By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
jason1637 on 08 August 2019
Edit Thread
sundin13 said:
jason1637 said:

Eh I guess you're right. I really hear about shootings cases not getting resolved so it's possible that a lot of them don't get cleared. But it would be better if the rates were more specific because there's a chance that gun related crimes have a higher solve rate. Like you pointed out they make 70% so it's probably not that liekely.

Yeah that's how background checks work. They look at someone's criminal history and check if they're mentally ill.

I was reading through this summary of a study conducted https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180208120842.htm. They couldnt give a percentage or a liekly hood but the methods the way the discussed different methods make it sound like the likelihood for them to gather dna information is high.

Do you think that nobody commits crimes who doesn't have a disqualifying criminal history?

As for your study, the unfortunate thing about it is that it isn't actually about DNA. So thats a bit awkward...

But to answer my own question, in my experience, less than 5% of firearms produce a usable DNA profile.

No. There are people that commit crimes for the first time but the odds of a criminal committing multiple crimes are really high because of how we treat them.

The study links methods they use for DNA testing and it works for that so it works to identify the guns.

What experience?

SpokenTruth said:
jason1637 said:

1. If there was a background check the shooting probably would have not happened in teh first place so there is no need for a gun registry.

2.If the shooter got away they probably took the gun with them and if they left it you could look at the dna on the weapon to find who they are.

3. No I don't think if someone sold a gun is valuable information since they didn't do the actual shooting.

1). How the hell does that work?  If a person gets a background check they will never commit a gun related crime? 

2). DNA on the gun?  DNA from what?  Unless the killer bled all over it, spit all over it or ejaculated all over it, left a hair follicle with attached bulb, you're not getting a DNA sample.  And that's under ideal conditions.  Weather, time, usage, etc...all degrade the usable DNA markers.  Again, life isn't like CSI.

3). So who they sold it to isn't valuable information?  Person A bought gun.  Sells gun to Person X.  Person X kills Person Y.  Person A can show investigators he sold the gun to Person X.  Or vice versa.  Registration can show Person X is now the current owner of the gun. Not valuable?  Tell that to an investigator or prosecutor.

jason1637 said:

1). Yeah that's how background checks work. They look at someone's criminal history and check if they're mentally ill.

I was reading through this summary of a study conducted https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180208120842.htm. They couldnt give a percentage or a liekly hood but the methods the way the discussed different methods make it sound like the likelihood for them to gather dna information is high.

1). Correct.  Still not sure how you correlate a background check with preventing gun related crime and absolving the validity of a registry for investigations.

2). That's a article on ballistics - the lands, groves, strike face scratches, ejector scratches, etc...that match bullet or casing with the gun that discharged them. Every gun leaves a 'fingerprint' upon the bullets they fire.  By test firing the same gun/ammunition, you can match, with a high degree of certainly. a weapon to a given shooting.  Read the articles you Google before linking to them.

1. People who commit a crime once have a high chance of doing it again. Most gun owners never partake in gun violence so background checks do work.

2. What's the CSI? Is that some type of TV show or movie? People don't just pick up guns and shoot they've had contact with their guns multiple times so DNA can be left on it.

3. Well if you registered guns and owners you'd have to have some type of bar code or gun code on the weapon to identify it. There are almost 400 million guns already in circulation and shooters would just take gun registration number or code out. Now if you want the government stalking what you buy thats on you but a lot of people dont.

4. The odds of a criminal committing another crime are pretty high. With a background check you'd be able to prevent the shooting and there would be no need for a registry.

5. The study links methods they used for DNA testing and it works for that so it works to identify the guns.