Posted on 10/22/2002 7:08:11 AM PDT by hoosierskypilot
SACRAMENTO(AP) - California would collect ballistic "fingerprints" on all firearms sold in the state under legislation proposed Monday in response to the East Coast sniper shootings.
Sen. Jack Scott, D-Altadena, said he will introduce legislation when lawmakers reconvene in December requiring manufacturers and importers to collect the unique markings for every firearm made and sold in California.
"Now, they have fingerprints from criminals," Scott said. "It just makes sense to give them fingerprints from guns which criminals use."
Maryland and New York require ballistics be kept on handguns, but gun owner organizations contend the systems are expensive and of limited value.
"It's a terribly expensive process, and that money could be better used for more law enforcement," said Chuck Michel, who represents the National Rifle Association-California Grassroots. In addition, the unique markings on any firearm change with use and can be easily altered, he said.
The proposal was praised by Mark Chekal-Bain of Americans for Gun Safety as a way to catch criminals without hurting lawful gun owners.
Scott has successfully authored other legislation opposed by the firearms industry, most recently a law letting people sue gun makers if they believe the company has been negligent in its firearm advertising or production.
State Attorney General Bill Lockyer on Sunday called for the creation of a national ballistics database to track firearms use. His Department of Justice is studying the practicality and cost of creating and maintaining a state database, but Lockyer said a national database would be better.
Both proposals come as police search for a sniper in the Virginia and Maryland area who is responsible for at least 11 shootings and nine deaths since Oct. 2.
Yet another lie from the gun grabbers: fingerprints are only taken from criminals, yet all guns are proposed to be covered, including those bought by non-criminals. Collecting data on all guns is like fingerprinting (and/or DNA-testing) all people - not just the criminals. But that would be a Fourth Amendment violation.
As would fingerprinting all guns, even if it did work. (But, it doesn't, because the so-called ballistic fingerprints change with use or by deliberate altering.)
If and when this becomes the new cure-all in the judicial environment, all it will do is guarantee the release of people who commit crimes with guns. Yes, there may be fingerprints on a gun. Yes there may be motive. Yes there may be witnesses. But if the ballistic fingerprint argument pans out to be inconclusive(LEO codeword for no match), the suspect will walk due to all the "We need ballistic fingerprinting" hoopla! Any defense attorney is gonna be thrilled with ballistic fingerprinting.
Why don't these same people advocate mandatory fingerprinting and DNA printing for every US resident? This would actually be much more effective, as not every crime involves a gun (not to mention that you can't fake, replace or change these markers, unlike the case with guns). The answer is very simple - they aren't interested in solving crimes. They also know that such a proposal would be resisted by all advocates of civil rights (not just the gun folks), that it would go down in flames, and that it would be found unconstitutional even if somehow passed into law.
I repeat, for anyone with any doubts, that the call for ballistic fingerprinting is about registration and confiscation.
This is just so much hot air or errors made by the reporter who wrote this piece. There is no reason to collect data on those guns which are not semi-auto, because there will be no evidence left at the scene. This bill will have no impact in California other than a fiscal impact because all pistols and revolvers sold in the state are already part of a DOJ database. Every owner is already registered in Cal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.