Just read the executive summary of the Ballistic Imaging Report, 2008

[Magoo541]

I was looking through my universities on-line library for books relating to Lean Manufacturing and Organizational Change when I typed in ballistics on a whim.  The red flags started going up almost immediately as I read the Exec Summary.  ATF's NIBIN (National Integrated Ballistics Information Network) is cited in the first paragraph along with the NIJ (National Institute of Justice).
NIST ring any bells?  I remember a reference to it on a podcast, I think it was Eric on the Hangun Podcast , but I don't recall the context.

"Finding: The validity of the fundamental assumptions of uniqueness and reproducibility of firearms-related toolmarks has not yet been fully demonstrated.

Notwithstanding  this  finding,  we  accept  a  minimal  baseline  standard  regarding ballistic evidence." 

Cork, Daniel L.; Rolph, John E.; Meieran, Eugene S. (Editor). Ballistic Imaging.
Washington, DC, USA: National Academies Press, 2008. p xxv.
http://site.ebrary.com/lib/georgefox/Doc?id=10235161&ppg=25
Copyright © 2008. National Academies Press. All rights reserved.

ROFL!  

For those that aren't familiar with this study the desired outcome was to test fire and record every, or nearly every, firearm manufactured or imported into the US to build a database.  All at the cost of taxpayers and gun owners.  

EDIT:  This report also floated microstamping as a way to track firearms.

[tombogan03884]

I was looking through my universities on-line library for books relating to Lean Manufacturing and Organizational Change when I typed in ballistics on a whim.  The red flags started going up almost immediately as I read the Exec Summary.  ATF's NIBIN (National Integrated Ballistics Information Network) is cited in the first paragraph along with the NIJ (National Institute of Justice).
NIST ring any bells?  I remember a reference to it on a podcast, I think it was Eric on the Hangun Podcast , but I don't recall the context.

"Finding: The validity of the fundamental assumptions of uniqueness and reproducibility of firearms-related toolmarks has not yet been fully demonstrated.

Notwithstanding  this  finding,  we  accept  a  minimal  baseline  standard  regarding ballistic evidence." 

Cork, Daniel L.; Rolph, John E.; Meieran, Eugene S. (Editor). Ballistic Imaging.
Washington, DC, USA: National Academies Press, 2008. p xxv.
http://site.ebrary.com/lib/georgefox/Doc?id=10235161&ppg=25
Copyright © 2008. National Academies Press. All rights reserved.

ROFL! 

For those that aren't familiar with this study the desired outcome was to test fire and record every, or nearly every, firearm manufactured or imported into the US to build a database.  All at the cost of taxpayers and gun owners. 

EDIT:  This report also floated microstamping as a way to track firearms.

Why am I having visions of baby Harp seals ?

[Magoo541]

Why am I having visions of baby Harp seals ?

Returns not valid if the seal is broken.... sorry couldn't resist.

I was half reading half skimming through and then I saw the highlighted Findings.  After reading it I wondered why didn't the summary, study and funding STOP right there?!?!

[twyacht]

Even Sarah Brady is quoted as continuing to work "under the radar",.....This is exactly what this is,....

Stimulus Money in action....

[Magoo541]

Even Sarah Brady is quoted as continuing to work "under the radar",.....This is exactly what this is,....

Stimulus Money in action....

Which implies her work won't survive in the light of day or can't withstand any scrutiny.  Which is what the above quote says it not so many words. 

The tide has turned with Americans when it comes to guns and I guess I would rather have them fight this losing battle than attack another freedom.

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

Which implies her work won't survive in the light of day or can't withstand any scrutiny.  Which is what the above quote says it not so many words. 

The tide has turned with Americans when it comes to guns and I guess I would rather have them fight this losing battle than attack another freedom.

They still use Michel Bellisle as a reference even though he was found to have used fake references in his book.
The references he uses actually exist, they just do not say what he claims they do.
Kind of like saying God created the 1911  it says so in the Bible, Gen. 3-5.