Editorial: Gun safety measures

In the wake of the recent sniper shootings in the Washington, D.C. area, many people have suggested a national system of ballistic fingerprinting for firearms, where the unique marks that gun barrels leave upon fired bullets are recorded and kept in a national database. Then, when a crime is committed, the ballistics evidence collected at the crime scene can be compared to the information stored within the database, providing investigators with a powerful tool to help narrow down suspects and catch criminals.

Unfortunately, the White House has come out in opposition to such ballistic fingerprinting, suggesting that it is inaccurate and would not help solve crimes. However, police and forensic experts already use ballistic fingerprinting to solve crimes, as the sniper case indicates. Whenever a new shooting occurred, investigators used ballistic evidence to confirm that the crimes were committed by the same person.

If police and forensic experts are already using ballistic fingerprinting in their investigations, how can the Bush administration argue that it is not helpful? Of course, ballistic fingerprints can be altered, but that does not mean they cannot be helpful. Even if some (or many) gun-owners alter the ballistic fingerprints of their guns, for those who do not, the database of information still can be used as a valuable crime-solving tool.

What is most disturbing about the White House's opposition to sensible safety measures like ballistic fingerprinting is that the Bush administration seems to be towing the National Rifle Association's line rather than thinking about the pertinent issues at hand. The president should not be a tool of the NRA, mouthing whatever pro-gun drivel they want him to, especially when the NRA's position is nonsensical.

Whenever any law having anything remotely to do with guns is proposed, the NRA reacts in a knee-jerk manner by stauchly opposing any bill, regardless of its intent or its actual effect on gun owners. However, if the NRA knew what was good for it, it would actually support many of the gun laws it fights so hard against.

Things such as ballistic fingerprinting only make guns safer and help prevent crime; if the NRA supported gun safety measures and crime prevention measures, that could go a long way toward changing the NRA's image from a crazed group of fanatics dedicated to having absolutely unregulated guns at any cost into a group dedicated to protecting the Second Amendment while balancing that freedom--one of the core freedoms upon which America was founded and an essential one for the functioning of our democracy--with legitimate crime fighting and safety concerns.

Beyond ballistic fingerprinting, the government should also work hard to ensure that the gun laws currently on the books are effectively and broadly enforced and that ridiculous loopholes, such as allowing unregulated gun sales at gun shows, be closed. These measures and laws are not about infringing upon the Second Amendment. They are solely about improving the safety of America for both gun owners and non-gun owners alike.

Everybody should be in favor of these sensible measures that promise to reduce gun violence and to make it easier to solve those unfortunate crimes that give firearms a bad name.