Breaking: North Charleston cop about to go free!!!

[bucs90]

Bucs argues that boats can fly.

Bucs: Boats can fly
Everyone else: Prove it
Bucs: Well things that fly have to be aerodynamic. Boats are aerodynamic. Are you saying they arent?
Everyone else: Just prove that boats can fly
Bucs: I did! In order to fly something has to reduce wind resistance. Boats are designed to do that. See?

Do Glock pistols have rough or smooth grip surfaces?

You have yet to show that a fingerprint cannot be taken from a glock (rough and smooth have no bearing here). Once you do that then your arguement holds weight, but the bait and switch between what is rough or not has nothing to do with it unless you can show that fingerprints cannot be taken from a glock. Speaking about rough doesnt support your assertion.

But have fun playing with everyone else. My signature shows you'll say anything and use any excuse

A Glock grip is a rough surface. I linked forensic experts saying they still have trouble printing rough surfaces. Game set match. You two lost. Badly.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Bucs argues that boats can fly.

Bucs: Boats can fly
Everyone else: Prove it
Bucs: Well things that fly have to be aerodynamic. Boats are aerodynamic. Are you saying they arent?
Everyone else: Just prove that boats can fly
Bucs: I did! In order to fly something has to reduce wind resistance. Boats are designed to do that. See?

Do Glock pistols have rough or smooth grip surfaces?

You have yet to show that a fingerprint cannot be taken from a glock (rough and smooth have no bearing here). Once you do that then your arguement holds weight, but the bait and switch between what is rough or not has nothing to do with it unless you can show that fingerprints cannot be taken from a glock. Speaking about rough doesnt support your assertion.

But have fun playing with everyone else. My signature shows you'll say anything and use any excuse

A Glock grip is a rough surface. I linked forensic experts saying they still have trouble printing rough surfaces. Game set match. You two lost. Badly.

From what can fingerprints be lifted and from what can't they be lifted?
I'm wondering if a hand print can be lifted from a bikini bottom, but looking for a complete answer for many different materials.

Justin Freeman, Former Patrol Officer

Print lifting capability isn't binary regarding various surface types - there is somewhat of a spectrum of suitability for lifting fingerprints. Knowing my answers tend to wax prosaic, here's the TLDR as a public service:

• Easy: Glass, glossy tile, porcelain, lacquered furniture, smooth metal.
• Involved: Paper, painted surfaces, drywall, cardboard, leather, most dashboards.
• Difficult: Organic surfaces (tree leaves, fruit peels, feathers).
• Formidable: Fabrics, human skin, and rough or textured surfaces (checkered handgun grips come to mind).

 

[bucs90]

Bucs argues that boats can fly.

Bucs: Boats can fly
Everyone else: Prove it
Bucs: Well things that fly have to be aerodynamic. Boats are aerodynamic. Are you saying they arent?
Everyone else: Just prove that boats can fly
Bucs: I did! In order to fly something has to reduce wind resistance. Boats are designed to do that. See?

Do Glock pistols have rough or smooth grip surfaces?

You have yet to show that a fingerprint cannot be taken from a glock (rough and smooth have no bearing here). Once you do that then your arguement holds weight, but the bait and switch between what is rough or not has nothing to do with it unless you can show that fingerprints cannot be taken from a glock. Speaking about rough doesnt support your assertion.

But have fun playing with everyone else. My signature shows you'll say anything and use any excuse

A Glock grip is a rough surface. I linked forensic experts saying they still have trouble printing rough surfaces. Game set match. You two lost. Badly.

From what can fingerprints be lifted and from what can't they be lifted?
I'm wondering if a hand print can be lifted from a bikini bottom, but looking for a complete answer for many different materials.

Justin Freeman, Former Patrol Officer

Print lifting capability isn't binary regarding various surface types - there is somewhat of a spectrum of suitability for lifting fingerprints. Knowing my answers tend to wax prosaic, here's the TLDR as a public service:

• Easy: Glass, glossy tile, porcelain, lacquered furniture, smooth metal.
• Involved: Paper, painted surfaces, drywall, cardboard, leather, most dashboards.
• Difficult: Organic surfaces (tree leaves, fruit peels, feathers).
• Formidable: Fabrics, human skin, and rough or textured surfaces (checkered handgun grips come to mind).

Ummm.....thanks? Yes. Getting a print off a rough gun grip is "formidable" as he says. Nearly impossible.

 

[Skylar]

Sorry Skylar. I posted the book governing bond hearings. You can read it

And where in that 'book governing bond hearings' does it say what you do? You have never read the source you've cited. You can't verify that anything you've said is part of the 'book'.

Show us. Don't tell us.

Show us the SC law that says that lawyers have to answer each other's questions in a bond hearing.

And you won't see forensics experts specifying particular gun grips. Because they're all rough surfaces. Common knowledge. Doesn't matter what the rough surface is ATTACHED to.

Then it will be remarkably easy for you to quote your source stating that you can't pull a print from a glock or taser.

Unless you're talking out of your ass, in which case we'll just get more excuses why you can't.

You're done.

 

[bucs90]

Sorry Skylar. I posted the book governing bond hearings. You can read it

And where in that 'book governing bond hearings' does it say what you do? You have never read the source you've cited. You can't verify that anything you've said is part of the 'book'.

Show us. Don't tell us.

Show us the SC law that says that lawyers have to answer each other's questions in a bond hearing.

And you won't see forensics experts specifying particular gun grips. Because they're all rough surfaces. Common knowledge. Doesn't matter what the rough surface is ATTACHED to.

Then it will be remarkably easy for you to quote your source stating that you can't pull a print from a glock or taser.

Unless you're talking out of your ass, in which case we'll just get more excuses why you can't.

You're done.

They don't HAVE to answer. 5th amendment. I said they can question and cross examine each other. And they can. I provided links showing the procedural law governing it in SC. AND...a link showing cross examination is allowed in FEDERAL bond hearings.

Checkmate.

As for fingerprints on a rough Glock grip....even ClosedCaption tried to find it...and was only able to find a link showing just how difficult it is...and that's for ALL guns including smooth grip pistols. Rough Glocks? It's as "possible" as you beating LeBron 1 on 1. Sure....technically "possible". But...in practice....impossible.

 

[Skylar]

Sorry Skylar. I posted the book governing bond hearings. You can read it

And where in that 'book governing bond hearings' does it say what you do? You have never read the source you've cited. You can't verify that anything you've said is part of the 'book'.

Show us. Don't tell us.

Show us the SC law that says that lawyers have to answer each other's questions in a bond hearing.

And you won't see forensics experts specifying particular gun grips. Because they're all rough surfaces. Common knowledge. Doesn't matter what the rough surface is ATTACHED to.

Then it will be remarkably easy for you to quote your source stating that you can't pull a print from a glock or taser.

Unless you're talking out of your ass, in which case we'll just get more excuses why you can't.

You're done.

They don't HAVE to answer. 5th amendment. I said they can question and cross examine each other. And they can. I provided links showing the procedural law governing it in SC. AND...a link showing cross examination is allowed in FEDERAL bond hearings.

And where is the SC law that states lawyers have to answer each other's questions? This was your claim:

In SC law opposing attorneys can challenge and question each other at bond hearings.

bucs90

Show me the law saying this. You have only cited yourself. You've never quoted any law, State or Federal, that says that lawyers have to answer each other's questions at a bond hearing.

Checkmate.

I don't think that means what you think that means. As you're still just citing yourself. And you're nobody.

As for fingerprints on a rough Glock grip....even ClosedCaption tried to find it...and was only able to find a link showing just how difficult it is...and that's for ALL guns including smooth grip pistols. Rough Glocks? It's as "possible" as you beating LeBron 1 on 1. Sure....technically "possible". But...in practice....impossible.

Then it will be remarkably easy for you to show me where in your source it says that prints can't be lifted from a glock or a taser. The glock doesn't use a checkered hand gun grip.

You can't. You can only quote yourself. And you're nobody.

See how this works? Until you quote a source other than yourself, you haven't actually presented evidence. You've offered us your personal opinion. And no one gives a shit what your opinion is.

 

[bucs90]

Sorry Skylar. I posted the book governing bond hearings. You can read it

And where in that 'book governing bond hearings' does it say what you do? You have never read the source you've cited. You can't verify that anything you've said is part of the 'book'.

Show us. Don't tell us.

Show us the SC law that says that lawyers have to answer each other's questions in a bond hearing.

And you won't see forensics experts specifying particular gun grips. Because they're all rough surfaces. Common knowledge. Doesn't matter what the rough surface is ATTACHED to.

Then it will be remarkably easy for you to quote your source stating that you can't pull a print from a glock or taser.

Unless you're talking out of your ass, in which case we'll just get more excuses why you can't.

You're done.

They don't HAVE to answer. 5th amendment. I said they can question and cross examine each other. And they can. I provided links showing the procedural law governing it in SC. AND...a link showing cross examination is allowed in FEDERAL bond hearings.

And where is the SC law that states lawyers have to answer each other's questions? This was your claim:

In SC law opposing attorneys can challenge and question each other at bond hearings.

bucs90

Show me the law saying this. You have only cited yourself. You've never quoted any law, State or Federal, that says that lawyers have to answer each other's questions at a bond hearing.

Checkmate.

I don't think that means what you think that means. As you're still just citing yourself. And you're nobody.

As for fingerprints on a rough Glock grip....even ClosedCaption tried to find it...and was only able to find a link showing just how difficult it is...and that's for ALL guns including smooth grip pistols. Rough Glocks? It's as "possible" as you beating LeBron 1 on 1. Sure....technically "possible". But...in practice....impossible.

Then it will be remarkably easy for you to show me where in your source it says that prints can't be lifted from a glock or a taser. The glock doesn't use a checkered hand gun grip.

You can't. You can only quote yourself. And you're nobody.

See how this works? Until you quote a source other than yourself, you haven't actually presented evidence. You've offered us your personal opinion. And no one gives a shit what your opinion is.

Am I in a twilight zone? I post links to the entire state governing book...along with federal law...and he claims i didn't quote it or source it. He says I need to prove law that says lawyers MUST answer questions...then quotes me where I said they may ASK questions. Of course lawyers (representing their client) can plead the 5th. But they can ask questions in bond court...by state and federal law.

Then...he says Glocks don't have checker printed grips. And a Google search of Glock pics...wow. Especially Gen 2 and 3 Glocks. He says I must provide a source directly quoting fingerprinting a Glock....after providing one saying "rough surfaces" pose challenges even to expert forensics people. Hell....even ClosedCaption linked one showing handgun grips in general are extremely difficult to print.

And Skylar still keeps fighting it. He lost so badly....yet...keeps denying it.

 

[bucs90]

Why We Don’t Find Fingerprints on Firearms | Law Enforcement Today

Here you go Skylar. An expert. Former NYPD specialist. Current college professor on the topic. Appears on temevision shows. His article "Why we don't find fingerprints on firearms".

He says it's rare. 5% or fewer you'll even find one...much less a useful one...ON ANY part of a gun. The grip? I'd say 0% of those 5% found are on the grip.

Now....attack me...saying this expert said "firearm"...not "Glock".

 

[Skylar]

Sorry Skylar. I posted the book governing bond hearings. You can read it

And where in that 'book governing bond hearings' does it say what you do? You have never read the source you've cited. You can't verify that anything you've said is part of the 'book'.

Show us. Don't tell us.

Show us the SC law that says that lawyers have to answer each other's questions in a bond hearing.

And you won't see forensics experts specifying particular gun grips. Because they're all rough surfaces. Common knowledge. Doesn't matter what the rough surface is ATTACHED to.

Then it will be remarkably easy for you to quote your source stating that you can't pull a print from a glock or taser.

Unless you're talking out of your ass, in which case we'll just get more excuses why you can't.

You're done.

They don't HAVE to answer. 5th amendment. I said they can question and cross examine each other. And they can. I provided links showing the procedural law governing it in SC. AND...a link showing cross examination is allowed in FEDERAL bond hearings.

And where is the SC law that states lawyers have to answer each other's questions? This was your claim:

In SC law opposing attorneys can challenge and question each other at bond hearings.

bucs90

Show me the law saying this. You have only cited yourself. You've never quoted any law, State or Federal, that says that lawyers have to answer each other's questions at a bond hearing.

Checkmate.

I don't think that means what you think that means. As you're still just citing yourself. And you're nobody.

As for fingerprints on a rough Glock grip....even ClosedCaption tried to find it...and was only able to find a link showing just how difficult it is...and that's for ALL guns including smooth grip pistols. Rough Glocks? It's as "possible" as you beating LeBron 1 on 1. Sure....technically "possible". But...in practice....impossible.

Then it will be remarkably easy for you to show me where in your source it says that prints can't be lifted from a glock or a taser. The glock doesn't use a checkered hand gun grip.

You can't. You can only quote yourself. And you're nobody.

See how this works? Until you quote a source other than yourself, you haven't actually presented evidence. You've offered us your personal opinion. And no one gives a shit what your opinion is.

Am I in a twilight zone? I post links to the entire state governing book...along with federal law...and he claims i didn't quote it or source it.

And you have yet to quote a single passage - not so much as a sentence - from either link that backs anything that you've said. You've paraphrased what you think the law says. But when challenged to actually quote the law itself...

......you've failed perfectly. You've never once quoted anyone but yourself.

Quote the SC law that indicates that lawyers must answer each other's questions in a bail hearing. Until you do, its just you citing you. And you're nobody.

See how that works?

He says I need to prove law that says lawyers MUST answer questions...then quotes me where I said they may ASK questions. Of course lawyers (representing their client) can plead the 5th. But they can ask questions in bond court...by state and federal law.

You've insisted that lawyers can cross examine each other in bail hearings. I've challenged you to show us the law that says this.

You've never quoted the law once. You've only quoted yourself. If you had the quote from the law backing your claim, you would have offered it.

You don't. You fail again.

Then...he says Glocks don't have checker printed grips. And a Google search of Glock pics...wow. Especially Gen 2 and 3 Glocks.

This is a checker print hand grip:

Neither the Glock gen 2 or 3 use them. You lose again.

He says I must provide a source directly quoting fingerprinting a Glock....after providing one saying "rough surfaces" pose challenges even to expert forensics people. Hell....even ClosedCaption linked one showing handgun grips in general are extremely difficult to print.

Show us your source indicating that finger prints can't be lifted from a glock or taser. Like your gibberish above about bail hearings, you've only quoted yourself.

And Skylar still keeps fighting it. He lost so badly....yet...keeps denying it.

Says the guy who has yet to quote a single law backing anything he's said, nor can quote a single source that indicates that you can't lift a print from a taser or a glock.

Remember, you citing yourself isn't evidence. And you citing you is all you have.

 

[Skylar]

Why We Don’t Find Fingerprints on Firearms | Law Enforcement Today

Here you go Skylar. An expert. Former NYPD specialist. Current college professor on the topic. Appears on temevision shows. His article "Why we don't find fingerprints on firearms".

He says it's rare. 5% or fewer you'll even find one...much less a useful one...ON ANY part of a gun. The grip? I'd say 0% of those 5% found are on the grip.

Now....attack me...saying this expert said "firearm"...not "Glock".

So you've moved from 'impossible', to 5%. About 1 chance in 20.

Do you acknowlege now that your claims that you can't lift a print from a glock or a taser is inaccurate? Or are you going to ignore your own source?

 

[bucs90]

Why We Don’t Find Fingerprints on Firearms | Law Enforcement Today

Here you go Skylar. An expert. Former NYPD specialist. Current college professor on the topic. Appears on temevision shows. His article "Why we don't find fingerprints on firearms".

He says it's rare. 5% or fewer you'll even find one...much less a useful one...ON ANY part of a gun. The grip? I'd say 0% of those 5% found are on the grip.

Now....attack me...saying this expert said "firearm"...not "Glock".

So you've moved from 'impossible', to 5%. About 1 chance in 20.

Do you acknowlege now that your claims that you can't lift a print from a glock or a taser is inaccurate? Or are you going to ignore your own source?

From a grip? Not at all. It's virtually impossible. And you haven't held many Glocks. Many have checkered grips...on the front and rear you idiot.

You want me to source a law mandating lawyers MUST answer question? Doesn't exist...5th amendment wouldn't allow it. However...it DOES allow lawyers the chance to question each other. Federal law does too. I linked both. The original point...can lawyers cross examine at bond court. Yes. State and federal law allows it. I linked both.

And getting a print off a textured gun grip? Odds are about the same as you beating LeBron 1 on 1. A million or so chances...and still likely to never happen. Not according to me. But forensics experts.

You can keep grasping. But you lost.

 

[bucs90]

And here's a link where you can purchase a checkered Glock grip....which you say doesn't exist

Checkered Grip for your Glock - Double Duty Police Supply.com

 

[bucs90]

And Skykar....if you buy a Glock with checkered grip....which you say doesn't exist...here's some detailed explanations regarding shaving off that checkered grip....which you say doesn't exist...

Can I smooth off the facory checkering and and then checker my grips? - AR15.Com Archive

 

[Skylar]

Why We Don’t Find Fingerprints on Firearms | Law Enforcement Today

Here you go Skylar. An expert. Former NYPD specialist. Current college professor on the topic. Appears on temevision shows. His article "Why we don't find fingerprints on firearms".

He says it's rare. 5% or fewer you'll even find one...much less a useful one...ON ANY part of a gun. The grip? I'd say 0% of those 5% found are on the grip.

Now....attack me...saying this expert said "firearm"...not "Glock".

So you've moved from 'impossible', to 5%. About 1 chance in 20.

Do you acknowlege now that your claims that you can't lift a print from a glock or a taser is inaccurate? Or are you going to ignore your own source?

From a grip? Not at all. It's virtually impossible. And you haven't held many Glocks. Many have checkered grips...on the front and rear you idiot.

Your own source says that the chance is about 1 in 20. You are ignoring your source and continuing to cite yourself.

And glocks don't come with a checkered grip. Its not even an option when ordered them. You don't know what you're talking about.

You're nobody.

You want me to source a law mandating lawyers MUST answer question? Doesn't exist...5th amendment wouldn't allow it. However...it DOES allow lawyers the chance to question each other.

Show me the law stating that lawyers get to question one another in a bail hearing. You still haven't quote anyone but yourself.

Federal law does too. I linked both. The original point...can lawyers cross examine at bond court. Yes. State and federal law allows it. I linked both.

You've never cited a single sentence from any law. State or Federal. You've paraphrased what you think the law says.

Yet when challenged to quote the actual law saying it......you run. Giving us sniveling excuses why you can't back anything you've said. You've only quoted yourself.

Keep running.

And getting a print off a textured gun grip? Odds are about the same as you beating LeBron 1 on 1. A million or so chances...and still likely to never happen. Not according to me. But forensics experts.

You can keep grasping. But you lost.

Says you, citing you. Show us your source indicating that you can't get a print off of a taser or glock. You citing yourself isn't evidence of anything. As you're nobody.

See how this works?

 

[bucs90]

Why We Don’t Find Fingerprints on Firearms | Law Enforcement Today

Here you go Skylar. An expert. Former NYPD specialist. Current college professor on the topic. Appears on temevision shows. His article "Why we don't find fingerprints on firearms".

He says it's rare. 5% or fewer you'll even find one...much less a useful one...ON ANY part of a gun. The grip? I'd say 0% of those 5% found are on the grip.

Now....attack me...saying this expert said "firearm"...not "Glock".

So you've moved from 'impossible', to 5%. About 1 chance in 20.

Do you acknowlege now that your claims that you can't lift a print from a glock or a taser is inaccurate? Or are you going to ignore your own source?

From a grip? Not at all. It's virtually impossible. And you haven't held many Glocks. Many have checkered grips...on the front and rear you idiot.

Your own source says that the chance is about 1 in 20. You are ignoring your source and continuing to cite yourself.

And glocks don't come with a checkered grip. Its not even an option when ordered them. You don't know what you're talking about.

You're nobody.

You want me to source a law mandating lawyers MUST answer question? Doesn't exist...5th amendment wouldn't allow it. However...it DOES allow lawyers the chance to question each other.

Show me the law stating that lawyers get to question one another in a bail hearing. You still haven't quote anyone but yourself.

Federal law does too. I linked both. The original point...can lawyers cross examine at bond court. Yes. State and federal law allows it. I linked both.

You've never cited a single sentence from any law. State or Federal. You've paraphrased what you think the law says.

Yet when challenged to quote the actual law saying it......you run. Giving us sniveling excuses why you can't back anything you've said. You've only quoted yourself.

Keep running.

And getting a print off a textured gun grip? Odds are about the same as you beating LeBron 1 on 1. A million or so chances...and still likely to never happen. Not according to me. But forensics experts.

You can keep grasping. But you lost.

Says you, citing you. Show us your source indicating that you can't get a print off of a taser or glock. You citing yourself isn't evidence of anything. As you're nobody.

See how this works?

Holy shit....this is just getting bizarre.

Basically....every time I link stuff = YOU:

 

[bucs90]

Difference between Glock Gen1, Glock Gen2, Glock Gen3, Glock Gen4

Here ya go. Starting with Gen 2....Glocks have checkered front and back grips. ONCE AGAIN....I show you to just be dead wrong. You said it's not even an option on Glocks. Which the link...and photos in it...show that checkered grips are a factory made item. Meaning....you have no ******* clue what you're talking about.

 

[bucs90]

Skylar....the source said about 5% of guns get any print at all....from the ENTIRE gun...including the SMOOTH slide, barrel, mag and shells. I'm talking about the GRIP...the rough surfaced grip...which he notes is extremely difficult. See...you can't twist it. I won't allow it haha!!

And of those 5% where a print is actually lifted....it may not be useful. Most prints...from any source...are useless and get no hits or matches in AFIS.

 

[Skylar]

Skylar....the source said about 5% of guns get any print at all....from the ENTIRE gun...including the SMOOTH slide, barrel, mag and shells. I'm talking about the GRIP...the rough surfaced grip...which he notes is extremely difficult. See...you can't twist it. I won't allow it haha!!

And of those 5% where a print is actually lifted....it may not be useful. Most prints...from any source...are useless and get no hits or matches in AFIS.

You've said that its impossible to pull a print from a taser or a glock. You've cited no source that indicates this. You've only cited yourself.

You've indicated that SC law states that lawyers can cross examine each other in a bail hearing. You've cited no source that indicates this. Not so much as a single sentence of any law, state or federal. You've only cited yourself.

You citing you isn't evidence. Try again.

 

[bucs90]

Why We Don’t Find Fingerprints on Firearms | Law Enforcement Today

Here you go Skylar. An expert. Former NYPD specialist. Current college professor on the topic. Appears on temevision shows. His article "Why we don't find fingerprints on firearms".

He says it's rare. 5% or fewer you'll even find one...much less a useful one...ON ANY part of a gun. The grip? I'd say 0% of those 5% found are on the grip.

Now....attack me...saying this expert said "firearm"...not "Glock".

So you've moved from 'impossible', to 5%. About 1 chance in 20.

Do you acknowlege now that your claims that you can't lift a print from a glock or a taser is inaccurate? Or are you going to ignore your own source?

From a grip? Not at all. It's virtually impossible. And you haven't held many Glocks. Many have checkered grips...on the front and rear you idiot.

Your own source says that the chance is about 1 in 20. You are ignoring your source and continuing to cite yourself.

And glocks don't come with a checkered grip. Its not even an option when ordered them. You don't know what you're talking about.

You're nobody.

You want me to source a law mandating lawyers MUST answer question? Doesn't exist...5th amendment wouldn't allow it. However...it DOES allow lawyers the chance to question each other.

Show me the law stating that lawyers get to question one another in a bail hearing. You still haven't quote anyone but yourself.

Federal law does too. I linked both. The original point...can lawyers cross examine at bond court. Yes. State and federal law allows it. I linked both.

You've never cited a single sentence from any law. State or Federal. You've paraphrased what you think the law says.

Yet when challenged to quote the actual law saying it......you run. Giving us sniveling excuses why you can't back anything you've said. You've only quoted yourself.

Keep running.

And getting a print off a textured gun grip? Odds are about the same as you beating LeBron 1 on 1. A million or so chances...and still likely to never happen. Not according to me. But forensics experts.

You can keep grasping. But you lost.

Says you, citing you. Show us your source indicating that you can't get a print off of a taser or glock. You citing yourself isn't evidence of anything. As you're nobody.

See how this works?

Skylar....the source said about 5% of guns get any print at all....from the ENTIRE gun...including the SMOOTH slide, barrel, mag and shells. I'm talking about the GRIP...the rough surfaced grip...which he notes is extremely difficult. See...you can't twist it. I won't allow it haha!!

And of those 5% where a print is actually lifted....it may not be useful. Most prints...from any source...are useless and get no hits or matches in AFIS.

You've said that its impossible to pull a print from a taser or a glock. You've cited no source that indicates this. You've only cited yourself.

You've indicated that SC law states that lawyers can cross examine each other in a bail hearing. You've cited no source that indicates this. Not so much as a single sentence of any law, state or federal. You've only cited yourself.

You citing you isn't evidence. Try again.

I've cited forensics experts who say how extremely difficult it is.....practically impossible. Barrel? Mag? Casing? Maybe. Grip? Ain't happening.

I've cited SC procedural law and federal law. Lawyers can ask each other questions in bond court. It's common practice. It's COURT...afterall.

I've shown where Glocks have checkered grips. You said they dont. You said you can't even order them. I showed not only can you buy them...but starting Gen 2 they were factory standard.

If our debate was a football game....I'd have won by a score of about...oh....63-7. You get 7 for "impossible" vs "highly unlikely". Sure...printing a gun grip with rough texture doesn't violate scientific laws of nature.....it's theoretically "possible" to do. But does it ever happen? Never heard of anyone actually getting a print off a grip.

63-7.

 

[bucs90]

18 U.S. Code § 3142 - Release or detention of a defendant pending trial | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Ok Skylar. Fun time over. FEDERAL law allowing cross examination at bond bearing. Part (F) Section 2 , US code Title 18 part II chapter 207. Defendant has right to legal counsel and can cross examine. Is that specific enough for ya....or you want to know the color of the ink they wrote it in too?

Cross examination at bond court. FACT. Federal law buddy.
Glocks have checkered grips. FACT. Factory issued.
And pistol grips are nearly impossible to fingerprint due to texture. FACT.

Game. Set. Match.

63-7 win....and that's with me taking a knee with 5:00 left to play.