Yeah, attacking the power grid is a good way to get into real trouble.
Almost as bad as messing with the mail.
Or the phone cops.
Maddow began her show tonight talking about the similarities between this attack and a weirdly similar California attack just outside of San Jose in 2013 which is still unsolved (apparently the day after the Boston Marathon attacks).
In the 2013 California attacks they supposedly never found any fingerprints on the shell casings they found.
Friend is asking why they didn’t just shoot up the drag show instead? She thinks there is some hidden plan and they’ve got something bigger planned. I believe it’s because they knew it wasn’t a soft target (l know some folks knew something could happen and they were ready for trouble)
Organizers of the show said last week that far-right activists had tried to shut down the event for weeks. Organizers, responding to threats of violence, ramped up security for the Saturday evening event, with private security and the Southern Pines Police Department monitoring the event, Sunrise Theater Executive Director Kevin Dietzel said last week.
So I just saw a story on CNN on how they recovered a bunch of casings at the N.C. scene. Now, I don’t know much about assault rifles and such and have only fired guns a handful of times. But, I have watched NCIS—if I were ever to shoot up someplace and want to remain undiscovered, I would try to “police my brass”. For those more in the know—is that particularly easy to do our are the casings ejected so wildly that it would be hard to gather them all up, particularly in the dark or such?
They actually have bags that attach to firearms to catch casings as they are ejected. Like grass catchers on lawnmowers.
Firearms forensics is way overblown on tv. It’s not really very easy or certain to match casings or fired bullets to a specific weapon.
It varies from gun to gun, but some of them can indeed throw brass a really long way.
Gathering casings is pretty hard to do, especially if you’re firing a shitload of rounds outdoors.
My dad reloaded, so when he went to an outdoor range, he’d bring a giant tarp to catch shells to gather up and reload. He never returned with as many as he left with.
The better solution is probably going to be something like individually wiping down every round and using gloves to load magazines. Because you’re going to lose brass and the feds are going to find that brass, so you want nothing to trace it back to you.
Hypothetically, you’d want to use reloaded rounds that you wore gloves while reloading. Ideally old rounds you reloaded just in case the Feds have some way to contact the manufacturer and somehow trace it back to you. Then reload them all, again with gloves, hair net, basically a lot of PPE to avoid any DNA/hair/fingerprints. Then after the shooting you remove the firing pin and barrel from the weapon involved and melt them down/throw them in a lake/the ocean someplace no one would have any reason to look.
This is also true. But it’s also the case that the government doesn’t care if things actually match and they’ll put an “expert” on the stand that says your gun fired the rounds.
The field of forensic firearms or ballistics analysis, the subject of Agar’s memo, rests on two underlying premises. The first is that when a gun is fired, it leaves unique, identifiable marks on the bullet—marks that can’t be replicated by any other gun. The second is that, by examining these marks, firearms analysts can objectively and reliably match them to the gun that fired them, to the exclusion of all other guns.
There is no scientific research to support either premise. At best, in some cases, an analyst could say with some certainty that a particular gun did not fire a particular bullet.
Controlled studies have also shown that the entire field of forensic firearms analysis is inherently subjective.
Interesting, one of those things where they want us to think they’re better than they are, I’m sure. If they are as good as TV would have it, you also need to destroy the breech face and barrel, probably the magazine too. Or if you reload, just bring along a box of mixed range brass and chuck it out the window, I doubt they could check a thousand cases.
It’s really fucking depressing how much of courtroom forensics is junk science (or indeed no science at all).
Eg.
“Praying”…
In this context could be actual praying, could be a euphemism?
Well let’s just say that someone was on their knees and move along.
Preggo but NOT barefoot and in the kitchen? BLASPHEMER!
Hmm, I can’t help but think that Duke Energy is a bit passed off at these jackholes…