As far as I know, it lets law enforcement query for things against the data. Can be specific (like a license plate) or more general (like a dark colored mid-sized SUV around <location> at <time>).
To get where this story is at, cops here must have done the latter, and taken the first name off the top of the pile and patted themselves on the back, and then waited 7 months, and went and arrested her. Unless there’s an explanation for a 7 month delay, it seems designed to allow defensive evidence to spoil.
There isn’t an uncanny-valley of automation here. There is just lazy, grossly-incompetent, bad-faith, and malicious cops/investigators.
Please tell the police that, then, under penalty of being blacklisted if they ever violate it. They're the ones treating it as such.
But they didn't question the quality of the evidence. And there is a reason for that.
Guns can be used for all sorts of things. A handgun in a house is likely to be used for murder/suicide.
The total number is relatively small, but so are deaths from measles. Should we not decrease them where we can?
On an article about people who did no research to actually prove out their assumptions, this is perhaps the most ironic comment to be chastising them.
The statistic you are reaching for but misunderstanding, is that they are more likely to be used in a suicide or murder than in home defense against an intruder.
A personally-owned handgun is statistically most likely to simply never be used, or only used at a range. The number of personally-owned firearms that are ever involved in a murder or suicide is literally a fraction of a percentage.
But go off!
More guns in houses, more murder/suicides.
I think guns are as cool as the next guy but I'm willing to maybe consider my personal enjoyment from playing with a gun isn't worth the cost to society.