Topic: Coalition of Mayors Against Illegal Guns

[Dana Gicale]

I wasn't exactly sure where this should go, but it is Firearm Identification related.  I especially wanted it on the Public Forum so anyone can read it and the replies.

This was brought to my attention, and I am sure some of yours, by the NSSF Newsletter, Bullet Points. 

http://www.protectpolice.org/ 

Especially this survey of the "American public" that they are using to forward their agenda:

http://mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/maig_slides.pdf

Pay particular attention to the question on Page 19!!

[Aaron Brudenell]

Especially this survey of the "American public" that they are using to forward their agenda:

http://mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/maig_slides.pdf

Pay particular attention to the question on Page 19!!

While we're at it, I want a pony!

[Jerryp]

I just visited the http://www.protectpolice.org/ site. I have some questions about what I read on the home page.
 
When I worked in the Firearms Analysis section of the New York City PD lab, I recall on a weekly basis we would provide a Federal Law Enforcement agency (you figure it out) with information regarding firearms recovered in the City.
Based on MY experiences in Law Enforcement my questions are the following:

The Tiahrt Amendment restricts a city’s access to:
Its own crime gun trace data;

Question: If a city law enforcement agency provides data to the ATF why would they need access to that data?

The Tiahrt Amendment restricts a city’s access to:
•   crime gun trace data from other cities and states;

Question: If a city law enforcement agency is responsible for enforcement in its city, why would that agency need gun trace data from another city? Especially if a State or Federal law enforcement agency is responsible for enforcement in that venue?

My experiences also have seen that most local law enforcement agencies have personnel assigned to State and Federal Task Force’s.  A Task Force is a multi agency unit working as a team sharing resources on the same cases. Departments who participate in these task forces have access to all of this data. Conversely, State and Federal agencies have access to local data necessary for enforcement.
I’m not saying that I don’t support efforts to stop gun crime. I am saying that some of what is stated on this home page is inconsistent with what I have seen.

I could not open the link for http://mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/maig_slides.pdf

[Dana Gicale]

The link is for a survey the group is using to support their position.  The first part of the question on P 19 is paraphrased somewhat like this asking the "American public":

Are you in favor of requiring "all guns sold in the US to have a ballistic fingerprint, which allows police to determine the gun a bullet was fired from?"

I had a little bit of a beef with this.

[Jim Campbell]

AS well you should Dana.  It would be a total waste of taxpayer (all of us who are gainfully employed) money, as it has been in the great (?) State of New York (confusion?)

[Cole]

The question is worded in a confusing fashion.  I can't tell if they mean that all guns should be required to have a recorded image of the individual characteristics, or if they mean that all guns should be required to just have individual characteristics.

As worded, I would read it as the latter.  Probably as impractical as the database or moreso, but I can see people agreeing to it without really thinking about it.  Especially because most people don't really know anything about it.

We also don't really know anything about the sampling. 

[Bob Poole]

Are you in favor of requiring "all guns sold in the US to have a ballistic fingerprint, which allows police to determine the gun a bullet was fired from?"

I think we're in agreement that this question is designed to be answered "yes."  Otherwise, the natural conclusion one would draw from it is that the respondent would be in favor of crimes going unsolved/unpunished.  Who wants that?

Its not unlike the questions about clean air or clean water.  If you don't agree with a specific method of solving the problem . . . then you're in favor of dirty air and filthy polluted water.   

[Aaron Brudenell]

Its not unlike the questions about clean air or clean water.  If you don't agree with a specific method of solving the problem . . . then you're in favor of dirty air and filthy polluted water.   

If your rivers are dry, maybe poluted water would be an improvment? 

[MaxYasko]

I think that recording of individual characteristics of all guns with rifled barrels is useful, but the more weapons you have, the more difficult it's to provide the database. Moreover, it's necessary to update the data periodically, what means to fire out every gun once an identification period (that depends of  how hard the weapon is used).
For example, in Belarus all registered rifled guns are  sampled every 10 years. But we don't have a lot of weapons here-- in Grodno region (1/8  of Belarus population ) there are about 800 registered rifled guns (rifles, carabines, pistols etc.) in individual use.  In USA , of course, much more. But the main problem, as I understand, is that we can't sample illegal weapons.

[Aaron Brudenell]

The lesson of Maryland's period of entering all handguns at point of sale is instructive: between zero and one successful links in something like a 10 year period is not encouraging given the typical quoted IBIS hit rate of ~1%.  The statistic that's often ignored is the percentage of US guns used in crime and it's vanishingly small; I don't know the actual number or if it's ever been calculated.  As it is, IBIS is looking for a needle in a haystack and if you add all US firearms (numbering in the 100 millions) you can expect your success rate to drop as your haystack get's larger and larger. 

[Jim Campbell]

Aaron,

I concur with your needle in a haystack theory.  Here in NY we have had a legal gun databse snce March 1, 2001 and have had 2 hits, neither of which led to any prosecution, at an estimated cost of about $30 mil.  The program calls for the imaging of any "new" gun first purchased in New York.  (No, I had not input in the program after I uttered the line "Why are we doing this?")   In our program it would not matter where the gun was made, only that the first "new" purchase was made in New York.  Most of the crime guns we see here in Upstate New York are made in Ohio, California or Nevada, or assembled in Georgia.   I am a bit confused by your mention of US guns, can you explain?

[Aaron Brudenell]

Aaron,

I concur with your needle in a haystack theory.  Here in NY we have had a legal gun databse snce March 1, 2001 and have had 2 hits, neither of which led to any prosecution, at an estimated cost of about $30 mil.  The program calls for the imaging of any "new" gun first purchased in New York.  (No, I had not input in the program after I uttered the line "Why are we doing this?")   In our program it would not matter where the gun was made, only that the first "new" purchase was made in New York.  Most of the crime guns we see here in Upstate New York are made in Ohio, California or Nevada, or assembled in Georgia.   I am a bit confused by your mention of US guns, can you explain?

Sorry, I wasn't being clear.  What I meant by US guns was the total number of guns in the US (regardless of when or where they were made).  If we have, let's assume, 400 million firearms in the US and 1% of them are used to commit just one assault per year, that would be 4 million each year!  The actual subset of "crime guns" is very small and their use is substantial within that subset only because it's not the guns but the users who are repeat offenders.  So, if it's possible to track either all guns or just crime guns (mostly, that is, by focusing our efforts there) there's definately an easier/better way to proceed.

In other words, if the majority of firearms in this country were used for crime, we'd need to hose the blood off the streets every day because there's so many of them--it's a waste of time to focus investigative efforts on "all guns" if you don't have to.

[MaxYasko]

I think, it's necessary to take into account the profilactic effect of such total registration. The person having registered gun will hardly hesitate to shoot. It's interesting to compare how many crimes with use of firearms have been done per year in NY before the beginning of this program-- for example, in 2000, and  after it's setting into operation (in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 & 2006).

[Jim Campbell]

Max,
Regardless of what the politicians say in their press releases, gun crime has increased since 2001.