Have you never seen an Arnie film?
I read the news today oh boy! Page 302
Quote: DaButt @ January 14 2011, 1:01 AM GMTNo laws were broken.
Raping your wife is legal in some countries.
(possibly even yours -- who knows!)
Quote: DaButt @ January 14 2011, 12:15 AM GMTThat's an anti-gun organization so of course they're going to deny it. But you're a smart man and certainly you can wrap your head around the fact that the "unique" markings are made by the hard steel of the barrel on the softer lead/copper of the bullet and brass of the case.
Now think about how easy it would be to alter that steel with a file or other abrasive device. Gun barrels can be removed and replaced in a few seconds and that, too, would change the markings. You may not be aware of it, but many gun owners use reloaded ammunition. The brass cases are already marked by a previous gun, so that would render any match void.
And your quotes are from a pro-gun organization, so what..That's what I said, one set of myths against another, but BATF are the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, so if the quotes in the anti-gun petition above are correct they underlying statistics are coming from a Govt Bureau and are likely to be more accurate about the reliability of forensic bullet analysis. So I'd rather believe their myths than the ones you propose.
I know what the ballistics markings are and I know how they are caused. I know about and have used firearms, though they were rifles not handguns. I've handled many handguns, including my Father's service revolver *, a Luger automatic found hidden in Germany, and a tiny 'decorative' Derringer type pistol.
Yes, I know that you can file or change the barrel I know that it changes the bullet markings; but it makes them more unique, so there isn't much point (you might as well ditch the gun instead after a crime) because if you used the gun in a further crime and the gun was found then its a dead cert that the bullet in the victim (if found) would match the gun.
Obviously in any sane manufacturers ballistics database ALL barrels would be catalogued, so changing the barrel would make the criminal more likely to get traced as less spare barrels exist than guns.
I cannot understand why any law abiding legal-buying gun owner would object to a gun having a pre-recorded signature/fingerprint or even to it being re-printed every couple of years to account for wear, because this is one instance where only the criminals suffer from the use of the register. Legal owners should welcome registration/fingerprinting of their weapons, it would eliminate their gun from the enquiries.
>The brass cases are already marked by a previous gun, so that would render any match void.
The brass cases possibly, but not the striations on the bullet. But there would also be a second set of chamber marks on the case and those could be matched to a fresh forensically fired cartridge.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* Cyprus 1955 a time of active Greek Terrorists called Eoka. Our family-quarters village was surrounded by barbed wire fences and our fathers' did active armed patrols of the perimeter at night.
Quote: Oldrocker @ January 13 2011, 11:42 PM GMTBut as regards getting rid of kitchen knives, cricket bats etc, who thinks anyone could kill nine people with a garden fork before he/she was overpowered and stopped?
Perhaps the particular issue is with private ownership of assault weapons; we've already banned combat knives, and I really think it's time we banned combat cricket bats.
Quote: DaButt @ January 13 2011, 6:48 PM GMTYou conveniently left out a large number of countries around the world where gun violence is many times worse than it is in the United States.
Unfair, I deliberately wrote "IF these figures are to be believed." You are welcome to present figures of your own.
Personally I'm far more scared of driving on roads than being shot in the US.
Quote: Nogget @ January 14 2011, 5:57 AM GMTPerhaps the particular issue is with private ownership of assault weapons; we've already banned combat knives, and I really think it's time we banned combat cricket bats.
Cricket bats make terrible weapons. They're cumbersome and clunky and generally hopeless. Baseball bats are far more effective, but even then someone can see if you've got it and has a good chance of defending themselves.
The beauty of the gun is that it's a great weapon for a coward. You can hurt whoever you want from a distance, without any chance of them hurting you back. It's ideal for yellow-bellies.
Real men wear martyrdom belts.
I think Prince Phil moaned after Dunblane that they'd be banning cricket bats soon.
Responding to calls for a firearm ban after the Dunblane shooting: "If a cricketer, for instance, suddenly decided to go into a school and batter a lot of people to death with a cricket bat, which he could do very easily, I mean, are you going to ban cricket bats?"
I do think in the UK you should be banned from buying baseball bats if you can not prove you play baseball.
And survival knives if you don't own a tent.
Quote: sootyj @ January 14 2011, 9:28 AM GMTResponding to calls for a firearm ban after the Dunblane shooting: "If a cricketer, for instance, suddenly decided to go into a school and batter a lot of people to death with a cricket bat, which he could do very easily, I mean, are you going to ban cricket bats?"
I think the cricket bat is much over-rated as an instrument of mass carnage, compared to an assault rifle. It's much easier to get out of range of a cricket bat, or to simply shelter somewhere, and the bat-wielder could be dealt with simply by a couple of chaps wielding chairs. The thing is, cricket bats are not designed for slaughter, and so they aren't good at it. There not even very good at what they are designed for, if the performance of the Aussie side is anything to go by.
But to own an assault rifle for pleasure is perfectly understandable, and not at all weird. It should be viewed just the same as owning a powerful car, or owning a series of fully-functioning Nazi gas chambers.
Assault rifles run out of bullets though...
Quote: Nogget @ January 14 2011, 11:35 AM GMTBut to own an assault rifle for pleasure is perfectly understandable, and not at all weird. It should be viewed just the same as owning a powerful car, or owning a series of fully-functioning Nazi gas chambers.
Quote: Nogget @ January 14 2011, 11:35 AM GMTBut to own an assault rifle for pleasure is perfectly understandable, and not at all weird. It should be viewed just the same as owning a powerful car, or owning a series of fully-functioning Nazi gas chambers.
Or, of course, driving a fully armed 50 ton battle tank instead of a car.
Proliferation of guns = more gun crime and associated incidents. It's as simple as that.
Quote: Nogget @ January 14 2011, 5:57 AM GMTPerhaps the particular issue is with private ownership of assault weapons; we've already banned combat knives
What the heck is a "combat knife"? A knife is a knife; you can do as much damage with the butcher knife in your kitchen as you can with any other kind of knife.
"Combat knife" sounds like a term invented by the same people who came up with the word "assault rifle" to describe any rifle that looks scary. They're no different than your father's hunting rifle but they had to conjure up a scary name in order to enact a (now-repealed) ban. Pathetic.
Quote: chipolata @ January 14 2011, 9:23 AM GMTThe beauty of the gun is that it's a great weapon for a coward. You can hurt whoever you want from a distance, without any chance of them hurting you back. It's ideal for yellow-bellies.
The beauty of the gun is that it levels the playing field in all attacks. When used legally as a form of self-defence it is entirely appropriate to want to hurt someone "without any chance of them hurting you back" because that person has already targeted you as a victim.
A perfect example is the woman who shot and killed an intruder here in San Antonio last week. The two burglars were both large men in their twenties. One went home in a body bag and the other ran after his friend was killed and was caught by the police. How well do you think an 82-year-old woman would have fared in a confrontation with this guy had she not been armed?
Quote: Nogget @ January 14 2011, 11:35 AM GMTBut to own an assault rifle for pleasure is perfectly understandable
Exactly. It's no different than a hunting rifle.
Quote: roscoff @ January 14 2011, 1:33 PM GMTProliferation of guns = more gun crime and associated incidents.
Guns do not turn law-abiding people into criminals. It's as simple as that.
Look, America has a gun culture that's deeply ingrained, and that we as British people look upon as slightly bonkers, no one is going to agree with each other as both sidea have horror stories/happy stories to back up their views. So this argument that seems to come up every month or two is pointless.