Yeah, no.

The round used by the primary firearm in this incident was, according to all the reports I've seen, the .223, aka the 7th round in your chart labeled "5.56 x 45 Nato." There's an important digit of distinction between a .22 and a .223. The projectile is only slightly wider, sure, but it has a lot more mass (approx double) and is moving at a much higher velocity (around 900-940 m/s vs 300-500 m/s).

For pedantics, .223 and 5.56 are not the exact same thing, but they're externally the same, i.e. the same size cartridge (casing and bullet). The interior volume of the 5.56 round is smaller, and can create slightly larger chamber pressures when fired in a gun designed solely for .223.

Not that it matters, but I'm a certified firearms instructor (certified to teach pistol, rifle, home firearm safety and personal protection) and strong advocate that the concepts being banded about for "gun control" are absolutely ludicrous at best, but that's not relevant to this specific bit of misinformation.

The reference to ISO compliance here isn't to the ISO9001 quality standard, but the ISO 27001 and ISO 27002 best practices standards for information security.

see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_27001

Congratulations! You just re-invented two factor authentication! Of course, what you're proposing is nothing as elegant or simple as market leader RSA's SecurID solution

And a good number of banks offer the use of two-factor authentication to protect your money, including the mid-sized midwestern financial institution where I currently work.