Fingerprints

[civil]

I'm not offended, but I do have a low idiot tolerance. You've just triggered an episode.

More offence? Warning to all those around this bully, violence is about to occur.

Offence is often the responce of those will low mental ability to logical argument.

[civil]

The government is telling us how to discipline our children.

Dont get me started on children and why / how the goverment can dictate how we raise our children.

REGISTER, common law. The certificate of registry granted to the person or persons entitled thereto, by the collector of the district, comprehending the port to which any ship or vessel shall belong; more properly, the registry itself. For the form, requisites, &c. of certificate of registry
Bouvier's Law Dictionary

Ask why the goverment requires / asks us to REGISTER our children's BIRTH, and what we are saying about who they (our children) belong to in so doing?

[MWVT]

I have nothing to hide (ok, well not much) under our CURRENT laws.

I'm not that keen on making wild predictions under our FUTURE ones.

I grates with me a little when i'm pulled over at a breath test point, when there was no reason to suspect i was driving under the influence (driving normally, not throwing bottles at the cops etc). But on the other hand, after losing a couple of friends to drink drivers randomly taking them out, i understand the reasoning, and i grin and bear it (helps if they are polite.... which the vast majority are).

Taking my fingerprints..... is there a reason to suspect i have commited a crime (other than i am alive, and some alive people commit crime).

Without lending my voice to the conspicary choir, limits on the power of government (and police) are there for a reason.... eroding those limits need very careful consideration. The general principle of the state not detaining a person (or requiring them to prove their innocence) without some reason to believe they may have commited a crime, is one i'm very glad we (largely) live under.

So my vote, thumbs down on the fingerprinting.

[MWVT]

That's pretty misleading. Police all around the world can stop people on traffic enforcement matters, (as in the check point you mentioned) without requiring suspicion of any other criminal activity in order to lawfully carry out that stop. The difference is when you are stopping people with the express intention of carrying out a search for stolen property, drugs, guns etc. In those situations there are clear statutory obligations that cover the police actions, ("probable cause" for those of you who watch too much seppo TV).

Hey Spud,

I agree that it was misleading. Do you believe traffic should be different? (obviously it is in almost all countries), we don't allow random searches of our houses, why random searches on our licenses.

Matt

[Paul in NZ]

FFS - think about it....

They take a print in a roadside reader... They may not even store that print for future use BUT it will be compared against the database to see if it matches the details you gave (assuming they have a print already) and against a database of unsolved crimes etc.

You would be amazed how many cold cases are solved that way and thats a good thing!

Cheers

[more_fasterer]

IMO it doesn't seem that different to the current climate. Examples:

- When I was 11 two nice policemen came to our school and talked to our class about catching those nasty criminals. Then they started talking about identification etc and said "lets take everyone's fingerprints, for fun!"
They recorded these with our full names & dates of birth... I would be very surprised if these aren't in the database.

- Around 10 years ago, my Mum's car was broken into. The police fingerprinted the car and I had to submit my fingerprints to them as I had used the car recently. That would mean my fingerprints are definitely recorded in the database.


I don't have any qualms about the second point as my prints were recorded to help solve a crime - maybe I would've taken issue with it if I had an interest in doing illegal things (other than committing speed limit murder). The first raises a few questions though.

[Sanx]

I don't mind the drink/drive checkpoints. They don't check licences, they just check if you're drunk. They ask for your name and address, sure, but that's only because it's something that everyone knows and takes long enough to say in order for the machines to get their sample.

However, I would object strenuously to any move to bring in fingerprinting when arrested. Or, as is the case in the UK, compulsory DNA testing when arrested. When someone is convicted of a crime, they forfeit basic human rights such as a right to privacy and freedom of movement. The state can then require fingerprints and DNA sampling should it require.

But to require them when arrested is not on. People get arrested and released without charge all the time. They haven't committed and offence (or at least, haven't been convicted) and they have not forfeited any basic human rights. There is no just cause for taking that person's fingerprints or DNA.

If you're arrested in the UK for any reason they will take your fingerprints and a DNA sample. Even if you are later released because the Police are satisfied that you have been falsely arrested, they will not destroy the data they've collected. the Association of Chief Police Officers have seriously suggested that all children should be DNA sampled at birth. When you now apply for a passport in the UK, you have to give your fingerprints. the UK is rapidly turning into a surveillance state; cameras everywhere. The government has used fear, uncertainty, doubt and the ever-present spectre of 'terrorism' in order to continually erode basic civil liberties.

Next will come the introduction of 'voluntary' ID cards. Except you'll need them for accessing health care or any government service. So everyone will need them. When they've achieved sufficient critical mass, they'll make them compulsory. Then they'll make it compulsory to carry with you at all times. Then they'll make it an arrestable offence not to carry it.

It's the start of a long slippery slope and should be opposed at all costs, whether you have anything to hide or not. 'Cos one day, further down that slippery slope, they'll deprive you of a civil liberty that you do care about...

[more_fasterer]

Next will come the introduction of 'voluntary' ID cards. Except you'll need them for accessing health care or any government service. So everyone will need them. When they've achieved sufficient critical mass, they'll make them compulsory. Then they'll make it compulsory to carry with you at all times. Then they'll make it an arrestable offence not to carry it.

I've already got one of them ID cards... it's got "New Zealand Driver License" printed at the top

[Sanx]

I've already got one of them ID cards... it's got "New Zealand Driver License" printed at the top

That's not an ID card. It doesn't have your fingerprints on it. You don't have to have it with you at all times (only when driving). Driving is not a civil liberty or human right, it's a privilege. There's a distinction.

[Krusti]

This infringement on my personal freedom is why I have just applied for a job in Pakistan..........

[JimBob]

Hey Spud,

I agree that it was misleading. Do you believe traffic should be different? (obviously it is in almost all countries), we don't allow random searches of our houses, why random searches on our licenses.

Matt

Why not? I am sure if a street was locked down and homes and people were searched they would find some lawbreakers. Even if its just Joe who didnt get a permit for his gazebo. Of course if you have something to hide etc etc
Random breath testing, random drug testing,(another proposal. Apparently the technology is available to incorporate it with roadside breath testing) random vehicle searches, video recording of protesters, etc etc are nothing more than fishing expeditions. The next step is random property searches. And the same old BS is trotted out "if we do this you will be safer" and always the inference that the only people who dont want it are criminals and worse still leftie civil libertarians
Just because it is lawful doesnt make it right.

[Albino]

People who dont want this dont understand what we are asking for. We are asking for the power that when we stop someone in the street or pull them over to have them put their thumb on a PDA like device. This is then scanned through the Police database for anyone known to us.

Why are you stopping them on the street, or pulling them over if they haven't committed an offence?

[civil]

Driving is not a civil liberty or human right, it's a privilege. There's a distinction.

Since when did the freedom of movement or travelling become a privilege?

Thats right when we got a licence to do it and called it Driving. All for the best of good reasons mind you, as of-course we had nothing to hide.

[JimBob]

FFS - think about it....

They take a print in a roadside reader... They may not even store that print for future use BUT it will be compared against the database to see if it matches the details you gave (assuming they have a print already) and against a database of unsolved crimes etc.

You would be amazed how many cold cases are solved that way and thats a good thing!

Cheers

My emphasis

Bit naive arent you?
And how many "cold cases" are solved this way?

[spudchucka]

More offence? Warning to all those around this bully, violence is about to occur.

Offence is often the responce of those will low mental ability to logical argument.

Suggesting that actual physical violence can occur across the interweb shows that you have the mental capacity of a paper cup. But just so you aren't completely disappointed, here's a virtual poke in the eye.