Ethics Newsline®

Source: Reporters Without Borders’ first worldwide index of press freedom.

Over dinner last week in Tennessee, one of my hosts recalled a question he put to his high-school-age Sunday-school class several years ago.

“I asked how many of them could get hold of a gun within an hour,” he said, “and every one said they could.”

“‘Give me 24 hours,’” he recalled one boy adding, “‘and I can get you a submachine gun.’”

That was a week before the shootings at Columbine High in Colorado.

The apparent capture last week of the Washington-area sniper, with his rifle, has again brought gun-control advocates out in force. Their opponents had their day earlier in the week, when front-page photos showed Charlton Heston, president of the National Rifle Association, brandishing a flintlock above his head during a campaign rally in New Hampshire. The resulting national conversations, predictably, present a stark dichotomy between those who would die to keep their guns and those who fear we’ll die if we don’t get rid of them. Can we cut through the polarizing? I think so, by focusing on ethics and character.

Start by accepting the core arguments of each camp. Those who argue for free access to guns observe that guns, like all manifestations of technology, are morally neutral — that it is the users, not the guns, that kill people. They also point to the right of local populations to bear arms unconstrained by the national government, under the Second Amendment of the Constitution. There’s enough validity to these arguments that they can’t readily be dismissed.

Those who argue for gun control, however, note that lots of people are now dead who, had it not been for the presence of a gun at the scene, would be alive today. They point to the many accidental deaths among children playing with guns, and to the escalation of domestic quarrels into murders because a firearm was available. These, too, are powerful ethical arguments.

On three points, too, I suspect both sides would agree:

1. With rights come responsibilities. Whatever Second Amendment rights are given to individuals (as opposed to state-based militias, to which the Constitution seems more specifically to apply), they demand obligations for the safe and respectful use of such dangerous equipment.

2. While the requirement for taking responsibility can be legislated, the practice of responsible behavior is an individual choice that, by the time it breaks down at any given moment, is entirely beyond the control of mere law.

3. So the teaching and learning of practical responsibility — an activity related to academic intelligence but by no means synonymous with it — must go hand-in-hand with the Second Amendment.

That’s why a third event last week — the release of survey data on moral deterioration in U.S. high schools — is particularly sobering. Collected by the Josephson Institute from samples (apparently less than random) of 12,000 high-school students, the figures show that over the past ten years those who admitted to cheating rose from 61 percent to 74 percent. In the same period, those who admitted to shoplifting rose from 33 percent to 38 percent, while those lying to teachers rose from 69 percent to 83 percent. And in the last two years alone, those willing to “lie to get a good job” rose from 28 percent to 37 percent.

Now put all these ideas together. If a responsible population is essential for the safe use of guns, and if this is how poorly we are at educating the next generation to think about responsibility, it’s tempting to say that you can’t get there from here. Something has got to change. Should the National Rifle Association take up character education as its principle public promotion? Whatever the answer, the events of last week remind us that the era of Second Amendment responsibilities — rather than simply rights — is upon us. It’s increasingly clear that a well-armed and irresponsible population makes the law of the jungle look tame by comparison.

(c)2002 by the Institute for Global Ethics

“The pattern is chilling, as if the sniper is watching experts on television predict his next move — and then acting on it. Robert Ressler, a former FBI profiler, suggests on CNN’s ‘Larry King Live’ that the sniper might travel as far south as Richmond, Virginia, perhaps ‘down to Ashland.’ The next day, a 37-year-old man is shot in the stomach leaving the Ponderosa steakhouse in Ashland, Virginia. Gregg McCrary, a former FBI psychological profiler, tells CBS News on a Friday that the sniper has ‘a God complex, killing these people at random and from a long distance.’ The next Monday, a 13-year-old boy is shot after being dropped off at school. The sniper reportedly leaves behind a tarot card, the death card, inscribed with the message: ‘Dear Mr. Policeman, I am God.’…”

–Los Angeles Times, “In a Sniper’s Grip: Media’s Role in Drama Debated,” Oct. 24.

NEW YORK
Media conglomerate AOL Time Warner last week admitted that the firm had used improper accounting techniques to inflate earnings by $190 million over a two-year period that ended last summer.

On the heels of a Washington Post report last July questioning AOL’s earnings, the company announced an in-depth investigation that zeroed in on ad revenues reported for its online AOL division.

Last week, with 70 percent of such transactions examined, CEO Richard Parsons said the wrongdoing — once believed to be minor and narrow in scope — actually spread across a wider swath of revenue reports.

From before AOL’s merger with Time Warner in mid-2000 until the conglomerate’s most recent quarterly report in June 2002, AOL overbooked its revenue by $190 million, reported USA Today.

Last week, Parsons said the firm would restate its earnings by that amount, adding that further restatements seem unlikely.

“We have taken, and do take, this matter very seriously,” Parsons said, promising that the investigation would continue.

Upon news of the $190 million restatement, AOL Time Warner’s stock price actually rose five percent, as investors let go of fears that the damage had been far worse, noted the New York Times.

Analysts were cooler to the company’s confident statements, noting that AOL Time Warner still has a distance to go before getting out of the accounting hot seat, especially with pending investigations by the U.S. Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

“They are trying to regain credibility,” Hal Vogel, head of Vogel Capital Management, told the Reuters news agency. “But they have to build a track record of trust and that lies in the future still.”

Special to Newsline from Canadian correspondent Errol P. Mendes

TORONTO
Garth Drabinsky, the Canadian founder of Livent, formerly the largest live entertainment company in North America, and his colleague, Myron Gottlieb, have been hit with fraud charges that could carry a penalty of up to 10 years in jail.

In announcing the charges, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) alleged that the two defrauded investors out of $500,000 by falsifying the corporate financial statements of Livent and misrepresenting the financial health of the company.

The defendants have been hit with 19 counts of fraud while two other former executives of the company were also charged with a smaller number of fraud counts.

Garth Drabinsky, who brought some of the best-known musicals, such as “The Phantom of the Opera,” to theatres in New York, Chicago, and major Canadian cities, issued a statement through his lawyer that he welcomed the chance to clear his reputation in the coming trial.

He is also facing fraud charges in the United States.

BALTIMORE, Maryland
Former currency trader John Rusnak last week agreed to plead guilty to bank fraud after hiding $691 million in trading losses at Allfirst bank in Baltimore.

Over a five-year period beginning in 1997, Rusnak allegedly hid the fact that he was taking a severe hit on currency trades gone bad, using phony faxes and fake names to create a paper trail of bogus firms.

When Allfirst discovered the fraud last winter, it found nearly $700 million in losses racked up by Rusnak, who succeeded at the scam for so long because of lax oversight, according to indictments and an internal investigation.

Rusnak, indicted in June on seven counts of white-collar crime, was accused not of profiting from the scam itself, but rather of hiding his losses to continue receiving his salary and generous bonuses based on trading profits.

Under last week’s plea agreement, Rusnak will serve seven and a half years in prison for one count of bank fraud. He will also help investigators looking into the fraud, and be held responsible for his trading losses.

Allfirst’s chairman and CEO/president were both replaced following the discovery, and Allfirst owner Allied Irish Bank (AIB) bolstered management procedures, reported the Washington Post.

AIB, which fired six employees over the scandal, recently agreed to sell Allfirst to M&T Bank Corp. for $3.1 billion in cash and stock.

Prior to last week’s deal, Rusnak faced a maximum penalty of 30 years in prison and a $1 million fine, noted the Post.

OTTAWA
The Canadian government of Jean Chrétien last week unveiled a package of ethics reforms following a series of scandals that have shaken the ruling party’s credibility and image.

One day before announcing the proposed reforms, Solicitor-General Lawrence MacAulay resigned his post after being targeted for awarding a grant to a college headed by his brother.

MacAulay’s departure was the latest in a string of resignations and demotions over conflict-of-interest charges tarnishing the image of the cabinet of Prime Minister Chrétien, who took office in 1993.

Last spring, Chrétien promised to shore up ethics oversight. But last week’s raft of proposed reforms did little to quiet critics, who dismissed the measures as too weak, reported the Associated Press.

The proposed reforms would create an independent ethics watchdog who reports to Parliament instead of to the prime minister, as is currently the case.

Other reforms include a new code of conduct for members of Parliament, and lobbying restrictions designed to curb the influence of industry and special-interest groups.

Before becoming law, the measures must go through a process of committee review and debate, noted the AP.

WASHINGTON
A federal judge last week ordered the Bush administration to hand over energy-policy documents the White House says should be kept secret.

The battle between President Bush, watchdog groups, and the courts centers on documents detailing how Vice President Dick Cheney devised a plan for managing the nation’s energy resources.

That plan, released in May 2001, calls for more gas and oil drilling and a renewed nuclear energy program. Critics say Cheney and other energy-industry veterans in the Bush administration crafted their strategy with heavy corporate involvement and deliberately little input from environmental groups.

In a bid to shed light on the matter, government ethics watchdog Judicial Group sued for access to the meetings’ details under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act. The Sierra Club later joined the suit.

While the White House has released thousands of pages of related documents, it has refused to provide the public or Congress with details of who met with Cheney and other White House officials, saying it should be shielded by executive privilege.

In August, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan rejected the Bush administration’s claims that such details were confidential and protected from the view of public groups, reported the Washington Post. Judge Sullivan then ordered the White House to surrender the requested information.

Last week, he lashed out at the Bush administration for failing to follow that ruling, ordering Cheney’s office to release the requested documents or file a detailed log explaining why each document should be individually sealed by November 5.

Justice Department attorney Shannen Coffin said the White House could not meet the judge’s deadline, and said it would appeal the ruling to an appellate court.

In a fiery exchange, Judge Sullivan responded by upbraiding Coffin and the Bush administration for stalling and trying to deny public access to the energy documents without formally asserting executive privilege.

BRUSSELS
European airlines were put on notice last week by the European Parliament (EP), which swiftly approved a proposed law threatening steep fines for flight operators who strand passengers or cancel flights.

Last week’s parliamentary vote sends the measure to individual EU nations for approval. If national governments give the green light or add amendments, the bill will return to EP lawmakers for a final vote.

The proposed law would double the current compensation levels for airline passengers who are bumped from flights because of overbooking or left stranded by fiscally motivated flight cancellations.

Last week, U.K. Labor EP member Mark Watts blasted such cancellations, which strand more than 250,000 passengers each year, reported the BBC.

“Airlines are plain wrong over this,” Watts insisted last week. “Where they overbook, cancel flights, or let people down, it’s sound business sense to pay compensation.”

“It’s not value for money when you miss a family wedding because your plane didn’t leave the ground,” Watts added. “We’re just putting right something that’s been wrong for years.”

The new law would award bumped and stranded passengers a minimum of roughly $195 for flights of less than 1,900 miles, and a minimum of roughly $590 for longer flights. All delayed passengers would have the right to hot meals and free hotel accommodations.

Low-cost airlines say the new measure could put them out of business, according to a report from the Guardian.

BAGHDAD
The Iraqi government last week said it will expel all foreign journalists from the country this week, following anger over CNN’s coverage of an anti-government rally outside the country’s Information Ministry.

The government’s reaction was swift and severe, reported CNN, which will be forced to fold up its 12-year-old Baghdad office and withdraw the only Western correspondent permanently based there.

Iraq has accused CNN and other Western journalists of spreading propaganda for the U.S. government.

Iraq said that when foreign journalists are allowed to return, they will be subject to restrictions of only one non-Iraqi journalist per organization, and maximum stays of 10 days at a time.

Iraq’s expulsion would leave world coverage of the nation’s events in the hands of the government, which already controls domestic news reporting, except for the few transmissions originating from the Kurd-controlled north, according to CNN.

Aidan White, general secretary of the Brussels-based International Federation of Journalists, last week called on Iraq to rescind its threatened expulsion, according to a report from the Associated Press.

“In a time of crisis, Iraq should have the courage to face the world,” White said last week. “This news is bad for world opinion and bad for Iraq.”

ATLANTA
As tensions ratchet up with Iraq, a growing number of U.S. television networks and newspaper firms are sending correspondents and their crews to survival boot camp in an effort to help them stay out of harm’s way.

Interest in such training was heightened by the murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who was kidnapped and killed while trailing a story earlier this year in Pakistan, according to a report last week from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

While more than 400 journalists have died on the job over the past 10 years, Pearl’s death forced Western newsrooms to confront the fact that reporters are facing increased dangers in a world rife with terrorism.

Now, news firms from CBS to CNN to the Journal-Constitution itself are putting correspondents and news crews through intense training in first aid, hostage negotiations, and battle scenarios.

“We decided that from now on, we wouldn’t send anyone who hadn’t taken the training into hostile places,” Eason Jordan, CNN’s chief news executive, told the Journal-Constitution. “With no exceptions.”

The paper’s report profiles the rigors faced by more than 400 CNN employees who have taken a five-day course just south of Atlanta — in a terrain designed to mimic Kosovo and other danger-fraught frontlines.

While the programs focus mostly on first aid, they aim to get news crews in shape for non-medical scenarios they could face outside the classroom — scenarios in which every option can seem a tough way out.

“There’s no ‘right’ answer sometimes,” instructor Tim Crockett confided to the Journal-Constitution. “We give them guidelines and hands-on experience so they can learn how to make informed decisions.”

NEW YORK
The Associated Press last week released a list of 40 stories the news service suspects may include fabricated people, quotes, and organizations dreamed up by fired reporter Christopher Newton.

Questions about Newton’s integrity surfaced last month after his AP editors were unable to locate two people and one organization cited in a Sep. 8 article by Newton.

After a review of hundreds of his stories, the AP said it could not find any evidence that 45 people and a dozen organizations cited by Newton were anything more than figments created to bolster his stories.

“We were blindsided,” AP spokeswoman Kelley Smith Tunney told the New York Times.

In comments to the Times, Newton stood by his stories, accusing the AP of skewing the truth. “The company chose to publicly reveal only information that supported its accusations,” he charged.

Newton, who began working for the AP in 1994, denied fabricating content, though he could not promise that all of his spellings were correct or that cited groups still existed.

“I was not given an opportunity to account for the names of those people the AP did not find,” Newton said in a statement. “Setting the record straight is an important matter. I am no longer pursuing the situation with the AP, but rather with an attorney. We have already located some of those people the AP says do not exist.”

Newton declined to provide the Times with any corroborating names or numbers, saying he would instead clear his name in court.

SAN FRANCISCO
Polo Ralph Lauren Corp. has been hit with a class-action lawsuit accusing the high-end retailer of illegally forcing its sales staff to spend thousands of dollars each year to dress in the company’s latest fashions.

Toni Young, a Polo employee in San Francisco, launched the class-action suit, saying the firm was forcing her to spend as much as $7,000 of her $22,000 annual salary on its latest fashion lines.

“They would ask Ms. Young to take off her sweaters — she had a shirt on underneath — or take off her shoes, so they could check the labels,” plaintiffs’ attorney Patrick Kitchin told the Los Angeles Times.

“In late August, all employees in the San Francisco store were told they needed five new outfits from the fall collection. They had to come in wearing the outfits so they could be photographed and those photographs could be kept in a file sent on to headquarters in New York,” Kitchin added.

Polo Ralph Lauren has declined to comment on the suit.

California state authorities are also examining whether the practice of “wardrobing” amounts to requiring workers to wear a uniform. In California, employers must pay for uniforms if workers are ordered to wear them.

“We have concerns about what appears to be a significantly more widespread practice in the industry than we originally thought,” California Labor Commission attorney Miles Locker told the San Francisco Chronicle.

The Times and Chronicle both note that some of the practices in California may not violate only state laws, but corporate headquarters policies as well — with aggressive dress codes designed by local managers without the companies’ official okay.

Scott Krugman, spokesman for the National Retail Federation in Washington, DC, says that while the law should be followed, mandating how employees dress is a legitimate prerogative for fashion peddlers.

“The Gap can’t have their employees wearing J. Crew clothing,” Krugman told the Chronicle. “It dilutes and damages the brand. Potential employers make this known to employees in advance. If they have a problem with that dress code, they can choose another employer.”

From Reporters Without Borders:

“The first worldwide index of press freedom has some surprises for Western democracies. The United States ranks below Costa Rica and Italy scores lower than Benin. The five countries with least press freedom are North Korea, China, Burma, Turkmenistan, and Bhutan.

“Reporters Without Borders is publishing for the first time a worldwide index of countries according to their respect for press freedom. It also shows that such freedom is under threat everywhere, with the 20 bottom-ranked countries drawn from Asia, Africa, Latin America, and Europe….

“The top end of the list shows that rich countries have no monopoly of press freedom. Costa Rica and Benin are examples of how growth of a free press does not just depend on a country’s material prosperity.

“The index was drawn up by asking journalists, researchers, and legal experts to answer 50 questions about the whole range of press freedom violations (such as murders or arrests of journalists, censorship, pressure, state monopolies in various fields, punishment of press law offences, and regulation of the media). The final list includes 139 countries. The others were not included in the absence of reliable information….

“Right at the top of the list, four countries share first place — Finland, Iceland, Norway, and the Netherlands. These northern European states scrupulously respect press freedom in their own countries but also speak up for it elsewhere, for example recently in Eritrea and Zimbabwe. The highest-scoring country outside Europe is Canada, which comes fifth.

“Some countries with democratically-elected governments are way down in the index — such as Colombia (114th) and Bangladesh (118th). In these countries, armed rebel movements, militias, or political parties constantly endanger the lives of journalists. The state fails to do all it could to protect them and fight the immunity very often enjoyed by those responsible for such violence.

“The poor ranking of the United States (17th) is mainly because of the number of journalists arrested or imprisoned there. Arrests are often because they refuse to reveal their sources in court. Also, since the September 11 attacks, several journalists have been arrested for crossing security lines at some official buildings….

“The 15 member countries of the European Union (EU) all score well except for Italy (40th), where news diversity is under serious threat. Prime minister Silvio Berlusconi is turning up the pressure on the state-owned television stations, has named his henchmen to help run them, and continues to combine his job as head of government with being boss of a privately-owned media group. The imprisonment of journalist Stefano Surace, convicted of press offences from 30 years ago, as well as the monitoring of journalists, searches, unjustified legal summonses, and confiscation of equipment, are all responsible for the country’s low ranking.

“France, in 11th place overall, comes only 8th among EU countries because of several disturbing measures endangering the protection of journalists’ sources and because of police interrogation of a number of journalists in recent months….

“No Arab country is among the top 50. Lebanon only makes 56th place and the press freedom situation in the region is not encouraging. In Iraq (130th) and Syria (126th), the state uses every means to control the media and stifle any dissenting voice. Iraqi President Saddam Hussein especially has set his country’s media the sole task of relaying his regime’s propaganda….

“The political weakening of the Palestinian Authority (82nd) means it has made few assaults on press freedom. However, Islamic fundamentalist opposition media have been closed, several attempts made to intimidate and attack local and foreign journalists and many subjects remain taboo. The aim is to convey a united image of the Palestinian people and to conceal aspects such a demonstrations of support for attacks on Israel.

“The attitude of Israel (92nd) towards press freedom is ambivalent. Despite strong pressure on state-owned TV and radio, the government respects the local media’s freedom of expression. However, in the West Bank and Gaza, Reporters Without Borders has recorded a large number of violations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which guarantees press freedom and which Israel has signed. Since the start of the Israeli army’s incursions into Palestinian towns and cities in March 2002, very many journalists have been roughed up, threatened, arrested, banned from moving around, targeted by gunfire, wounded or injured, had their press cards withdrawn, or been deported….”

“As long as war is looked upon as wicked, it will always have its fascination. When it is looked upon as vulgar, it will cease to be popular.”

–Oscar Wilde (Irish writer, 1854-1900)

There’s a quick explanation for the dozen recent sniper-style shootings in the Washington, DC, area: international terrorism, linked to al Qaeda. It’s probably wrong. Terrorism, after all, is a message system, in which killing only serves a purpose if it makes a point. But al Qaeda’s usual points — death to America, down with Israel, purification of Islam — are nowhere in sight. Nor is there an apparent pattern linking victims, choice of crime scenes, time of day, or other symbols. If it’s terrorism, the terrorists aren’t getting their message across.

How, then, to explain the sniper’s motivation? It requires the confluence of four very different trends: the sophistication of weaponry, the prevalence of extreme sports, an acceptability of suicide, and a rising moral vacuity. Each trend is new. Each is long-term. And each needs the others to make this killer succeed.

No question about the weaponry. The long-range accuracy of the sniper’s rifle didn’t exist a century ago. What’s more, this killer is a skilled marksman, suggesting sophisticated training over a long period. In the weapons culture of present-day America, both his tool and his skills are readily available, easy to acquire, and easy to hide.

Then there’s extreme sports. In a culture with few ways for the young to prove themselves courageous (or the old to prove themselves young), extreme sports provides real allure. Why else risk life and limb in harrowing, dangerous activities, except for the thrill of the experience and the satisfaction of knowing you had the courage to endure? Nor must the “sport” be athletic. President Clinton’s Oval Office dalliances with Monica Lewinsky were not the work of someone taking care to prevent discovery, but rather of an extreme-sports mentality for whom the risk was integral to the experience. The sniper, too, exhibits an in-your-face, catch-me-if-you-can bravura.

Add in suicide, and you can explain the sniper’s willingness to consider his own death as the price of admission to this terrible game. The events of 9/11 and the prevalence of suicide bombings in Israel have raised the profile of suicide as a tactic in warfare. They’ve also desensitized us to its horrors. In this mental atmosphere, it’s now easier than ever for a serial killer to accept the risk of his own death. If he wanted less risk, there are lonelier targets than the public (and potentially suicidal) ones he’s chosen.

But the above trends only come into play if there’s a moral chip missing from the sniper’s mental motherboard. Marksmanship and extreme sports are fine if undertaken by ethical individuals who are compassionate, responsible, and respectful of others. And a fascination with suicide has less appeal in a moral culture in which fairness lets every voice be heard and candor speaks up for the marginalized.

So which of these four trends can we control? The weapons genie won’t go back in its bottle, though we can regulate availability and training. Extreme sports — at least those done for little more than derring-do — will be with us until the thirst to prove physical courage is replaced with a comparable hunger for feats of moral courage. Suicide is a tougher issue, requiring a shift of consciousness from “everything to die for” to “everything to live for.”

But moral vacuity can be overcome — slowly and not without difficulty, but steadily and consciously. Corporate ethics training programs, political codes that elevate the tone of campaigns, character education programs in the schools — all of these work. So do strong families, well-run community and religious organizations, and thoughtful public media. In the end, the sniper had to come from somewhere; something had to shape his values. Will those values become models for others, or object lessons in how not to act? How fast can we build a culture that turns them into the latter?

(c)2002 by the Institute for Global Ethics

“This is like Enron all over again. They’re cooking the books, and it’s all to the detriment of the public.”

– Kent Wilkinson, a senior appraiser for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Utah, speaking to the Washington Post. According to agency documents obtained by the Post, “the Bush administration recently agreed to a massive land swap with Utah even though the federal government’s own experts had warned that the deal amounted to a $100 million giveaway by U.S. taxpayers.” That report was apparently corroborated last week by an independent review of the BLM, which found a widespread pattern of abuse and fraud in land deals, causing investigators to call for a moratorium on all land-swap deals, as well as possible civil and criminal prosecution. (“U.S. Ignored Appraisers in Land Deal with Utah,” Washington Post, Aug. 19.)

HOUSTON
Accounting firm Arthur Andersen was hit last week with five years’ probation and a $500,000 fine — the maximum penalty allowed by the law — for its role in hindering investigators looking into the collapse of Enron.

Last week’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Melinda Harmon comes exactly one year after Enron released its third-quarter figures, reporting a $1.2 billion restatement of past earnings, reported the Houston Chronicle.

In June, a jury convicted Andersen of obstruction of justice after hearing evidence of document shredding and email excisions. In August, the firm lost the right to audit publicly traded companies.

With less than 1,000 of the 28,000 employees it had one year ago, Andersen is now a shadow of its former $4 billion self, struggling more to recover its name than its profits, observed the Chronicle.

In last week’s ruling, Judge Harmon sided with prosecutor Sam Buell to give Andersen the harshest penalty possible under existing law.

“Andersen’s conduct in obstructing the Securities and Exchange Commission investigation of Enron,” Buell asserted, significantly “contributed to … the historic shaking of the foundations of our markets.”

Andersen said it will appeal the ruling.

WASHINGTON
The White House last week ordered a government review into the possibility of a national database of gun “fingerprints” to be used by police tracing the path of weapons used in crimes like the current killings by a sniper in the Washington area.

The government’s decision follows growing debate over gun control in the United States following 12 sniper attacks near Washington. Over the past three weeks, nine people have been killed and three critically wounded.

A growing number of lawmakers and gun-control groups has renewed calls for a database of all guns sold in the United States. The database would hold the “fingerprints” — images of the distinct marks made on bullets by a gun’s barrel — of all handguns, rifles, and other firearms sold.

Currently, only two states — Maryland and New York — employ such databases, and they only hold information for handguns, not rifles like the one being used by the sniper, reported the Associated Press.

Throughout the early part of the week, the Bush administration, which has enjoyed strong support from the National Rifle Association, dismissed the need for a national database of gun fingerprints, saying they were concerned about gun rights and unconvinced of the system’s effectiveness.

“New laws don’t stop people like this,” White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said of the sniper.

After mounting criticism, Fleischer later said Bush would set aside his doubts to ask for a review of the proposed database by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF), according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

A current ATF database of gun fingerprints taken from seized weapons holds 867,000 images and has produced 12,000 matches, according to a study released in May, the paper noted.

While supporters of the database admit it may not provide conclusive evidence in every crime, they say it will give investigators a leg up in the race to catch criminals using registered weapons.

“If you ask any of the hundreds of investigators working to find the sniper, they would very much like to know where the gun first was sold and who first bought it,” Matt Bennett, director of public affairs at Americans for Gun Safety, contended to the Reuters news agency. “If we had a national ballistics fingerprinting system in place, they probably would have that information.”