Senate nixes interstate resiprocity of concealed weapons - Page 4

m21sniper · 07-23-2009, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey

Yes we do, in TX you give both thumbs, no prints, no license.

I nearly walked out of their DMV but I'm already in the system so figured WTH do i have to lose at this point.

Not in Pa. For that reason alone i would not live in Texas.

MotoSook · 07-23-2009, 09:53 AM

Why is giving finger print so objectionable?

legion · 07-23-2009, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soukus

Why is giving finger print so objectionable?

At least for me, no one has mine right now.

Rick Lee · Rick Lee's Garage

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soukus

Why is giving finger print so objectionable?

Because there is no legitimate reason for the gov't. to keep track of law abiding citizens only when they want to exercise their rights.

MotoSook · 07-23-2009, 10:08 AM

Some of you know where I stand on CCW and gun owner's rights....but if the govern't wanted to find you, they would regardless of whether you gave finger prints at the DMV or at boot camp. And if you are afraid they will match your print at a scene to the FBI data base...why wouldn't you then be more careful about a tiddy scene?

Seems that a name, address, phone number, credit card info, SSN will all be useful toward tracking you down by the right agency. Finger prints are associated with a name and your history....so unless you intend to commit a crime after which a finger print can lead to your conviction, why worry about it?

Don't go getting all worked up guys....I'm just playing devils advocate to understand why anyone things the lack of prints won't lead to an agency finding you.

Rick Lee · Rick Lee's Garage

If I have nothing to fear by giving them my fingerprints for no good reason, then I should have no reason to decline consent to search my car or house either, eh? I have a problem with being in gov't. databases. There is simply no good reason for it. Paying them for the "privilege" just adds insult to injury.

MotoSook · 07-23-2009, 10:40 AM

I would not consent to an unreasonable search (sans warrant) of my property, but a finger print is different IMO. Finger prints is on the same level as your name on public file or your SSN or your credit info. Prints are just identifiers which like names and SSN can't really harm your privacy. All of us are already in at least one govenment database finger print or not.

I gave an FBI interview once for a co-worker who was interviewing for the FBI. I was very surprise to find out that they had me on record word by word during the follow up interview prior to the co-worker being hired. Most likely they had some other information on me also to determine my trustworthiness.

There's just no way to live in the mainstream without being in someone's database...and if you have a CCW permit, you probably already gave prints...

stomachmonkey · 07-23-2009, 10:42 AM

How to fake a fingerprint.

stomachmonkey · 07-23-2009, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soukus

Prints are just identifiers which like names and SSN can't really harm your privacy.

Brandon Mayfield and Madrid bombing

Error in identification: Brandon Mayfield is an Oregon lawyer who was identified as a participant in the Madrid bombing based on a so-called fingerprint match by the FBI.[42] The FBI Latent Print Unit ran the print collected in Madrid and reported a match against one of 20 fingerprint candidates returned in a search response from their IAFIS — Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System. The FBI initially called the match "100 percent positive" and an "absolutely incontrovertible match". The Spanish National Police examiners concluded the prints did not match Mayfield, and after two weeks identified another man who matched. The FBI acknowledged the error, and a judge released Mayfield after two weeks in May 2004.[42] In January of 2006, a U.S. Justice Department report was released which faulted the FBI for sloppy work but exonerated them of more serious allegations. The report found that misidentification was due to misapplication of methodology by the examiners involved: Mayfield is an American-born convert[42] to Islam and his wife is an Egyptian immigrant,[42] not factors that affect fingerprint search technology.

On 29 November 2006, the FBI agreed to pay Brandon Mayfield the sum of US$2 million.[42] The judicial settlement allows Mayfield to continue a suit regarding certain other government practices surrounding his arrest and detention. The formal apology stated that the FBI, which erroneously linked him to the 2004 Madrid bombing through a fingerprinting mistake, had taken steps to "ensure that what happened to Mr. Mayfield and the Mayfield family does not happen again."[42]

[edit] René Ramón Sánchez

René Ramón Sánchez, a legal Dominican Republic immigrant was booked on a DUI charge on July 15, 1995. He had his fingerprints affixed on a card containing the name, Social Security number and other data for Leo Rosario, who was being processed at the same time. Leo Rosario was arrested for selling cocaine to an undercover police officer. In August of 1998, Sanchez was stopped again by police officers, for DUI in Manhattan. René was then identified as Leo Rosario on October 11, 2000, while returning from a visit to relatives in the Dominican Republic. He was arrested at Kennedy International Airport. Even though he did not match the physical description of Rosario, the fingerprints were considered more reliable.[43]

[edit] Shirley McKie

Error in identification. Shirley McKie was a police detective in 1997 when she was accused of leaving her thumb print inside a house in Kilmarnock, Scotland where Marion Ross had been murdered. Although detective constable McKie denied having been inside the house, she was arrested in a dawn raid the following year and charged with perjury. The only evidence was the thumb print allegedly found at the murder scene. Two American experts testified on her behalf at her trial in May 1999 and she was found not guilty. The Scottish Criminal Record Office (SCRO) would not admit any error, but Scottish first minister Jack McConnell later said there had been an "honest mistake".

On February 7, 2006, McKie was awarded £750,000 in compensation from the Scottish Executive and the SCRO.[9] Controversy continues to surround the McKie case and there is an ongoing public inquiry into the affair.[44]

[edit] Stephan Cowans

Stephan Cowans (d. 2007-10-25)[45] was convicted of attempted murder in 1997 after he was accused of the shooting of a police officer while fleeing a robbery in Roxbury, Massachusetts. He was implicated in the crime by the testimony of two witnesses, one of whom was the victim. The other evidence was a fingerprint on a glass mug that the assailant drank water from, and experts testified that the fingerprint belonged to him. He was found guilty and sent to prison with a sentence of 35 years. While in prison he earned money cleaning up biohazards until he could afford to have the evidence tested for DNA. The DNA did not match his, but he had already served six years in prison before he was released.

Mistakes do happen and considering the high rate of false convictions here in TX my paranoia is moderately justified.

MMARSH · MMARSH's Garage

Quote:

Originally Posted by m21sniper

I was a soldier.

There's no way in hell i could stand by and watch as a gunman killed my countrymen in front of me. I could never live with myself afterward. It would haunt me forever.

I would rather die.

I'm with you on that. This whole mentality of "i don't want to get involved" is complete BS.

Rick Lee · Rick Lee's Garage

Quote:

Originally Posted by MMARSH

I'm with you on that. This whole mentality of "i don't want to get involved" is complete BS.

Since you have a get-out-of-jail-free card (your badge), it's no liability for you to get involved. Not so for us civilians.

m21sniper · 07-23-2009, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soukus

Why is giving finger print so objectionable?

For the same reason gov't tatooing or RFID chip implantation is so objectionable.

MotoSook · 11:27 AM

Mistakes and bad detective work can happen without the prints being in some database. And if it did happen....as with the first case...I'll gladly squeeze every possible cent out of the agency that screwed things up in addition to a public apology and my record being wiped clean...and if the incident caused any detectable harm to my reputation and career....I'll be going after them for all future earnings.

If one is really concerned about prints...one should be extra careful not to leave any source of DNA anywhere, that includes cups and glasses at restaurants, any hair that may fall off your body in any public place, tissue used to blow your nose (should be burned after use), etc...

Like I posted earlier, it would be difficult to live a mainstream life being so paranoid.

m21sniper · 07-23-2009, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

Since you have a get-out-of-jail-free card (your badge), it's no liability for you to get involved. Not so for us civilians.

I have no badge, but i would very much view it as a continuation of the oath i swore to protect my country, and my countrymen.

Consequences be damned, i would never stand by and watch innocents be slaughtered if i felt there was any chance at all for me to stop it.

That's just not who i am.

MotoSook · 07-23-2009, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m21sniper

For the same reason gov't tatooing or RFID chip implantation is so objectionable.

Gov't tattooing? In the USA?

The RFID thing is over blow IMO. Who are you afraid of? No greater harm can be done to you via the RFID than with your name, address and SSN.

m21sniper · 07-23-2009, 11:46 AM

You think fingerprinting is blown over too.

Obviously i disagree at the most basic levels.

To you it is a non-issue. To me it is fundamentally important.

...Impasse...