Remember the media hoopla surrounding ballistic fingerprinting? Proponents argued that a database of ballistic "fingerprints" would help police solve crimes. They would be able to track crimes to specific guns and thus nab the bad guy. Aside from the usual suspects of gun grabbers, the technology's biggest cheerleaders were the media and the companies that sold the technology. Both New York State and Maryland took the bait and required that all new guns sold in the state be entered into the database.

After more than three years and millions of dollars, not a single crime has been solved. Maryland's database has had only 6 "hits", while New York's has not had any. Of course the proponents aren't swayed.

Proponents of ballistic databases say New York's system is still relatively young and that it could take years before new, legally purchased guns are used in crimes.

That would tend to imply that people that legally purchase their guns are not using them in crimes. We have to wait for the guns to be stolen or resold first, and then used in a crime. Of course, what good would the database be, if you cannot track the gun back to a specific person? Well, as opponents of the database have routinely pointed out, it serves as the perfect stepping stone to a gun registry and eventual confiscation.

Supporters of the technology, including Eric Gorovitz of The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence Ownership, are blaming other states. If the database was national, or all the other states had a registry, he claims it would be a resounding success.

New York spends $1.5 Million a year on the ineffective technology, and Maryland has poured millions into their database. That's millions of dollars they aren't spending on real law enforcement.