Author Topic: Glock and Ballistic Fingerprinting? (Read 730 times)

sjc1 · « **on:** February 19, 2003, 02:21:31 AM »

I posted this on the Glock Forum and I thought I would post it here to see if anyone knows if this may be correct.

Maybe this has already been addressed here but on Sunday, 02/09/03, I happened to be watching part of 60 Minutes, which I hardly ever watch, and I believe that I heard the CEO of Glock in the U.S. say that Glock had no problem on ballistic fingerprinting. Could someone tell me if I heard this correctly? I was meaning to ask this question last week but I forgot to post it then, it just came back to me now....this is what happens as you get older.

WLB · « **Reply #1 on:** February 19, 2003, 07:21:40 AM »

YES, sjc1, you did hear that correctly. I happened to be flipping channels and saw that portion of the show. It looked like they had built some sort of testing device that fired and collected bullets automatically. I didn't watch the whole thing but I find it hard to believe that one could reliably differentiate bullets fired from 10 different barrels that were machined on the same tooling one after another. Sounds like voodoo science to me. Did Al Gore invent this?
Bill

WLB · « **Reply #2 on:** February 19, 2003, 07:26:40 AM »

Forgot to add. If Glock embraces this ballistic fingerprinting bill that is another reason not to own one. The primary reason--just my opinion--is that they are UGLY, UGLY, UGLY. Life's to short to own an ugly gun.
Bill

sjc1 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 19, 2003, 07:47:34 AM »

WLB
Thanks for the information. I agree they are ugly. Before I retired from law enforcement it was the last firearm I was issued. It was ugly then and it is ugly now. I must admit it was accurate. I do not own one and probably never will. I just have this thing about guns made out of anything else other than steel.