Ohio Sniper On The Loose

[mogadishu]

Originally posted by j2k4@15 February 2004 - 19:14
The wisdom of such a thing would be subject to the same template used for the gathering of fingerprints to track terrorists.

It would seem to be less reliable though, given the need to have a record created by firing each weapon as it left it's place of manufacture, and, given the black market and it's ability to provide services as well as goods, gunsmiths already provide a variety of modification services without proper documentation.

I think though, along the lines you describe, Biggles, that if such info as exists were entered into a database it could be of use, however limited.

I am referring to recovered rounds from crimes whose condition would lend themselves to the creation of a record.

It would seem a shame not to make use of any such information, given the ease of data transmission these days; could conceivably put a dent in street crime.

EDIT: Sorry for being late posting this; I was away from the keyboard for a bit after your first post, Biggles.

i agree that making a database would do nothing but good. and it is nothing like gathering the fingerprints of "terrorists".. the people who would have their fingerprints taken would have done nothing at all except be from a certain country (im not sure on the spec of what you are reffering to). But with a gun registry - you are creating a database for the ownership of a lethal weapon that is for killing people. No other purpose. Now whether that person is an intruder or a cheating husband is a dif issue. But the bottom line is that we are giving these weapons to people and then when a crime is commited we have to way to link it to a gun unless we a) have the gun or B) the gun was used in another crime. In the latter case, we only know that the same gun was used.. but we still dont know what the gun was used for. I could go on and on - i am very pro gun control - i see no need for them here. But i dont want to get into a fight about gun control. I hope we all agree that a gun ownership database is a good idea. i was responding to your comparison to a fingerprinting database, which i view as a violation of personal privacy. personal privacy is void when you go out and buy a lethal weapon.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by mogadishu+16 February 2004 - 04:17--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (mogadishu &#064; 16 February 2004 - 04:17)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@15 February 2004 - 19:14
The wisdom of such a thing would be subject to the same template used for the gathering of fingerprints to track terrorists.

It would seem to be less reliable though, given the need to have a record created by firing each weapon as it left it&#39;s place of manufacture, and, given the black market and it&#39;s ability to provide services as well as goods, gunsmiths already provide a variety of modification services without proper documentation.

I think though, along the lines you describe, Biggles, that if such info as exists were entered into a database it could be of use, however limited.

I am referring to recovered rounds from crimes whose condition would lend themselves to the creation of a record.

It would seem a shame not to make use of any such information, given the ease of data transmission these days; could conceivably put a dent in street crime.

EDIT: Sorry for being late posting this; I was away from the keyboard for a bit after your first post, Biggles.

i agree that making a database would do nothing but good. and it is nothing like gathering the fingerprints of "terrorists".. the people who would have their fingerprints taken would have done nothing at all except be from a certain country (im not sure on the spec of what you are reffering to). But with a gun registry - you are creating a database for the ownership of a lethal weapon that is for killing people. No other purpose. Now whether that person is an intruder or a cheating husband is a dif issue. But the bottom line is that we are giving these weapons to people and then when a crime is commited we have to way to link it to a gun unless we a) have the gun or B) the gun was used in another crime. In the latter case, we only know that the same gun was used.. but we still dont know what the gun was used for. I could go on and on - i am very pro gun control - i see no need for them here. But i dont want to get into a fight about gun control. I hope we all agree that a gun ownership database is a good idea. i was responding to your comparison to a fingerprinting database, which i view as a violation of personal privacy. personal privacy is void when you go out and buy a lethal weapon.[/b][/quote]
Oddly enough, the right to privacy has no constitutional basis (in the U.S.), but that is another story.

My point was that a database built from all sources (crime scene forensics/spent ammo, etc.), but beginning with weapons being test-fired for this purpose at the point of manufacture, would be subject to the same ridicule as the fingerprint program by those who would not be pleased by either program.

You raise privacy issues, but the more paranoid among us would, I&#39;m sure, object to both programs, and on the same basis: privacy.

All that aside, even if, as I and Biggles have proposed, a database was formed from existing evidence, and built upon accordingly, it would only stand to reason such an article would be of some use; many of these weapons are used over and over again by street criminals, gangs, etc.

The only difference would be that it wouldn&#39;t be accompanied by political hoopla that would acconpany a full-bore (there&#39;s a term, eh?) program which would incorporate wasteful aspects.

[ivy]

yippy&#33; i love living in ohio.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by ivy@16 February 2004 - 12:31
yippy&#33; i love living in ohio.

This sniper is just another in the long line of attention-seekers.

If these types knew the gas chamber, and not headlines and book/movie deals awaited them, they just might forego their special brand of idiocy.

[ilw]

gun control, sweet gun control, where would we be without gun control :-"

[Billy_Dean]

Well here&#39;s a bit of deja vu for you, ilw squashed between Billy Dean and j2k4.

Almost makes it worth starting an argument&#33;

How ya been stranger?

[j2k4]

Originally posted by ilw@16 February 2004 - 12:58
gun control, sweet gun control, where would we be without gun control :-"

Are there ever any crimes at all in the U.K. involving firearms?

Yes-yes there are; the numbers are growing, in fact.

And I&#39;m betting those crimes are committed by people who refused to be stayed by "gun control".

Law-abiding citizens are, by their nature, law-abiding, and are also, by-and-large, not likely to commit crimes with the guns they own.

Criminals quite simply don&#39;t care.

As to other issues anent firearms, such as trigger-safes, etc.:

A law passed to bring about the use of such (admitted) good ideas would seem to run afoul of privacy laws if it became an issue of compliance checks, eh?

Perhaps some of these laws ought to be re-designated "guidelines", owing to their current ineffectiveness.

Billy-

I don&#39;t think Ian would fit between us, no matter what his stature.

BTW-ilw-is you a beeg won?

[Alex H]

THE T.P.S. SYSTEM

The T.P.S. System is an also one of a kind identification system. This system will be used in ALL types of firearms, including;

Handguns
Rifles
Shotguns
Military Weapons
Etc...

We will also be installing this unique digital system into security systems for personel or high security business areas&#33; This product has been designed, engineered and prototyped for testing.

The T.P.S. System offers personnel identification of your individual print, then scanned into the weapons memory. Once the persons print is loaded and stored, this weapon will only fire when the owner has his/her thumb on the lens.

Once the impression of your print is loaded, the T.P.S. System can also download (via a secured internet connection) to all record departments of:

CIA
FBI
NCIC
Interpole
International
Federal
Military
State
and Local

This will considerably cut COST, PAPERWORK, MISTAKES, TIME and prevent ALL person&#39;s not allowed to have a firearm, from aquiring one&#33;

Source

[Alex H]

Check out the photo

Pretoria inventor Nic van Zyl has developed what may be the world’s first "intelligent firearm", a handgun that can be operated only by its rightful owner. It could make criminal abuse of firearms a thing of the past

It looks like a cross between a sci-fi raygun and an industrial high-pressure cleaning device. Bulky and block-like, it displays none of the black-metal menace inherent in most civilian firearms, and frankly, it is not a thing of beauty.

Then again, there’s no rule that says a firearm has to be pretty. Some people might find the smoothly formed wooden hand grip and machined aluminium body downright compelling, especially if they’re at the wrong end of the muzzle.

Say hello to the Intelligent Fire Arm, a unique and thoroughly South African device that could change the way we think about guns – and the people who wield them. Although still in prototype form, it will soon enter manufacture.
Inventor Nic van Zyl, 65, is an ardent believer in firearms with brains.

“Until now, firearms have been dumb. They lie in your safe at home, or in your holster, and tell no stories. Naturally, this opens the door for all sorts of abuse. The Intelligent Fire Arm, also known as the ‘smart gun’, changes all that.”

Van Zyl is managing director of Bansha Investments, the company that has produced the prototype of the IFA. Work began on the device in 1994, when the first of many patents was taken out. Now, eight years later, an international firearms company is poised to acquire the production rights to what may well be the world’s first foolproof firearm – at least in terms of criminal abuse.

The IFA, as it’s known, uses a biometric sensor located just above the handgrip to activate its firing capability. The sensor is encoded with the thumbprint of an authorised user (or users): unless it recognises the imprint, it remains inoperative. As Van Zyl says, an unauthorised person could use it to clobber someone over the head, but that’s about it.

“This is the first firearm to enter the electronics age in terms of authorised use. It could be used for personal protection, or in a responsible peacekeeping role. There is a real need for a gun like this.”

In conjunction with the biometric sensor, the electronic chip located in the gun’s pistol grip will be encoded with a range of additional information regarding the user’s personal details, including fingerprints, identity number, and licence status (that is, whether the firearm is for personal protection, hunting, police or military use).

The device is designed to empower a country’s authorities with absolute control over the gun’s life history, says Van Zyl. When the firearm is issued, it can be “loaded” with one or more authorised users’ details. This data is stored in a fixed memory that cannot be changed. And it records each and every shot fired by the IFA.

“In addition to this record, we have added a tiny camera – similar to the devices used in mini-cam recorders – which takes a photograph every time the gun is fired. This information is downloadable by the authorities for use in a court case, if necessary, to document the circumstances in which the shot was fired.”

Banshee intends to develop a smart card recognition system for the gun as a further safety measure. The smart card will be carried by the owner, and the proximity of the gun to his card activates the device to “ready” status. Again, it will not fire unless the biometric sensor above the grip recognises the authorised user’s thumbprint.

The IFA dispenses with the conventional percussive firing action, instead employing laser technology to ignite the charge in the bullet. This has required the production of special bullets with a built-in “window”, allowing a laser beam to ignite the (conventional) charge. To prevent gas from fogging the laser beam, the inventor has installed a small plastic lens on the back of the bullet and an O-ring on each bullet.

Because there is no percussive or hammer device in the gun, it has been possible to incorporate the magazine and the barrel in one unit. The prototype uses a 10-barrel configuration, with two vertical rows of five bullets arranged side-by-side.

When all 10 shots have been fired, the magazine/barrel is simply ejected and a new, loaded barrel is installed, using a quick-release lever. The empty barrel (held in place by a clip that permits rapid removal and replacement) is returned to the dealer for reloading. It’s virtually impossible for ordinary users to make or reload the uniquely coded, caseless ammunition.

Van Zyl says it would be possible to develop many barrel/magazine combinations – accommodating different calibres and types of bullet – and considerably improve firepower, perhaps for military applications. With a large-capacity magazine, the IFA could be programmed to fire 50 or more rounds in single shots, bursts, or fully automatic.

For a street-legal weapon that complies with civilian laws, it would have a 10-round magazine and fire single shots only, requiring the trigger to be pressed each time. The IFA has been designed to fire at the rate of three rounds per second – fast enough to make even a Wyatt Earp happy.

“Sure, the prototype is bulky, but when we go into production it will be much smaller,” he says. The prototype was built by Kentron, a subsidiary of South African armaments group Denel.

Says Van Zyl: “A lot of the electronics contained in the handle or grip have yet to be miniaturised; the typical personal-use weapon can be made much smaller - the size of a conventional handgun, in fact.”

Bansha Investments has acquired patents for the weapon in a number of countries, including Japan, China and Russia, but it is likely that the IFA will be produced by a European company, as yet unnamed. It’s known that other major firearm manufacturers have “owner recognition” guns under development, but Van Zyl is confident that none of these offers the simplicity or user-friendliness of his invention.

Cost? About 50 per cent more than a conventional, or “dumb” firearm.

“There are additional shot-recording features that are likely to be incorporated into the IFA, such as a GPS recorder, which will pinpoint the exact location where each bullet is fired.
“The prototype already has a clock installed that records each shot, and by using flame spectrometry techniques, the bullet’s DNA, so to speak, can be recorded. Even a fragment could be traced back to its origin, together with details on the person issued with that particular bullet.

“Using special bullets will obviously complicate the infrastructure needed to get the IFA into production, but it should be remembered that this device could change our whole approach to firearms.

“I’m only a scientist… I can’t change people’s minds. But I can make it very difficult for people to abuse a firearm.”

The IFA has been tested by the SA Bureau of Standards in prototype form, says Van Zyl, and the test results show that it operates well within the spec of a conventional firearm in terms of accuracy and firepower. The 9 mm, 100-gram bullet speed was measured at between 370 and 400 metres per second – as good as a typical 9 mm pistol.

“Accuracy is no problem, despite the short barrel used on the prototype. By eliminating the percussion firing action, which necessitates locating the barrel and the trigger device at the top of the gun, we have managed to balance the IFA, so there’s negligible barrel kick in an upwards direction.”

Van Zyl says when the IFA goes into production it may well be for military applications, which saddens him a little. He’s always viewed the IFA in terms of safety, specifically in cases of theft and shooting accidents involving children.

“However, the United Nations has been moving more and more towards transforming military forces from aggressors to peacekeepers, and has made it clear that soldiers could be held liable for their actions under civilian law. In this respect the IFA could provide the necessary checks and balances to ensure that soldiers don’t abuse the power vested in them.

“It will even be possible, via the electronics, to establish a live link with headquarters whenever a soldier or policeman is deployed on an assignment. In effect, the curtains will always be open. When your neighbours can see in, you tend to be a lot more careful about the way you conduct yourself.”

In the final analysis, a firearm serves the purpose of launching a missile – in this case, the bullet that comes out of the barrel. “It stands to reason that these bullets should be controlled and accounted for… that’s why we developed our system. Bullets are coded at the point of manufacture and recorded against the name of the purchaser, who is held accountable for their use.

“This is the weapon for the soldier of the future – a specialist peacekeeper firearm.”

[j2k4]

Alex-

Your discovery will no doubt have the effect desired-on the law-abiding element.

Some enterprising criminal will still find a way to manufacture and distribute firearms and other weapons.

The standardization and enforcement of such a system?

Sounds like a job for the UNITED NATIONS&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;