason, and I am very thankful we do. Laws apply restricitions to behaviour, and in doing so, place responsibility on individuals, which is where it ultimately lies. If I commit a crime with a firearm, I appear in court to face charges laid against me. The fiream has not commited a crime - nor can it, as it's as inherently capable of evil as your average motor verhicle. When laws are applied to devices in an effort to affect the behaviour of human beings, we miss the point utterly. Human beings are responsible to each other. Failures to take this responsibility seriously are punishable in civilized society. That's friggin' it. Passing poorly thought-out laws in an effort to establish some sort of control over inanimate objects is futile and directs money, creativity, and energy away from actual solutions.

In short, any law that directs responsibility away from human beings and toward inanimate objects is morally suspect.

That's just my thinkin' on the subject. Feel free to reply - I'd be happy to get other takes on the situation.

Dan

__________________
I blame rap music. For everything.