Ok, I'm quoting this from http://www.dmv.ca.gov/dl/dl_info.htm


Please note the bolded item!! The thumb print is nothing new! The device does not put you into "the system." It's used as an alternative source of identification. This is not "big government" gathering more information, it is the government using the information it already has as an alternative source of identification.

If you don't want your thumbprint in "the system" then petition for yours to be removed from said "system" and relinquish your drivers license.

 

What happens if your just driving alone like me yesterday. Perfectly legal. I get stopped anyways. They want to fingerprint me on the side of the road.

No thanks..

You do understand once you are in the system you can never get out.

So once they get you into the system, Then next they add dna.
What happens if one day 10 years from now firearms are made illegal. Then 20 years from now Hitler rounds up everyone with bad DNA to Clean the world of crime.

Sounds like a high tech wwII.

You can call me a freak.. But hitler has been and gone. And no one can call the future. The less the government knows about me the better. Yes I am in the system already, working for a S.O. you get added into during the hire. But... How many bad cops surface up every now and then?


Take my finger print, Get my DNA, Then have my SS # Then ruin my life. All by some person that wants to do harm or by some under paid records person that just had a bad day or missed a letter on the keyboard.



No Thanks...

About your DMV thing... Its still my right to refuse to drive. So when you get stopped its not your right to refuse a scan. So bad example.


NO THANKS!!!!!!

 

its like people complaining about having to show their ID when a cashier asks while paying with a card...they dont ask for your ID to **** you off, they do it to protect people. I'll do anything if it means less criminals. film over my shoulder all you want i have nothing to hide.

 

I don't see what the problem is. It's just another way of verifying ID. Please, answer the posts asking how there will be a large abuse of power if they use this as an alternative to ID yourself. Banks allow a fingerprint instead of a signature, so wouldn't it be similar if the police accept a CA driver's license or a fingerprint for identification? Are you afraid of banks abusing their power if they had your fingerprint?

It's not as if they're getting rid of the entire system of a CA driver's license and resorting to only fingerprints. Heck, to get fingerprinted, or now livescanned, you need to go to a police station to get it done, do you think there's abuse in that system now?

 

Tooo much info to have under one system. Would not be too log before its hacked. Then what do you do? What happens if your wife had a mis-keyed charge and you went down the road and got pulled over. They take her away.

Its one more thing to go wrong. Finger prints are not going to exempt you from having a DL on you. You can be writen a ticket. They also have many many many ways of cross checking info.. hell most can even run that from their MDT's in their patrol cars.

If I cant trust the state to run the state. How can I trust the state with my info so personal.

we also already have a id check system its a SSN,,

And livescan can and is done in many places other then the police dept. You can got to some UPS stores and get it done now days.

 

I'm going to cut this post short here, because I think this is where the misunderstanding is.

The scanner does not put you in the system, you got put in the system when you got your license. This is just a different way of identifying you than using your drivers license. From the article it sounds like it's pulling up the same information provided when they run your license anyways.

Haha, it's not quite your "right to refuse to drive" but if you want to can kind of word it like that. You're more than welcome to refuse the exercise your privilege of driving, if the state has given you that privilege. The thumbprint scan is the same as showing your ID, which you are required to do if asked to do so by a peace officer.

Mike, you seem to be missing the fact that the information is already in the system.

 

No they enter you into the system on the road if you are not already in there.
Its one of those while I have you here.... things...

 

Thats not what is implied from the article quote. And you are already in the system. You are put in when you get your license. That was why I quoted the DMV website, to show you that your thumbprint is already in the system.

If you refuse to give your thumbprint you wont get your license. And then you sure as hell better hope you don't get pulled over while driving!

 

Last Updated: Wednesday, 22 November 2006, 15:34 GMT

E-mail this to a friend Printable version

Motorists to give fingerprints

No two fingerprints have ever been found to be identical on databases
Drivers who get stopped by the police could have their fingerprints taken at the roadside, under a new plan to help officers check people's identities.
A hand-held device being tested by 10 forces in England and Wales is linked to a database of 6.5m prints.

Police say they will save time because people will no longer have to go to the station to prove their identity.

Officers promise prints will not be kept on file but concerns have been raised about civil liberties.

Bedfordshire are the first force to use the equipment, which is being distributed among the forces in Essex, Hertfordshire, Lancashire, North Wales, Northamptonshire, West Midlands and West Yorkshire, as well as to British Transport Police and the Metropolitan Police, over the next two months.

It's a first to search a national database and get a response back in a couple of minutes

Chris Wheeler

Police Information Technology Organisation


Send us your comments
How scanners work

Officers will scan a vehicle's number plates using a special camera that checks if the car is subject to an offence, like being uninsured.

If the driver does not convince police he is giving them a correct name, they will fingerprint him and verify his identity on the spot, instead of taking him to the police station.

Police Minister Tony McNulty said: "The new technology will speed up the time it takes for police to identify individuals at the roadside, enabling them to spend more time on the frontline and reducing any inconvenience for innocent members of the public."

Under the pilot, codenamed Lantern, police officers will be able to check the fingerprints from both index fingers of the suspect - with their permission - against a central computer database, with a response within a few minutes.

"The handheld, capture device is little bigger than a PDA," said Chris Wheeler, head of fingerprint identification at the Police Information Technology Organisation PITO.

WHY IS A VEHICLE STOPPED?
A police car installed with a camera which has an automatic number plate recognition system scans passing vehicles
The number plates are then matched against a database of offending vehicles
The database alerts the officer of a "positive" match and the vehicle is stopped

"Screening on the street means they [police] can check an identity and verify it."

Currently an officer has to arrest a person and take them to a custody suite to fingerprint them.

The device will be used with the Automatic Number Plate Recognition team, who identify vehicles of interest.

If a vehicle is stopped, police will be able to identify the driver and passengers. At present about 60% of drivers stopped do not give their true identity.

Bedfordshire Police said officers using the device in Luton on Wednesday had arrested a man suspected of being an illegal immigrant and a woman for driving a stolen car.

Inspector Steve Rawlings said it takes two sets of fingerprints and the fingerprints are not retained. FINGERPRINTS

The first positive criminal fingerprint identification was made in Argentina in 1892
The UK's first fingerprint bureau was founded in 1901
No two fingerprints have ever been found to be identical on a database


Biometrics: Animated guide

"The encounter can be 15 minutes on the roadside rather than three hours in the police station," he said.

The device has an accuracy of 94-95% and will be used for identification purposes only, say police, and there are electronic safeguards to prevent misuse.

It sends encrypted data to the national ID system using GPRS - a wireless system used by many mobile phones.

More than 6.5 million fingerprints are cross-referenced and sent back to the officer.

Mark Wallace, who represents the civil liberties group the Freedom Association, told BBC Radio Five Live that he had "concerns" about the scheme.

"I don't think we should be reassured by the fact that at the moment it's voluntary and at the moment they won't be recorded," he said.

"Both of those things are actually only happening in the trial because the laws haven't been passed to do this on a national basis compulsorily and with recording."

 

really Mike? That's your source? You're backing yourself up with a "what the media won't tell you" website?

The intro to the video isn't even any facts, it's just fear tactics to get you riled up against your country so that you believe the BS they are about to feed you.

Seriously, I'm not watching two hours of tin hat television to see them twist the application of the thumbprint scanner out of context. Where's the rest of the article that you quoted Mike?

 

http://www.nationalterroralert.com/u...-to-enter-usa/

In 2003, Californian Roger Benson filed a lawsuit after he was stopped by police for a traffic violation and fingerprinted using the same scanner. His prints were incorrectly matched with a convicted felon and he served 43 days in prison.

Miguel Espinoza brought a lawsuit against Identix in 2004 after his prints were wrongly assigned to a convicted murderer. The case was dismissed after the judge ruled that human error, and not the scanner, had caused the mix-up, but human-rights groups say over dependence on technology will continue to put travelers at risk.

Last July, a US government report found that “systems supporting the US-VISIT program have significant information security control weaknesses”, but homeland security chief Michael Chertoff is an enthusiast. “Moving to 10 fingerprints is completely consistent with, and in fact enhances, our ability to protect,” he said.

 

Haha.. I had the wrong link. Which I changed it.

 

So moral of the story, carry your drivers license with you when you drive so that you can properly be identified Yeah. technology is not perfect, that's not a shock.

 

if a cop really wanted someones prints to do harm, they would just hand them a greasy clipboard to sign, then get the prints off that. Dna maybe form their hair? i dont know.

 

Screw it, and if a LEO asks me to submit I will refuse unless he has a warent, or is arresting me, and in that case he better read me my rights.

This is just yet another way for the government to take our private information and its bull****.