Other Bullet Recovery Systems

Over the years, several alternative techniques have been used for the recovery of fired bullets, including:

• Wet telephone books
• Oil or water-soaked sawdust
• Ballistic gelatin
• Plastic milk jugs
• Blocks of ice

Many of these methods work well because they do not damage the outer surface of fired bullets and prevent fragmentation. However, setup for each test firing is typically time consuming and complex.

 

 

In recent decades, variations of the cotton box have been constructed using filler other than cotton, such as rubber balls or foam. These are available in several grades according to the velocity of bullet they are designed to capture.

 

 

 

Outdoor Ranges

In some cases, it may be necessary to use an outdoor firing range, particularly if the indoor range is too short.

Outdoor range facilities may be necessary under the following circumstances:

• Longer distance shot pattern testing.
• Indoor facility construction limits the use of high power ammunition.
• Additional space required to reproduce a shooting scenario.
• Indoor facility construction limits the use of fully automatic firearms.
• Accuracy testing at greater ranges.

Disadvantages of using outdoor ranges not under laboratory control include these:

• Availability and scheduling.
• Permission may be required to conduct testing.
• Adherence to local laws and agency regulations.
• Weather conditions.

Selected Bibliography

1. Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners. http://afte.org/
2. Biasotti, A.A. 1979. Photomicrography and illumination: some critical factors. AFTE J 11 (4): 60.
3. Chamberlain, D. 1972. Microscope comparison bridge. AFTE J 4 (1): 9.
4. Cook, C.W. 1985. Basic optics. AFTE J 17 (4): 14.
5. Dutton, G. 2004. Firearms identification, comparison microscope & the Spencer Lens Co. AFTE J 34 (2): 186-198.
6. Dutton, G. 2004. LEICA FSC Comparison microscope. AFTE J 36 (4): 256-261.
7. Forensic Technology WAI Inc. http://www.forensictechnology.com/
8. Hatcher, J.S. 1947. Hatchers Notebook . 300-333. Harrisburg: Military Service Publishing Co.
9. Haemmerle, C. 1990. Easily made diffusers for fiber optic illuminators. AFTE J 22 (4): 446-447.
10. Hueske, E.E. 1990. Preliminary report on the application of fiber optic videomicroscopy to firearm and toolmark examination. AFTE J 22 (3): 280-287.
11. Hueske, E.E. 1993. Application of fiber optic videomicroscopy to firearm and toolmark examination: A further look. AFTE J 25 (2): 132-139.
12. Lansing, J.F. 1973. Customized comparison microscope. AFTE J 5 (5):25.
13. Lutz, M.C. 1986. Evaluation of new fiber optics system. AFTE J 18 (1): 12.
14. Martini, L.2005. Adoption of a toolmakers microscope for bullet measurements. AFTE J 37 (3): 194-196.
15. Mathews, J.H. 1962. Firearms Identification , Volume I. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas.
16. Moran, B. 1997. Building an inexpensive high intensity fluorescent lighting system for the comparison microscope. AFTE J 29 (1): 49-54.
17. National Institute of Standards and Technology. http://www.nist.gov/index.html
18. Scientific Working Group for Firearms and Toolmarks. http://www.swggun.org/swg/index.php
19. Thornton, J. 1989. Some historical notes on the comparison microscope. AFTE J 21 (2): 215-217.
20. Wikipedia contributors. Micrometer (device). Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php ?title=Micrometer_%28device%29&oldid=165622655
21. Ziegler, P.A. 1983. Examination techniques: The beam splitter and reverse lighting. AFTE J 15 (2): 37.

Back Forward