It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Government now firing the first bullet from newly purchased guns and keeping records.

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   
So what?


Seriously. So what!

It's no infringement on anyone's rights. There's nobody pointing a gun to your head (!pun!) and forcing you to buy a gun.

Besides - prior to being purchased, that gun does not belong to anyone except the company that made it. It's not public-domain.




posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   
If anything, this could only be used to build a case that already has a weapon and a suspect. It is silly to believe that we have the right to be protected from incrimination in a crime we have committted. Our rights are there to protect us from being falsley imprisoned, not to prevent us from ever being tried.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 12:18 PM
link   
Couldn't one just change the barrel and other such parts of the gun if they really wanted to? I'm pretty sure doing that would completely change any "finger print" left by the gun.

Besides, aren't most guns used by criminals obtained by illegal means, anyways?



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Darkinin
 


Why would you want to change the 'finger print' of a gun ??

I mean..if you had to use such a weapon..would not you want the bullet to be in Your name ? .. unless.. well as you put it....Criminals like the throw aways right ?

Personally..I see no problem with this record keeping.

JG.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by jaduguru
 


I believe the more proper question is, why wouldn't you?

If you agree with me that criminals often use guns that can't be traced to them, then you must acknowledge that this practice doesn't even have a point.

To answer your question, because I have a right to my privacy. If some person came up to you and just asked what the size of your member is, would you just go and blurt out a reply to them, this person who you've never known? If not, then why would you do the same, but instead for the size of your genitalia, for your weapon that is in question?

edit on 8-4-2012 by Darkinin because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Darkinin
 




To answer your question, because I have a right to my privacy. If some person came up to you and just asked what the size of your member is, would you just go and blurt out a reply to them, this person who you've never known? If not, then why would you do the same, but instead for the size of your genitalia, for your weapon that is in question?


The ballistic "fingerprint" of the bullet fired is no real privacy issue. Sorry, what you said makes no sense, neither does it make any sense to compare your genitalia to a firearm.

Apples and Oranges I'm afraid.

If anything, this more protects legitimate gun owners from wrongful prosecution. Especially if you have an independent company do a test of your own so that you have a copy of the "fingerprint". Even if for some reason you get blamed for a shooting you didn't commit, you would have your own evidence to clear your name.

Of course reading some of the replies, it seems that we don't actually have a lot of legitimate gun owners replying to this thread anyway.

Anything that makes police say in an investigation "It's obviously not you, we have the proof right here you didn't do it" is a good thing.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   
Just so you guys know I'm a repsonsible gun-owner and when I bought my first .40 cal a year ago I never got a pre-fired projectile with the shell coming in an envelope. And this is at a store that sold silencers for the firearms right across from thier appropriate pistols (it's not illegal to sell silencers in WA, just a felony to fire them). Anywahs none of you guys came up with a good explanation for a scenario that a member brought up on having the government fire more than one round and saying they only fired one. Because if they planted that bullet you'd be F*cked no matter what.

And it would be retarded for somebody to commit a crime using their own pistol. any responsible gun owner knows that along with any responsible criminal which would file off the serial #'s of the stolen gun as well as thowing it away right after the crime.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by HauntWok
 


I think I might not have worded what I meant correctly. What I was trying to ask is, what business of any other person, even government, is it to really know, or inquire, or search, anything about you, your person, or your possessions?

Also, the ballistic fingerprint thing can work both ways. If you do something to piss off a policeman, or someone of significant power, and they have access to such records, could they not frame you? Don't act like government is an innocent child, they've been caught numerous times committing acts such as espionage on the opposition, assassinating the citizenry, selling firearms to international crime organizations, etc.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   
Here is the simple reason it sucks. There is no proof that such databases work. However, they do cost the tax paying citizens of several states tens of millions to maintain every year. So, basically, people are being forced to pay for a system that doesn't work to slow or stop crime. All the system does is give politicians more control and make people that don't understand guns - or crime - feel warm and fuzzy.

I would much rather invest that money back in to schools or infrastructure than some politicians pet pork.
edit on 8-4-2012 by MikeNice81 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Useless since the invention of frangible ammunition progun here as well but it is just another way Government gets to track you.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 11:28 PM
link   
lol..

ok, complete waste of time and money by government idiots.... ****shaking head*****


let me now when they need my equipment measurements for record keeping to eliminate potential suspect for crimes pool

Lazyness pure lazyness on the part of lawmakers and police...

also illegal

2nd amendment



A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


not that most care, is there any exception named in that..

Shall not be infringed is pretty clear

I see no notice of, because (insert any reason you want) listed in the constitution

A huge liberal waste of resources that could actually go to better uses... like keeping animal shelters open... or may be, here is a concept -- obamacare (money has to come from somewhere)

The reason it is a waste is because every prohibition creates its bootleggers... I can think of three ways I could overcome this limitation my self and not leave the city, five if I am allowed to go a few counties over


Try educating the youth with a real education that enables them to compete in the world market. you wouldnt have as much violence to worry about. Yall have created our own problems and want me to pay more taxes so you can deal with them.



it is just waste of resources that could be put to better use. An exercise in accomplishing nothing, go strawman politics



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 01:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Darkinin
 



What I was trying to ask is, what business of any other person, even government, is it to really know, or inquire, or search, anything about you, your person, or your possessions?


This is done prior to you purchasing the firearm, so it's not actually your possession yet.


Also, the ballistic fingerprint thing can work both ways. If you do something to piss off a policeman, or someone of significant power, and they have access to such records, could they not frame you? Don't act like government is an innocent child, they've been caught numerous times committing acts such as espionage on the opposition, assassinating the citizenry, selling firearms to international crime organizations, etc.


Hence why you do your own independent test and keep the records for yourself. You aren't that important, the government isn't out to get you personally.

 


reply to post by ripcontrol
 



also illegal


It's done prior to your purchasing the firearm, You can still purchase the firearm, No infringement has occurred, nothing besides your own rampant paranoia is preventing you from buying a firearm.

People love quoting the 2nd Amendment, and have no idea what it really means. Ya'll always ignore the first part, you know the "well REGULATED" part, yes you are the militia, and the government does have the right to regulate.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
Typically I replace the barrels of my pistols with better barrels, and typically I get alt caliber barrels too, so lots of luck framing me!

Derek



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by HauntWok
 


no I do not ignore it the whole quote was there... if not I will fix it...

the language is quite clear.

...shall not be infringed.


nope that is pretty clear... right up with a jealous god I know of....

"Thou shall have no other gods before me"


It means
1)there are other gods

2)dont put them in front of me


desert people always act differently as do their gods.. the world is under the control of a desert religion


I have a better question...

Why do those who support stealing a persons right to defend themselves, have to force their insecurities onto others?


As for the thread...

every prohibition will create its own bootleggers

kinda says it all... waste of time and effort



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ameilia

The last gun I bought in 2003 or 2004 came with the envelope containing the shell of the first bullet fired.


Did you get a discount on it? Because if it's been fired, technically it's used, not new


An alternative would be to just build your own from parts, or buy one from someone who'd already done it for you.

Not sure of the legality of that. Being from Canada I just assume everything's against the law

edit on 9-4-2012 by HIWATT because: cat walked on my keyboard



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 


Again, well regulated. This practice does not in any way shape or form prevent, or infringe on your right to buy a gun. If your rampant paranoia is preventing you from purchasing a gun, that's your own problem and not the government's. You still have the right to keep and bear arms, no one has taken this from you by having a record of the firearm's "fingerprint", so your accusation is completely baseless.

The only thing preventing you from owning a firearm with this in place is your own paranoia. Too bad, grow a pair and get over it.

This is sorta like sex offenders screaming that making rape illegal prevents them from having sex.




top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join