Microstamping identifies the firearm when a firearm is not recovered at the crime scene. How does that help law enforcment? It is a good question.
Many opponents state that the only thing microstamping does is identify the original purchaser and needlessly harasses them. However, this argument is hollow. If a law abiding gun owner has a firearm stolen, it behoves me to think they would not report the theft, having to figure that the theft would be part of a possible home invasion and other personal items of far greater value would be stolen.
However if the theif borke into the gun owners home to only take the firearms, than more than likely, the theif was aware of the firearms location and the personal schedule of the lawful owner. This also brings up the question: why wouldn't you report the theft?
Further it is not out of the question that the lawful firearm owner might have been identified by a theft ring operating in the area and possibly at teh firing range where the gun owner enjoys their sport. Once again i think it is in the best interest of the lawful gun owner to report the theft, to allow the police to investigate this potential.
So, I am a law abiding gun owner and my firearm is stolen, I report the theft to my local police, they being an investigation and file the report.
Now, if my firearm is used to committ a murder and it is found at the scene, guess what I am am getting a phone call or visit by the police no matter what. that is just eh way it goes. Luckily I have my report. Hopefully the firearm is recovered fast, since it is better to clear the issue as soon as possible instead of years later.
Now, if my firearm is stolen and it is outfitted with microstamping, and it is used to committ a murder and the police find cartridge with the code, but do not recover the firearm, guess what, same situation, I am getting a phone call or a visit. However, once again the matter is taken care of the first time the firearm is used, whether it is recovered or not.
So, how does this help lawenforcement? first it identifies the firearm, it also leads tehm to the area where it was stolen and possibly dovetails into the theft investigation. maybe their is a theft ring operating in the area where the firearm is stolen and maybe the police have suspects, which leads to know associates, which leads to the possbile purchaser of the firearm.
The key is Intel and crime patterns. Microstamping is a piece of Intel that can be used, the newer the intel the better the analysis.
The FBI and ATF has developed ways of analyzing certain criminal enterprises by the patterns they form when they engage in criminal behavior. The critical element to defining these patterns and analyzing them is good INTEL or “real-time” data.
This has become even more important with the formation of homeland security. Now new tools are being adapted from military methods of INTEL analysis, such as link analysis and social network analysis. By overlaying INTEL data from firearms trafficking to known networks of gangs, gang associates and known drug trafficking networks a complete picture is developed. Of course these maps or links are only as good as the INTEL, i.e. fresh information.
The FBI states that through their work, criminal enterprises or gangs are creatures of habit, and they often establish specific patterns in their activities. For firearm trafficking, this means they might prefer a certain type of straw purchaser, a specific source location or licensee, or a favorite method of distribution. Such patterns can be found through analysis of data; the problem is the current data is acquired when the firearm is recovered, instead of when the firearm is first used. The key once again is faster INTEL.
Law enforcement is now dealing with a migration pattern of gangs and other criminal enterprises and this network is now stretching farther across the country.
If microstamping data can be gathered at the instant the firearm is used in a crime, the greater chance for better linking and mapping through analysis.
Firearm trafficking becomes vulnerable to these new techniques such as link analysis and social network analysis, when an analysis of the data can form into patterns within a narrower window of time.
So, when trying to find unique ways of getting law enforcement the information they need to combat trafficking, while maintaining the rights of law abiding gun owners, it seems possible, microstamping could strike that balance.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Your arguments for this technology is probably convincing to those who are fearful of firearms, are dependent upon the police to protect them, and those who already have a prejudice against firearms, and vicariously, their owners. First, the technology is dependent upon it functioning as described. It may or may not. Second, anyone who knows the stamp exists, and wishes too, can disable the stamp relatively easily. Third, it is a form of registration. Which means that the sidearm will be registered twice,at least. Forth, it will cause potential legal problems for the owner of the series of weapons, especially if, as suggested by the weapon manufacturers, the stamp may only be a partial. Will this allow police officers, an overworked and opportunistic group, to have probable cause to enter you home to recover your weapon because it is similar? You already know the answer to that. The whole process of "psuedo-gun control" is designed only to make a statement by ultra-liberal politicians who want to make it more difficult to own a firearm, by honest law abiding citizens, criminals will have weapons anyway, and guess what, they will still kill people. Hope it isn't you. Mike
Hello Mike,
I can see from your post that you could be considered a conspiracy theorist. This is ok. I tend to like people to question, explain doubts and skepticism.
I don't agree that all police and law enforcement are opportunistic. You are painting with to broad a brush. Remember the antigun groups do the same to us.
I do agree law enforcement is overworked; however, this work load is due to the fact that they are hobbled by the system and the way in which they have to follow leads to maintain the chain of evidence.
As for microstamping leading to more work, that is incorrect. Analysis of evidence is already done, so no new added work load. You need to read about firearm and tool mark identification methods. I was given insight into their methods, through reading and by a CA Department of Justice investigator who educated me on the general techniques and the method of tracing down the entire "Cycle of Fire", which is what is performed on the cartridge and projectile evidence, with or without microstamping. So, you see, no new work load, they are obligated to do it anyway. Microstamping just adds another feature to the analysis.
As for functioning, I understand everyone is using the Krivosta AFTE study as their holy grail of evidence. The problem is his research showed it has a very high success rate. If you read his paper you would see that he had two conditions for success:
1. The person reading the code is a layman, i.e. would be someone without knowledge of firearms investigative techniques, nor have access to higher end microscopy to analyze the cartridges. He settled on the layman using a 40X to 60X non-metallurgical microscope. This is very low end and doesn't have cross polarized light to allow for enhancing the stamp. Understand, we published four articles and made several presentations two years prior to his test stating that you need to use cross polarization and if you have obscured characters, you need to use a scanning electron microscope to see the micron level features. Krivosta was aware of these issues, because he attended my presentation at AFTE in 2003.
2. Krivosta also stipulated that his thesis statement is that this technology is intended to replace highly skilled forensic investigators, which it is not intended to do so. Based on his thesis he stated that in order for that thesis to hold, the transfer of characters would need to be 100% legible, i.e. satisfactory transfer would have to be 8 characters, anything less than 8 would be unsatisfactory. Of course, this 100% legibility would also be limited to only using a 40X to 60X microscope, without metallurgical lighting.
Based on these criteria, his test showed a transfer rate of 54% at 100% and unsatisfactory at 46%, using various vintage 1911 models. His six worst case cartridges appear in his paper. When observed it should be noted that nearly all eight characters can be identified and under scanning electron imaging characters are easily read.
Why this is important is that even if there are only 6 characters visible, the code number can identify a firearm to within < 3 units. The reason is our encrypted code technique has >400 billion combinations. We actually believe that our code method will allow the firearm to be identified even if you have 4 characters and we feel it will be possible in the long run. We are trying to create many levels of redundant systems and technique to ensure success.
Think of it as a real good partial license plate. You match the partial code with the "Cycle of Fire" data and you can pin point the firearm down, take into account the location of the firearm and you narrow it down even farther.
The problem is the opposition has ever talked to us about the technology in detail, they have only used their lawyer based imagination and in the end, the arguments will be shown to be without merit and even quite silly.
I do agree that people with knowledge of firearms could defeat the technology. The point is, the criminal element we are trying to target do not currently change the ballistic signature of their firearms, nor are they worried, since most firearms used in street crime are stolen or straw purchased.
The key is people like you and me tend to sometime envisage our skill sets onto those who have never fired a firearm. I did a test, I handed my S&W4006 test vehicle to a police officer in California and said, field strip it. He couldn't, he was a special security detail and only had knowledge of his SIG. He declined in embarrassment.
I did not mean to embarrass him, but only to show that even well informed people can not field strip firearms, unless they are familiar with them. We all read the manual when we acquire new firearms. Some of us have had to reassemble firearms blindfolded, some have not. The key is people are straw purchasing firearms for a quick buck and those types of people are not knowledgeable firearm enthusiasts.
As for the legal problem argument, every time I am told this will cause legal problems for law abiding gun owners, I ask how and most people say if a firearm gets stolen.
You understand that if you firearm is stolen and found at a crime scene, it doesn't matter if it has microstamping or not, you are getting a knock at your door, right?
I am not sure about you, but I have never had a firearm stolen. And if my firearm was stolen there are a couple of reasons for it:
1. Random break in and they got lucky and found my firearms. So I would report the theft ASAP, since I would be claiming other property of value that would have been stolen as well to my home insurance.
2. The firearm was the only thing stolen. This means somebody I have met or know stole it and knew where to find it. Or maybe I was targeted by a group who is staking out firing ranges. In this case, I report the theft as well; to get the insurance filed and to allow the local police to investigate whether there may be a theft ring operating in the area targeting gun owners at ranges or at gun stores.
3. The firearm was stolen by a family member or a friend of my kids.
As for registration, this is where you are just flat wrong. The codes reside at the manufacturer. They apply the codes and they are held within there own internal database. They only tie to the serial number; they are not linked to the distributor or the purchaser. The BATF have to do the standard trace, using the same trace system. No changes at all.
Microstamping is benign and uneventful; it is simply another lead for law enforcement.
However, it is also has another benefit, it inoculates all lawful gun owners from the chance of future 3D imaging technology from ever being implemented for new guns.
I appreciate your comments. In the end I am bias, since I invented this technology and I admit it. However, there are hidden benefits to this technology for us law abiding gun owners; people are not looking at the long term benefit. I am secure in my thought process on this and will always try to convince people like you. In the past I felt let down by the groups who say they are protecting are rights. They are the ones that almost allowed Ballistic imaging to get a foothold.
However thanks to people outside of the normal pro-gun movement, ballistic imaging was successfully shown to not be effective or worthwhile for new firearms.
Post a Comment