NYC Medical Examiner’s gun crime unit begins work Monday
New York City’s first-of-its-kind gun crime unit at the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner will begin work Monday and focus on testing an analysis of evidence from gun crimes, in order to speed up those cases.
NEW YORK – Beginning Monday, the New York City Medical Examiner’s Office is launching its new DNA Gun Crimes Unit.
Meant to help speed up both testing and the criminal justice process, the forensic lab is the first of its kind in the country dedicated exclusively to processing gun crimes.
“As far as gun cases, we handle over six thousand cases,” said Senior Forensic Scientist Gabrielle McKenzie.
That’s six thousand gun cases a year in New York City. Now, the city Medical Examiner’s Office has a gun crime unit that will be staffed with 24 forensic scientists.
NYC overall crime up, murders down
Although overall index crime in New York City was up, murders and shooters were down in September 2022 compared to September 2021. But the top brass said a few people are committing the vast majority of the crimes, which they say highlights the problem of recidivism.
What makes the lab new is that scientists working there are strictly devoted to processing and analyzing DNA found on guns, rather than fingerprints.
The team will get faster results for the NYPD, prosecutors as well as defense lawyers who represent accused shooters.
“We, in building this unit, are going to reduce our turnaround time in gun crimes cases from 60 days to less than 30 days and that’s revolutionary,” said Dr. Jason Graham, the city’s Chief Medical Examiner.
The unit has been created to help deal with the city’s gun crisis and is independently run by scientists.
Providing the criminal justice system with DNA results more quickly helps both the guilty and the innocent.
“That would lead to either a faster more efficient exoneration of someone who’s innocent and a speedier conviction of someone who’s guilty and maybe a threat to New Yorkers on the street,” Dr. Graham said.
“We will help to resolve a lot of crimes, and we will help get justice to people who need it,” said Vanessa Sutherland, one of the new forensic scientists on the team.
The new gun unit will officially begin its work on Monday, October 17.
If you were forced to defend yourself, would you want a .45 in your hand? How about one with 11 or more rounds in a concealable, yet utterly reliable, package? I know a lot of people, including myself, would feel very comfortable with a gun like that.
A 4″ barrel and shortened grip make the XD-45 Compact a great CCW pistol – and it is available in California as well as the rest of the U.S.
Springfield Armory offers just such a gun. Called the XD 4” Compact, the handgun is chambered in .45 ACP and will feed from 10- and 13-round magazines. It’s downsized from a full-size for ease of concealment and affordably priced. Interested? I was and recently got one to check out for myself.
The bonus for my friends in California is that this potent pistol is available to you as well.
Overview of the XD-45 Compact
For a lot of shooters, the .45 is as American as mom and apple pie. It’s not hard to figure out why – the cartridge carried the country through two World Wars, fought off Pancho Villa’s criminals along the Southern Border, loaded the Tommy guns of G-Men and protected tunnel rats in Vietnam. For us regular folk, the same cartridge proved to be an effective self-defense round when defending the homestead or the family.
Equipped with a Picatinny accessory rail, you can add most standard weapon lights to the XD-45 Compact pistol.
While the .45 and Springfield Armory are both associated with the 1911 platform, both the cartridge and the company offer an alternative in the XD line. It’s an alternative with some real benefits, also.
The XD-45 4” Compact is a smaller version of the Service Model. While both guns share the same length slide and barrel, the Compact pistol chops the grip by 0.75” to dramatically improve concealability. If you think about how you carry a concealed pistol, the overall height can impact printing much more than the length of the gun. Slicing off almost an inch from the grip dramatically reduces problems from printing.
Shown here with the 13-round extended magazine with grip sleeve, the XD-45 Compact makes for a powerful defensive weapon.
Even with the shorter grip, I’m able to get a solid two-handed grip on the pistol without any problem. My hands are medium-sized, and I had plenty of gripping space. I imagine that better than 99% of people will have plenty of frame to achieve a solid firing grip on the gun.
XD-45 Compact Features
In addition to the chambering and reduced footprint, what other features does the XD-45 4” Compact sport?
To start with, this XD-45 is tough. In addition to the proven ruggedness of the high-strength polymer frame, both the slide and barrel are made of forged steel. Moreover, Springfield Armory finished the barrel and slide using the Melonite process for extreme corrosion and wear resistance. I own several pistols with a Melonite finish and all of them look great after years of service.
Steel three-dot sights are standard on the XD series, including the author’s XD-45 Compact. They are extremely durable and easy to see.
Springfield installs three-dot sights on this pistol. The sights are steel and the rear sight has a flat edge for emergency slide manipulation. Many shooters prefer this sight configuration. I find three-dot sights functional, but I much prefer the U-Dot sights like those found on the Hellcat. Fortunately, the sights on the XD 4” Compact are dovetailed into place. If you want to swap them out, replacement is simple work.
Springfield backs the XD-45 Compact .45 with a warranty that covers the original purchaser from any defects in workmanship or material. I’m not a legal scholar, but it seems to me that Springfield intends to take care of you should the gun give you problems – short of user abuse, of course. Sam Weitzner did a great review of the Springfield Armory warranty. I recommend giving it a look.
Low Cap or Just California Friendly?
If you take a look at the Springfield Armory website, you will see this pistol described as “Low Capacity.” What does that mean? Put simply, it means the company did not abandon the citizens of California and other states that limit how many rounds can be carried in a magazine.
Many modern pistols are not authorized for sale in California. However, the XD-45 Compact is completely legal for sale in the Golden State.
The XD 4” Compact .45 ACP handgun ships with two 10-round magazines that fit flush with the end of the magazine well. Frankly, this is the magazine I choose to carry in the pistol even though I can purchase the extended 13-round magazines here in Florida. I simply prefer the improved concealability.
Nevertheless, California residents can purchase this gun as Springfield Armory was able to get the pistol on the dubious Roster of Certified Handguns. While many consider the California list to be unconstitutional, it is what California’s residents are currently saddled with. And the Springfield XD-45 4” Compact in .45 ACP is listed on it so citizens can buy the gun – something many guns from other companies cannot claim.
Legal for sale in California with 10-round magazines, the gun can be upgraded with these extended magazines in the free states of America.
I appreciate Springfield’s continued support of firearms owners in California – especially since the gun is both potent and remains available to the rest of us around the U.S. without any problems.
Specifications
Here are the factory specs on the Springfield XD-45 4” Compact .45 ACP pistol:
Chambering
.45 ACP
Barrel
4”
Weight
29 oz.
Overall Length
7.3”
Sights
Dovetailed three-dot
Grips
Integral polymer
Action
Striker-fired
Finish
Black: Melonite slide, polymer frame
Capacity
10+1 (13-round magazines available)
MSRP
$573
Range Testing
One of the hurdles I have to overcome as a writer is devising engaging ways to describe the total, if not downright boring, reliability of the XD pistols. Every XD pistol I own or have tested has been completely reliable.
The author put more than 500 rounds through the XD-45 Compact during this review. Even with a suspected double charge load, the gun functioned 100% reliably.
I shoot my guns a lot – and polymer-framed, striker-fired pistols tend to be reliable. They are certainly a major improvement over prior generations of guns from all manufacturers. The XD line is a perfect example of how reliable modern pistols can be.
Nevertheless, all guns can fail and should be thoroughly tested on the range prior to carry. That’s exactly what I did with the XD-45 4” Compact .45. With more than 500 rounds of ammo, I headed to the range to give the gun a workout.
The author found the pistol easy to shoot, simple to field strip and completely reliable with all kinds of ammunition.
As expected, the XD-45 Compact .45 ACP delivered wholly reliable performance. With full metal jacket (FMJ) and jacketed hollowpoint (JHP) loads, the ammo fed, shot and ejected as expected. Neither standard nor high-pressure rounds caused any issues.
Scary Moment
While testing the gun, I had a brief scare that seemed to prove the strength of this XD pistol. I loaded a magazine of JHP ammo from an overseas manufacturer. When I shot the first round, I felt recoil that was substantially greater than any other .45 ACP round I’ve fired. Additionally, the muzzle blast and visible fire ring were incredibly intense.
My chronograph measured the 185-gr. JHP round at more than 4,000 fps. If that seems impossible, I agree. I suspect that the device mismeasured due to unburned powder, the flash or some other interference.
Just a few weeks ago California gunowners dodged a legislative bullet meant to curb their right to bear arms in self-defense in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision tossing out the “may-issue” concealed carry permitting system in New York, which also upended California’s own requirement that applicants demonstrate a “good cause” for carrying a firearm in self-defense. Legislation that would have largely mirrored New York’s post-Bruen carry restrictions failed by a single vote on the last day of California’s legislative session, though Gov. Gavin Newsom and anti-gun lawmakers have vowed to bring the legislation back at the first possible opportunity.
Given the fact that a federal judge has already said that many portions of New York’s ironically named Concealed Carry Improvement Act are likely unconstitutional, are California lawmakers really ready to double down and approve similar restrictions in the Golden State? Unfortunately, the answer is “yes,” though California Attorney General Rob Bonta suggested in an interview this week that the California legislation could be tweaked in response to the New York case. One thing is clear, however: Bonta and other anti-gun Democrats are still intent on restricting the right to carry as much as they possibly can.
Bonta said his sense of urgency remains as acute as ever.
“There will be, and there have been huge spikes in the number of applicants,” he said. “We believe that it’s important to have a constitutional regime that allows for those who should constitutionally have a concealed carry weapon to have (one), but to take the steps to make sure that we are doing everything constitutionally permissible to keep people safe.”
“Keep people safe,” in Bonta’s view, means prohibiting concealed carry holders from actually carrying in most circumstances and ensuring stiff sentences and severe consequences for those concealed carry holders who may stray into one of the many “gun-free zones” Bonta and his anti-gun allies want to put in place. And even if the courts don’t look kindly on New York’s newest infringements on the Second Amendment, California’s AG is intent on putting new laws on the books.
Bonta echoed comments made by the bill’s author, state Sen. Anthony Portantino, a Glendale Democrat, who said that he would like to see the bill, or some version of it, introduced as soon as the next session begins in December.
That plan hit a possible speed bump late last month. Where California’s bill failed, a similar proposal in New York was signed into law, only for a federal judge to rule this month that its long list of “sensitive places” is unconstitutional.
“So we need to look at that, and maybe it is over-broad,” Bonta said, “and we should take that to heart…and respond appropriately with any new (similar) bill.”
Bonta was also asked about California’s new law that, in part, forces plaintiffs challenging any state-level gun control law to pay attorneys fees if they lose any portion of their lawsuit; a law enacted as a response to a Texas law allowing private citizens to sue abortion providers in the state. The California AG seemed to realize just how stupid this culture war fight really is, calling the move a “dangerous game” but claiming that somehow it’s okay when California does it.
Bonta insisted that the law is an earnest effort to “save lives,” but also acknowledged that it was meant to call the high court’s bluff.
“We’re using it in the best way that it can be used, in a way that advances California values,” he said. “But it’s dangerous. It’s a dangerous game. We’re using it responsibly. Now others can use it like Texas, and maybe the Supreme Court will look at the landscape of how this approach is being used and try to correct it. If that happens, that’s fine, too.”
Not exactly a stirring defense of the California law in question, is it? I’m sure the Second Amendment groups that are challenging the law in court will find Bonta’s comments very interesting, especially since it seems like Bonta’s basically asking the Supreme Court to step in and invalidate both the Texas and California statutes.
While Bonta might not be too eager to defend this particular law in court, he’s very much a willing participant in California Democrats’ attempt to chill the Second Amendment rights of Californians. Bonta can chalk that up to “advancing California values,” but to those trying to exercise their right to keep and bear arms Bonta’s efforts look a lot more like treading all over a fundamental right of we the people.
Night hunting is a different creature, especially when it comes to hog hunting. I never saw them during the daylight hours, and they’ve grown too wise and wary to let a mistake occur. Switching to thermal imaging is your ticket to lessen the negative impact hogs are placing on the countryside.
I love night vision, but thermal breathes new life into the night. I started out simple with the ATN X-Sight, and these optics are chock-full of features that deliver optimal performance. The only restriction I’ve found is distance, and night vision is only as good as the light output and throw of your IR light.
Fast forward, after utilizing the ATN night vision for a few years, I was able to jump into the thermal imaging game. I was fortunate to have ATN send a few Thor 4 optics for the entire Gun Talk team to test out. That moment changed how I looked at night hunting and my day hunt strategies.
The ATN Thor 4 is, again, exploding with features. Here are a few of my favorites.
Detection
With a 384×288 sensor, you can expect detection out to 750 yards, target recognition at 335 yards, and positive target identification at 205 yards. Think about that for a second. If you can detect a target at 750 yards, how easy will it be to develop a plan to get within shooting range? That is why thermal is a crucial night-hunting tool.
The range with the Thor 4 allows me to close the distance, whereas night vision is much closer, leaving less time for a plan. This isn’t 100% the case every time in the field. There are times when thermal isn’t the best. I had an issue a few years ago where the fog rolled through, and I didn’t get the distance I’d become accustomed to. ATN isn’t the only thermal device that runs into this issue. Fog is just a booger to deal with, and humidity builds its own problems. However, if you run at night during cooler months, nothing hides.
The hunting party crested the hill and instantly smelled hogs. It was the musky smell mixed with muddy water, unmistakably the feral pig kind of smell. We were coyote hunting and attempted to get out and set up early, but I knew the dog hunt was over if we located hogs. A quick scan of the area with the Thor 4 detailed 40+ hogs moving away at 300 yards. They had no clue we were in the area, so we hatched a quick plan to head them off. After covering plenty of ground, we took 8 out of the sounder. It was fast, but I can’t imagine that night vision would have offered the same opportunity. It’s helpful, but there’s nothing out there that hides.
Recoil Activated Video
I’m about the most forgetful person. When tensions get high and adrenaline runs rampant, I don’t always remember to hit the record button. Recoil video recording has literally saved my bacon on many occasions. I know most won’t use video recording to publish, but it’s fun showing buddies that come over what these optics are capable of and how much fun they’re missing. In all seriousness, don’t forget to insert the SD Card.
Power
The ATN Thor 4 has enough juice on a full charge to run an entire night. In fact, with the correct settings, you can get 18+ hours of continuous run time. So, if you plan on doing a mix of day and night hunting, never power down your optic. There are nights when I forget to power down the optic, and it’s still truckin’ along when I ready myself for the next day’s hunt.
One-Shot Zero
An easy way to get started on the hunt, the one-shot zero feature ensures you’re on target every time out in the field. The one-shot zero makes sighting in the optic effortless. Plus, think of all the ammo you save. I’d suggest sighting in the twilight hours. It offers enough contrast, but if you must sight in during the day, take hot hands with you and tape it to your target.
This is the first feature you’ll likely encounter when you get a new ThOR 4, which may be your favorite. The bonus of having an easy sight in the process is utilizing several firearms. Once you finish the sight in, save the ballistic profile. Then, at that point, it is pretty much a plug-in and play situation.
Price
I can’t think of many thermal optics that you can purchase for under $2,000, and they just don’t exist. If they do, I guarantee they aren’t as feature-rich or durable as the ThOR 4. One of the best parts of the ATN sight is the opportunity to purchase refurbished units.
I’ve said it a thousand times. Now is the best time to start if you aren’t utilizing thermal for hunting or scouting. Get what you can afford but get it as fast as you can. Thermal is the great equalizer in the field. In fact, it tips the odds completely in your favor. ~ KJ
KJ
Kevin Jarnagin (KJ) hails from Oklahoma but quickly established Louisiana roots after joining the Gun Talk team. KJ grew up as a big game hunter and often finds himself in a different venture often. Whether it’s making his way to British Columbia for elk or training with pistols, KJ always seems to find a gun in his hands and adventure on his mind.
When the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision was issued, even I was pleasantly surprised at the breadth of Justice Thomas’ opinion and its probable implications. By focusing strictly on whether particular limits on Second Amendment rights were historically recognized (and invalidating those that are not), the table was set for potential wholesale invalidations of many gun control laws.
In the short time that Bruen has been the law of the land, it is already bearing tangible results. Courts have struck down bans on the carrying of guns by 18 to 21-year-olds and local laws on the possession of firearms. More recently, New York’s petulant legislative response to losing in Bruen is being eviscerated.
Now another shoe has dropped. In United States v. Price, a district court in West Virginia considered whether bans on firearm possession by felons and possession of firearms with obliterated serial numbers were constitutional. While finding that the law barring convicted felons from possessing guns was justified under Bruen, the court found that the laws against removing the serial number on a firearm, or possessing a firearm with an obliterated serial number were not.
Firearms with no serial number are just as “bearable” as the same firearm with a serial number, and there is no “common use” issue here as the presence or lack of a serial number makes no difference with respect to whether the type of weapon is commonly used. Finally, I can find no authority for the idea that a firearm without a serial number would meet the historical definition of a dangerous or unusual firearm.
The opinion applies Bruen in a straightforward manner. Noting that serial numbers on firearms were essentially unknown until the era of mass production, and laws requiring them and prohibiting their removal dated only to the 1968 Gun Control Act, the court ruled that 18 U.S.C. § 922(k) unconstitutionally infringes on Second Amendment rights.
While not before the court, the court seems to indicate that requiring a manufacturer to serialize the guns it puts into commerce was acceptable, as such did not infringe any right to keep or bear arms.
The court gave the following examples:
Assume, for example, that a law-abiding citizen purchases a firearm from a sporting goods store. At the time of the sale, that firearm complies with the commercial regulation that it bear a serial number. The law-abiding citizen takes the firearm home and removes the serial number. He has no ill intent and never takes any otherwise unlawful action with the firearm. Contrary to the Government’s argument that Section 922(k) does not amount to an “infringement” on the lawabiding citizen’s Second Amendment right, the practical application is that while the law-abiding citizen’s possession of the firearm was originally legal, it became illegal only because the serial number was removed. He could be prosecuted federally for his possession of it. That is the definition of an infringement on one’s right to possess a firearm.
Now, assume that the law-abiding citizen dies and leaves his gun collection to his law-abiding daughter. The daughter takes the firearms, the one with the removed serial number among them, to her home and displays them in her father’s memory. As it stands, Section 922(k) also makes her possession of the firearm illegal, despite the fact that it was legally purchased by her father and despite the fact that she was not the person who removed the serial number. These scenarios make clear that Section 922(k) is far more than the mere commercial regulation the Government claims it to be. Rather, it is a blatant prohibition on possession. The conduct prohibited by Section 922(k) falls squarely within the Second Amendment’s plain text.
Before you break out your Dremel tool and start de-identifying your gats, remember that this case isn’t over. While the decision may (and should) be upheld, until it is final and the feds formally acknowledge that Section 922(k) is kaput, you must recognize that it might not be – and once you’ve removed a serial number, you can’t put it back on.
Similarly, there are various state laws that prohibit removal of serial numbers or possession of unserialized guns. While these should eventually be struck down for the same reason, until they are, you would be playing with fire.
I read the court’s opinion as potentially blessing laws enhancing the criminal penalties for committing a crime with a firearm that has had its serial number removed . . . which would give a zealous prosecutor additional ammunition were you to use such a firearm in a Zimmerman or Rittenhouse type self-defense situation.
What are the implications of this ruling? If its logic and reasoning are followed by other courts – again, they should be, as it’s a straightforward application of Bruen – then “ghost gun” bans, serialization requirements for homemade firearms, microstamping requirements, “smart gun” laws, and other recent ideas from the Shannon Wattses of the worlds should be toast.
So too should be things like magazine capacity limits and just about everything the California politicians have come up with in the past couple of decades.
Look Ma, no serial numbers! (JWT for TTAG)
Could it similarly be used to invalidate NFA regulations on suppressors, SBR’s, and SBS’s? Perhaps, although the argument will be made that the NFA is just a tax. The NFA was structured that way because FDR’s DOJ was concerned that straightforward bans on those items would violate the Second Amendment. That issue should be addressed soon by Judge Pittman in the test case on the “Made in Texas” suppressor law.
Could the West Virginia ruling be used to attack the Hughes Amendment? Most definitely.
In the mean time, pass the popcorn. The Bruen show is still just getting started.
Disclaimer: While I am a lawyer, I’m not your lawyer. This essay is journalistic, and neither I, my firm, or TTAG is providing legal advice. Consult your own attorney if you have specific questions.
