Tech Policy Girl

To content | To menu | To search

Law Enforcement

Entries feed - Comments feed

Monday 23 June 2008

Bullet Microstamping

by kcdsTM on FlickrSan Francisco PBS station KQED recently ran a report on the regulation that will require all guns sold in California to employ bullet microstamping technology. Each firearm will have a specially marked firing pin that will imprint a code on the bullet casing at the time of firing. While the NRA is up in arms with this, the only drawback presented in the report is that of incomplete stamping if the firing pin gets worn or damaged.

A question I have that the report didn't address: How easy is it to swap out the firing pin? Crime novel writers take note -- this could be an interesting plot resolution.

Wednesday 23 April 2008

Project 28 Upgrade

by soldiersmediacenter on Flickr A typical technology story: the DHS finally has Project 28 up and running and it's now determined to not meet the border patrol's needs and must be upgraded. Washington Technology doesn't have information on how, exactly, the project falls short of expectations, but back in February the Times-Tribune reported that US Rep. Chris Carney went south to check out the project and was not impressed.

The entire 100 miles are expected to be completed in 2011, (by which time the project should be due for another upgrade).

Sunday 30 March 2008

Smart Cars Snagged by Parking Laws

by James Gordon on FlickrThe best thing about Smart cars is that their length is equal to the width of the average car, allowing the driver to fit into tight spots by parking perpendicular to the curb, essentially creating a parking space where there isn't one.

Unfortunately California Smart car owners will have to lobby for a change in state law in order to reap the parking benefits of their fun little rides. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that state law requires both the front and rear tire on the curb-side of the car to be within 18 inches of the curb. The article mentions that other states have similar laws.

Since the current city administration seemingly views parking fines as a tax the voters don't have to approve (and issues violations copiously,) I recommend Smart owners not take their chances.

Sunday 16 March 2008

Dallas Saying No to Traffic Cams Too?

In my previous post I mentioned the revenue that municipalities can collect from the citations issued for traffic infractions caught by traffic cameras. Apparently I have a 'San Francisco' view of the world because according to an article in the Dallas Morning News, Dallas' City Hall is thinking of putting the kibosh on red light cameras because they're milking the city of revenue.

If, instead of $75, Dallas were to fine its citizens $531 for running a red light the way they do here in San Francisco... lost revenue may not be as much of an issue there.

Via Engadget

Monday 3 March 2008

Mississippi Says No to Traffic Cams

by takomabibelot on Flickr I was reading last week that Mississippi's state congress is considering legislation to prevent the installation of traffic enforcement cameras in the state. There is almost no opposition to the bill amendment.

Enforcement cameras are a hotly debated issue. Some reports claim that they save lives and decrease the number of traffic accidents. Other reports claim that they make no difference and are an invasion of privacy.

What's interesting about the debate in Mississippi is that the legislators' concern is about keeping money out of the pockets of the camera system vendors and not about the privacy or safety of their constituents (or even the income the cameras could generate for their municipalities!)