Re: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad

> First off, a large number of 
>guns used in homicides are revolvers or derringers (anyone got the 
>numbers?).  These guns don't spit out the shells.  So, it would be 
>utterly useless to do so.  

The shells are removed sometime or other. Nothing is a 100% solution
but anything that gives the criminal an extra thing to worry about 
improves the chances that a mistake is made.

Many people go to jail because of fingerprints on shell cases.

>The second problem is the number of shells 
>expelled in the US every day.  I doubt there's enough room on the 
>butt end of a shell to print that number (it couldn't be printed on 
>the sides, as this would screw up the fit of the shell, and possibly 
>weaken it).  

I doubt that more than 32 bits of info will be required. Thats not 
that difficult to imprint.

>And, it'd be almost impossible getting gun manufacturers to
>pay for the equiptment that it would take to emprint serial numbers.  

Not a problem, that type of machinery is a standard type of 
industrial machine. Might be expensive to adapt the lines but 
I doubt it.


>The third number is that cartridges 
>are recycled.  Aside from reloading your own, there's a large number 
>of people that sweep up brass from gun ranges to reload themselves.  
>The idea that someone swept up the brass could get almost anyone off. 

Not an issue. A person may have an excuse that explains why
the blood is in his car or his fingerprints are on the knife but
a conviction depends on more than one piece of evidence. If 
there is information that gives the police a lead it is 
usefull.

At present the police are investigating the purchase of white 
powder - checking each purchaser out who fits the Olympic
bomber profile. That is a lot of work for a much weaker lead.

If a person says that they fired at a range then you have 
narrowed the search scope to the guys at the range.

>The final problem is the paperwork.  Cops today can barly keep up 
>with the paperwork involved with the Brady Bill.  Could you imagine 
>if they had to keep track of AMMO purchases?

Not a problem, thats an opportunity. I build very large, very
high reliability computer systems. I can build machines that
deal with several million transactions a day for less than a 
million and run them for less than a quarter million a year. That
is cheap when one considers the cost of investigation saved.

>The provision to give people the means to commit treason against the 
>government are in the Constitution.  That's why the second amendment 
>is there -- to empower the people to protect themselves against the 
>government. 

Making that argument defeats your case. Irespective of the framers
of the constitution nobody in Congress or the Administration believes
that you have a right to take up arms against the government. In
fact they are scared of the militia movement and the NRA. Every time
you make that argument you make it harder for people to accept your
case. 

Its like hearing a Marxist spout stuff from Capital to support a
civil liberties. Regardless of wether the content makes sense the
form of the argument is a complete turn off. 

I used to side with HCI before I started talking to the 
talk.politics.guns people. That convinced me that they were a threat
to the security of the country - even before McVeigh sent me a
mail defending his 2nd ammendment rights that looked very 
much like yours. Regardless of whether he is guilty or not I
still regard him and those that hold his views to be as 
serious a threat to the USA as the Red Army Faction were in
Germany, or the Red Brigades in Italy or the IRA in the UK.

If people carelessly justify terrorism they are fueling that
fire. Up until now the US has not had a serious terrorist 
problem. If terrorism becomes widespread then don't imagine
the constitution will be a protection. Thomas and Reinquist 
are not going to stop measures to "protect the nation" even
if like the WWII internement of Japaneese nationals they are in
gross violation of the constitution. 

If you think the wiretap bill is bad think on this, all guns
of all types banned except where held by special license.
Checkpoints at major road intersections. Stop and search
patrols in city centers and the army on the street. Its not
at all far fetched, the UKgovt took less than a year to 
introduce such measures in Northern Ireland. Constitution or
not, don't expect that the US Congress won't make a similar 
response.


	Phill

On Mon, 05 Aug 96, hallam@Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote:
>The shells are removed sometime or other. Nothing is a 100% solution
>but anything that gives the criminal an extra thing to worry about 
>improves the chances that a mistake is made.
>
>Many people go to jail because of fingerprints on shell cases.

If the shell cases are NOT left at the crime scene, there is NO link between 
them and the crime. You are suffering from cranio-rectal inversion.

>I doubt that more than 32 bits of info will be required. Thats not 
>that difficult to imprint.
[snip]
>Not a problem, that type of machinery is a standard type of 
>industrial machine. Might be expensive to adapt the lines but 
>I doubt it.

That doesn't address the fact that (1) there are billions of unstamped shell 
casing extant, (2) stamping the side of a case will weaken it and be a 
significant safety hazard, (3) stamps in the head of the case can be 
filed/scraped off, (4) cases not left at the crime scene have no value as 
evidence, regardless of any serial stamps, extractor marks, etc. Even if you can 
prove a shell was fired in a particular gun, if there is no link between that 
gun and the crime, the "evidence" is worthless. You are suffering from 
cranio-rectal inversion.

>Not an issue. A person may have an excuse that explains why
>the blood is in his car or his fingerprints are on the knife but
>a conviction depends on more than one piece of evidence. If 
>there is information that gives the police a lead it is 
>usefull.

See above. You are suffering from cranio-rectal inversion.

>At present the police are investigating the purchase of white 
>powder - checking each purchaser out who fits the Olympic
>bomber profile. That is a lot of work for a much weaker lead.

That's BLACK powder, stupid! Also, profiling a bomber requires more than one 
crime. A profile is a psychological analysis of the patterns in a criminal's 
handiwork, and patterns cannot be clearly deliniated with a single crime.

>If a person says that they fired at a range then you have 
>narrowed the search scope to the guys at the range.

Huh? Smoke another one, Beavis!

>Not a problem, thats an opportunity. I build very large, very
>high reliability computer systems. I can build machines that
>deal with several million transactions a day for less than a 
>million and run them for less than a quarter million a year. That
>is cheap when one considers the cost of investigation saved.

Yeah, and lets make it mandatory for everyone to accept subcutaneous transponder 
implants monitored by your system. Can anyone say BIG Brother? Regardless of the 
system, some poor schmuck (or an army of them) is going to have to do the data 
entry work for your computer, or it is worthless. Remember the GIGO concept?

>Making that argument defeats your case. Irespective of the framers
>of the constitution nobody in Congress or the Administration believes
>that you have a right to take up arms against the government. In
>fact they are scared of the militia movement and the NRA. Every time
>you make that argument you make it harder for people to accept your
>case. 

The fact that the current government despises the intent of the people who wrote 
the Constitution and tries to circumvent and negate it to the maximum extent 
possible is the root of much of the disillusionment with and distrust of 
government in America today.

>Its like hearing a Marxist spout stuff from Capital to support a
>civil liberties. Regardless of wether the content makes sense the
>form of the argument is a complete turn off. 
>
>I used to side with HCI before I started talking to the 
>talk.politics.guns people. That convinced me that they were a threat
>to the security of the country - even before McVeigh sent me a
>mail defending his 2nd ammendment rights that looked very 
>much like yours. Regardless of whether he is guilty or not I
>still regard him and those that hold his views to be as 
>serious a threat to the USA as the Red Army Faction were in
>Germany, or the Red Brigades in Italy or the IRA in the UK.

Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than Tim McVeigh's guns.

>If people carelessly justify terrorism they are fueling that
>fire. Up until now the US has not had a serious terrorist 
>problem. If terrorism becomes widespread then don't imagine
>the constitution will be a protection. Thomas and Reinquist 
>are not going to stop measures to "protect the nation" even
>if like the WWII internement of Japaneese nationals they are in
>gross violation of the constitution. 
>
>If you think the wiretap bill is bad think on this, all guns
>of all types banned except where held by special license.
>Checkpoints at major road intersections. Stop and search
>patrols in city centers and the army on the street. Its not
>at all far fetched, the UKgovt took less than a year to 
>introduce such measures in Northern Ireland. Constitution or
>not, don't expect that the US Congress won't make a similar 
>response.

See my sigfile. These are shining examples illustrating why an armed populace is 
critical to freedom, even if some people do misuse firearms. I would rather be 
armed and take my chances against a crackhead looking for someone to mug than be 
disarmed and take my chances against government thugs who have discovered that 
they can act against the populace with impunity.

Jonathan Wienke

"1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full 
gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the 
world will follow our lead in the future!"
--Adolf Hitler

"46.  The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, 
transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. ...Consider the 
following statement:  I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist 
confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government."
--The 29 Palms Combat Arms Survey  
http://www.ksfo560.com/Personalities/Palms.htm

1935 Germany = 1996 U.S.?

Key fingerprint =  30 F9 85 7F D2 75 4B C6  BC 79 87 3D 99 21 50 CB

Contrary to reports of some sort of inversion it is not the case that
shell cases need to be found at the scene of a crime to cause an
arrest and conviction. There are many people who are serving time
after having left their fingerprints on shell cases found in a gun
recovered after a crime. If the gun can be linked to a crime scene
via balistics reports and the shells in the gun to an individual via
fingerprints that is circumstansial evidence.

Of course nobody gets sent to jail on a single piece of questionable
evidence (at least if they have a decent lawyer). But a weak piece
of evidence is sufficient to lead to a conviction if it is a lead.
Anything that reduces the search space for an investigating team
is an advantage for the police.

	Phill

Phil,

The Japanese were not interned in the State of Kansas. The people 
wouldn't permit it and the FBI just quietly backed down.

The Nazis couldn't enforce the Yellow Star in Denmark. The people 
wouldn't permit it.

I can't speak about what people in the UK will permit. If they're all 
like you, they'll permit anything.

Oh the Administration and the Congress don't agree that we have a right to
defend our freedoms, if necessary, against them?  I work in a military
base in the heartland, not a computer lab in Cambridge - and I think
you're wrong about that - I don't think you could get enough American
troops to perticipate in disarming innocent civilians. And the Congress
and the Administration DO know it and are scared to death of it. 


Anyway, Phil, I was trying to ask your opinion about something.... Is 
there any freedom for which you would personally risk your life for?

On Mon, 5 Aug 1996 hallam@Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote:
> >weaken it).  
> I doubt that more than 32 bits of info will be required. Thats not 
> that difficult to imprint.

     You haven't spent a lot of time with guns & ammunition have you?
The most common size round (from what I have seen) is a .22, .25s & .32s 
are also very common. That isn't a lot of room. 
 
> >government are in the Constitution.  That's why the second amendment 
> >is there -- to empower the people to protect themselves against the 
> >government. 
> Making that argument defeats your case. Irespective of the framers
> of the constitution nobody in Congress or the Administration believes
> that you have a right to take up arms against the government. In

     It's the truth. If you can't stand the truth, get out of the gene pool.

Petro, Christopher C.
petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow@smoke.suba.com