Fingerprints

[Sanx]

Should the Police get these powers (and the technology to perform on-the-spot checks), I look forward to reading about the first time they decide to go fishing. More and more people will end up being subjected to these random fingerprint checks. Would be very tempting to, for instance, block off the exits to Westfield Manukau on the pretence that some crim's run into the mall, and then proceed to require a fingerprint from everyone before they're let out.

When people have powers, they use them. Give someone more power, they'll use that too. And no-one needs reminding of the old adage about the relationship between power and corruption.

Which brings me on to something else, actually. Should I, Mr Honest-And-Upstanding Joe Public, be stopped by the boys in blue and asked to place my finger on their little scanner, what is the proposed punishment should I refuse?

[Patrick]

So what would happen if I was wandering along pursuing my lawful business and was apprehended by an officer of the law who wanted to validate my identity; let's say I was not a criminal, but I had chosen to lie about who I was and the Police had my fingerprint records on file. In this circumstance am I any more of a criminal than a person who, in exactly the same circumstances, also lies to the Police about who they are but for whom the Police do not hold fingerprint records?

Walking or driving??? Walking, you can lie, nothing happens. Driving and lying about your name will cost you $750 instant fine, or a court hearing and fine of up to $1000.

Don't hold your breath, I have been looking for reasoned argument for some time from those that support the forcing of their will upon others to gain control over them. What you tend to get from such people is the likes of this;

Chill Civil... Conspiracy Theory and 1984 were just movies, nothing more..... we are also looking for reasoned arguments, not ramblings about movies and books seen by some... nothing here, move on folks.

But arent the Police "Law Enforcement" not "Judicuatary"? Are you now saying that the police get to judge if I get to go before the courts?

Anyone else see the slipery slope we are going down?

There is nothing new here... joe cleanskin or reformed joe scrote will be treated differently to the recidivist...

Should I, Mr Honest-And-Upstanding Joe Public, be stopped by the boys in blue and asked to place my finger on their little scanner, what is the proposed punishment should I refuse?

Produce your licence when driving, all is good as ID will already be confirmed...

[spudchucka]

Don't hold your breath, I have been looking for reasoned argument for some time from those that support the forcing of their will upon others to gain control over them. What you tend to get from such people is the likes of this;

Feel the love!!

[spudchucka]

But arent the Police "Law Enforcement" not "Judicuatary"? Are you now saying that the police get to judge if I get to go before the courts?

Anyone else see the slipery slope we are going down?

Police have always had discretion. Would you like to see it eroded and have the police charging people whenever an offence is detected regardless of how minor.

Police exercise judgement whenever they elect whether or not to lay charges, an offender's history, (past and present) is just one factor that assists them to make those judgements.

[spudchucka]

More and more people will end up being subjected to these random fingerprint checks.

If you are driving a motor vehicle on a road all you have to do is produce your driver licence, if you do you won't be subjected to the thumb print check. That's all it will be, just another check that can be done to confirm a person's identity when they fail to provide any other form of ID.

[Sanx]

If you are driving a motor vehicle on a road all you have to do is produce your driver licence, if you do you won't be subjected to the thumb print check. That's all it will be, just another check that can be done to confirm a person's identity when they fail to provide any other form of ID.

Produce your licence when driving, all is good as ID will already be confirmed...

Apologies. In retrospect, my question was a little vague. My question about refusing to have my fingerprints checked was in relation to being stopped on the street or somewhere where it is legal to not have ID on me. As I understand it, failing to carry a licence whilst driving is an offence already. Are these new powers only to be used at the roadside?

But, that does bring me on to another question: if presenting another form of ID like a driving licence is acceptable, surely the half the point of using the portable scanners (i.e. matching fingerprints against unfnown persons who have left prints at a crime scene) is negated. Obviously anyone already with a warrant outstanding will get picked up on presentation of a valid licence, but someone unknown to the Police but whose fingerprints are recorded against some unsolved crime will not.

[JimBob]

Societies live in a perpetual state of anarchy. It’s the proportion of state control to anarchy that changes over time.
We start out with 100% anarchy, a state is created, and slowly but surely anarchy is replaced by state control. There is a lot of to-ing and fro-ing but the state wins out in the end. When it does, it collapses and we start all over again.
This process takes 50, 100, 1000 yrs but it happens, no society has ever got the balance right. Just because we have laptops, motorcycles, the All Blacks, and SkyTV doesn’t mean we are any different from the Romans, Russians, Greeks, Germans, Czechs, Fijians, Samoans, Turks, Mayans, or Scots. Its human nature.
Many of the things people in Western democracies are putting up with now, only 30 years ago, were what we saw as wrong with the Soviet Union.
Look at England, the home of Parliamentary Democracy. Now the most watched population in the world. The “police” or whoever is pulling their strings is pushing ahead with biometric id for the total population. Hasn’t happened yet but it is on the table which means its only a matter of time. And we are not that far behind. Did you know we were the 2nd country in the world to introduce a national DNA database? We didn’t win that but there are still some firsts we can take if we get cracking.
And there is always a good reason, in England they had the Irish and now they have terrorism. In America they had the USSR, then drugs, and now its terrorism. In NZ we have gangs, drunk drivers and p labs. If any of these “problems” are solved/controlled do we step back? No we find another problem and ramp it up some more.
And from the police hierarchy to the politicians its always “we NEED to do this to keep you safe from ………..”
I know we are a bit slow down here but our society is no different from any other and in 20, 50 100 yrs time someone will wake up one day and say “fuck this shit”. c'est la vie

[spudchucka]

Apologies. In retrospect, my question was a little vague. My question about refusing to have my fingerprints checked was in relation to being stopped on the street or somewhere where it is legal to not have ID on me. As I understand it, failing to carry a licence whilst driving is an offence already. Are these new powers only to be used at the roadside?

But, that does bring me on to another question: if presenting another form of ID like a driving licence is acceptable, surely the half the point of using the portable scanners (i.e. matching fingerprints against unfnown persons who have left prints at a crime scene) is negated. Obviously anyone already with a warrant outstanding will get picked up on presentation of a valid licence, but someone unknown to the Police but whose fingerprints are recorded against some unsolved crime will not.

Not carrying your licence when you drive is an offence currently. There is no legislation that requires anyone in NZ to ID themselves on demand when they are just going about their lawful business, (except relating to the Arms Act and other Acts that clearly state the specific circumstances).

The thumb scanner is just about identification of the person. One thumb print is not going to link a person to an unsolved crime, considering that they have nine other digits and two sets of palms. Perhaps it would be enough to make them a suspect but in order to charge anyone with an offence based upon a fingerprint identification requires the finger print examiner to make an actual physical comparison of the crime scene print and the prints taken off the person at the time they were arrested and charged with a previous offence.

[Grahameeboy]

Some people here are scared of their own shadow I reckon eh Spud......

[JimBob]

Some people here are scared of their own shadow I reckon eh Spud......

The reason for using the scanner is to help verify your identity because you are suspected of providing false details. If there is a match your details are verified. If no match there is no verification so you are still under suspicion which will require a trip down the road to continue the identification process.
So in order for it to work everyone’s details need to be on file.
That’s the bit they’re not telling you.
And its not about being afraid of your own shadow. Its about thinking for yourself and making your own decisions. If you are unable or afraid to do that then fair enough. Get in a line and keep in step.
Personally I could give a tupenny toss about fingerprints dna etc.
It’s the blind acceptance without question that irks me.

[Grahameeboy]

The reason for using the scanner is to help verify your identity because you are suspected of providing false details. If there is a match your details are verified. If no match there is no verification so you are still under suspicion which will require a trip down the road to continue the identification process.
So in order for it to work everyone’s details need to be on file.
That’s the bit they’re not telling you.
And its not about being afraid of your own shadow. Its about thinking for yourself and making your own decisions. If you are unable or afraid to do that then fair enough. Get in a line and keep in step.
Personally I could give a tupenny toss about fingerprints dna etc.
It’s the blind acceptance without question that irks me.

But if it is not actually a problem why does it irk you...........why does fingerprinting stop us from thinking for ourselves?

[ManDownUnder]

I have a personal preference for DNA identification. Get a cute blonde out there skilled in "seminal evacuation" and see how many complaints there are...

To actually add constructively though. The only concern I have with information gathering is the potential for it's misues in the hands of (future?) corrupt organisations. Then, despite I have nothing to hide, it can be used against me.

Just as all Jews could eaily be ruled out of an enquiry because their DNA or other recorded characteristics rule them out... if that technology had been available in Germany around 1940 I'm willing to bet Auschwitz would have been built 3 times the size...

I have nothing to fear today. And indeed I personally believe this stuff is being used to speed my progress (especially through every US port, every time I go through). Sure they can track me (somewhat), and count me in and out... I don't envy the poor bastard that gets the job of writing a report on me though. My passport details have been on how many systems for how long?

[Grahameeboy]

I have a personal preference for DNA identification. Get a cute blonde out there skilled in "seminal evacuation" and see how many complaints there are...

To actually add constructively though. The only concern I have with information gathering is the potential for it's misues in the hands of (future?) corrupt organisations. Then, despite I have nothing to hide, it can be used against me.

Just as all Jews could eaily be ruled out of an enquiry because their DNA or other recorded characteristics rule them out... if that technology had been available in Germany around 1940 I'm willing to bet Auschwitz would have been built 3 times the size...

I have nothing to fear today. And indeed I personally believe this stuff is being used to speed my progress (especially through every US port, every time I go through). Sure they can track me (somewhat), and count me in and out... I don't envy the poor bastard that gets the job of writing a report on me though. My passport details have been on how many systems for how long?

2 Things, you have a cute blonde.......and secondly I thought you couldn't give DNA anymore

[ManDownUnder]

2 Things, you have a cute blonde.......and secondly I thought you couldn't give DNA anymore

(yes but not NEARLY often enough...) and no but she wouldn't know till afterwards...

[007XX]

To actually add constructively though. The only concern I have with information gathering is the potential for it's misues in the hands of (future?) corrupt organisations. Then, despite I have nothing to hide, it can be used against me.

Should we say it actually boils down to:

No matter the means of identification, it is not so much how "invading" it is, but more the lack of confidence in the integrity of "the powers that be" , and how they would use that technology,that make us nervous?

Would you trust Helen to take a DNA sample from you??