Kansas to fingerprint traffic offenders?

This story in The Star today doesn't say what happens to me if I refuse to be fingerprinted:

• If you are stopped by police in Kansas, don’t be surprised if the officer pulls out a little black box and takes your fingerprints.
• The gadget allows officers to identify people by fingerprints without hauling them to the police station.
• Over the next year the Kansas Bureau of Investigation will test 60 of the devices with law enforcement agencies around the state. State officials said similar tests are being planned for New York, Milwaukee and Hawaii.
• “This is definitely new,” said Gary Page, Overland Park Police Department crime lab. “It’s been talked about, but as far as I know they are not in use anywhere in the metro.”
• The tests in Kansas are part of a bigger $3.6 million upgrade to the KBI’s statewide fingerprint database, unveiled Tuesday by the KBI and Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline.

So  you're pulled over because your headlight's out. A warning, certainly. A ticket, maybe. Fingerprints?

Update: I spoke with Kyle Smith, an attorney and deputy KBI director:

"It doesn’t change the rules on when we can require somebody to produce ID," he said. "If we can require them to produce a driver’s license, we can require them to produce fingerprints. But other than that, it doesn’t change the rules.

Bottom line: "If he can write you a ticket, he can demand ID," he said.

Update #2: Heard back from Kyle Smith - fingerprint ID may not apply to routine traffic stops like headlight out...he's looking into it.

Bio-metrics ompany behind this

Update Sunday, March 26, 2006:

• Simple traffic stops will not be enough for police officers to demand on-the-spot fingerprint scans when portable devices are tested in the coming months, Kansas officials say.
• Star story: Mobile print policy clarified
  

Comments

[WishaCopWouldAskFormine]

I wish a police officer would ask me to violate my rights!!! I know there has to be a lawyer somewhere right now licking his chops over this one!!! Just a matter of time before this crazy and insane project is shut down.

[G]

How is that a violation of your rights? He asks you for a driver's license, which is supposed to verify your identity. A fingerprint is the same thing. I guess I don't see what the big deal is????

[Brian]

I say we just skip this step and go straight for a DNA swab!

Wouldn't it be even better if we all just went ahead and got a bar-code tattoo, or an RFID chip implanted so justice could be served as easily as checking out at Wal-Mart?

What happened to the right to privacy? Oh, that's right, no one would want to be thought of as 'soft on crime' so they just keep voting to stomp on civil liberties.

Time to get the politicians out of politics and try a little common sense.

[Jake]

Have you ever heard of lying?? You can't fake fingerprints like license or other IDs. You'd be surprised at the number of crooks/felons/skells that slip through by having a valid looking license/ID. SO WHAT??
What are you trying to hide??????

[His Butchness]

Good post Brian I am with you buddy!!

This sh*t is getting out of control...

Now a finger printing for each time that you get pulled over? This is not good.

Wasn’t it just last week when 20/20 ran a story on how fingerprinting isn’t as accurate as we once believed, and there are cases that the FBI was 100% sure that the fingerprints matched, but when a real expert was brought in it was proven that these people had been wrongly convicted, and that the FBI had basically lied. After seeing that I don't want to be fingerprinted every time I am pulled over if it means I could be wrongly convicted of a crime I had nothing to do with.

This is not cool, we are losing our rights everyday, the rights that our grandparents and their grandparents fought and worked so hard to preserve.

Now its fingerprints, before you know it they are going to want us all to have an id tag either implanted into our bodies or tattooed on our wrists and when they pull us over they will just scan us and they will have access to everything we were ever involved in. I don’t like this one bit.
Land of the free no more, we are controlled more and more with every passing minute, we better rise up against this sh*t soon, or before you know it we wont have any freedoms or rights left.

[Steve]

you've heard of the 'red scare', the McCarthy era, the latest scare is arab terrorists, when the Feds want to put me in the 'you're scaring me' basket I don't want to make it easy for them. right to privacy is already being violated when they can tap my phone, look at my records without a warrant. someday i'll be in the group that will be suspect for one reason or another.

[Reality Check]

Hey Jake, does this sound familiar?

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

I don't have to be hiding anything (though I may soon have to hide my desire for a little freedom 'round these parts). I have the right for the cops leave me the hell alone unless they witness me committing a crime or can convince a judge I probably did.

After living in an Eastern Bloc country in the 80s, "Papers, please" is something I never thought I'd hear from the cops in the US.

[Brian]

Jake,

What about my comment makes you think I have anything to hide? Given that, I will NOT allow an unwarranted search of my person, vehicle or home without the proper court documents to justify such an invasion of my personal freedoms.

If you'd like for the government to have more power, I hear China and North Korea might have views that more closely match your own.

I hope your rights are never trampled, so you can continue believing that you indeed live in "The Land of the Free"

[Teresa]

I can't believe that a simple traffic stop would now warrant fingerprints!!!! INSANE! My question is what are they going to do with the print after they take it??? Does it go in some master database "just in case"??? CRAZY!

more and more rights are given up with the explanation, 'what do you have to hide?'

[Fred]

Me -- me -- me. It's all about me. I don't want, I don't like, I won't...... Why can't things be about us? Let's have laws, rules, and enforcement that protects the rights that belong to us. Laws, rules and enforcements that don't give illegal aliens, terrorists, murders, child molestors, and such ilk, a way to avoid detection and prosecution. How about protecting us? If the police pull you over, you are, most likely, already a criminal (broken traffic laws). If I break a law and they want to take my fingerprints, I would gladly give them to avoid letting hard core criminals run loose.

[Faith]

Um, it says right in the article that the fingerprints taken roadside won't be stored. And that was just from a quick scan of the article on my part. Might want to read things a bit more closely before freaking out, Teresa.

How is it a violation of someone's rights to simply fingerprint them? I remember being fingerprinted as a part of a program when I was a child...in case I was ever kidnapped, the government would have my print on file, and that could help save my life, or at least identify me should anything ever happen to me.

To the person with the name "Reality Check", you said, "I have the right for the cops leave me the hell alone unless they witness me committing a crime or can convince a judge I probably did." They aren't just randomly walking around in the supermarket or library or at your work collecting finger prints...the idea is that they will do it if they pull someone over for a traffic violation. So, basically, your right to be left alone by a "cop" wouldn't be in question until you decide to commit a definable crime, i.e. speeding, driving a car that's unsafe on the road, etc...

Everyone needs to mellow the hell out. The comments on this "blog" over the last few days have shown me that people are a bit too wound up in this city/country.

[Brian 2]

Fred, if the police pulling you over makes you a criminal, than my 86 year old grandma is a criminal for California stopping a stop sign. Everyone going through a DUI checkpoint is a criminal and should be fingerprinted. This is just another Phil Kline "I want the world to be just like me" tactic.

You know I have done job interviews where I had to give up my finger prints. Whats the differents you know those go threw the FBI and are kept on file they are not jsut droped after the Shift is over. It's just a finger print quit being liberal Jack@$$es.

[D.W.]

If my grandfather were alive today he would be mad beyond belief over this kind of stuff.

If you oppose it, you are accused of:

1. Attempting to hide something
2. Liberal
3. Soft on crime
4. Supporting the enemy
...
Have I missed any?

The issue is not so much being fingerprinted at the time I am pulled over, even if they do destroy the record afterwards, it is the issue of where will they take this next? It never stops with just one process; that process then evolves into something else.

Btw, to those who said that if you are stopped you are already breaking the law....correct me if I am wrong, but until a court of competent jurisdiction finds me guilty, I am PRESUMED innocent and thus should be treated as such.

This is just moving us one step closer to a national ID card and identification system that can track our every move, purchase, etc.

I believe the Honorable Benjamin Franklin said it best when he penned these words:

"The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either."

[Brian]

There is a difference between voluntary and involuntary

Child Fingerprinting Programs
and
Job applications

are far different than getting caught doing 10 mph over the speed limit.

Quit being a scared conservative and try being a patriot. This country was founded by those that were fed up with an over-reaching government.

Here's a start, at least have the gravitas to put a name at the end of your posts, it's a little rude to call names and hide.

A proud Patriot,
Brian

[Silvervit]

This is not the beginning, this is not the end.

I challenge anyone to go through a single day without violating some law, statute, code or regulation in some way. There are millions of laws on the books. It cannot be done. In the eyes of politicians, law enforcement and the judicial system, we are all criminals.

You are not safe in this country any longer.

If you do not fight it, you deserve what you get.

[Scarlet Letter]

Faith and Fred

Breaking a traffic law doesn’t make you a criminal you f*cking moron. It’s not even a misdemeanor; it’s a city ticket which doesn’t even require a visit to court. Wake up prag, you want to put SCARLET LETTERS on everyone so we know who they are and what they have done?

I bet you do things in the privacy of your home that you wouldn’t want people to know about.

Why don’t we just label everyone, I don’t much like homosexuals so can we get a label for them, how about a label for people who look at pornography in their homes because I don’t want my children to a part of that, hey why don’t we label adulterers, thieves, people who cheated on exams........do you not see a trend here? Do you not see where this is headed? If you want to be safe then behave that way know where your children are and who they are with...Educate your children about the dangers of strangers and others...And if your a grown man or woman and you cant take care of yourself and protect your own, wise up and quit relying on your government to raise and protect your families.

If you want to protect your self and your own then know who you’re dealing with and what kind of person they are by being involved. You two are scary dumb, you think its okay to forfeit your freedoms because 5% of America has criminal behaviors.

So instead of making stricter laws and following through with the sentences, let’s just put a label on everyone. Let’s just make everyone give a fingerprint for not wearing a seatbelt....Great!

I think this is nuts. If a cop asks me for fingerprints i'll tell him "sure but wait a few minutes until my lawyer shows up." Then i'll use that nice little cell phone to have a lawyer there in 10 minutes. The government is a fearmonger. It uses fear through propaganda to intimidate the masses and make them more pliable to its control. I guess heroin wasnt doing the trick.

I won't mind if it's only the middle finger.

[jb]

I'm not sure how much I like the fingerprinting idea, but think about this.
This should only be used on as "as needed" basis. There should be the same probable cuase to believe that someone is commiting a crime and that: A. The person is refusing to identify himself. B.The indentification
information they have provided does not check out. There are many who use a false name (brother, sister, relative,stolen ID) and those persons end up with warrants for an offense that they actually didn't commit.

[Reality Check]

Forgive me for having a healthy mistrust of any entity who says, "Trust me," particularly when that same entity has the legal right to use force to achieve its goals.

Faith, in college I was pulled over by a deputy in Mississippi County, Arkansas, simply because he saw a 22-year-old white guy with long hair driving what a beat up 1966 Mercedes sedan. I had done nothing illegal--I was pulling onto the interstate and not quite up to the speed limit, the car was not in violation of any laws, I had no illegal substances in the vehicle, and I had just stopped to buy gas. He intentionally ran the wrong license plate in order to go on a fishing expedition, and questioned me for nearly two hours.

When I asked him to run the license number again, he told me he'd run it four different ways, and they all came back the same. I called B*lls**t, and when he ran it correctly, I came back as the registered owner, and he reluctantly let me go.

Fortunately for me, it didn't escalate into anything more than an inconvenience. I had a friend who was beaten in police custody and then sent a bill for the dry-cleaning service that got his blood out of the cops' uniforms.

When (not if, WHEN) you encounter a cop on a power trip, I think you'll begin to appreciate my position.

[tgd]

Good idea.

Anyone who objects has something to hide.

If they refuse to be printed, the cops will have to arrest them. The refusal could signal that the person is a wanted felon or a deviate or an escaped convict looking for a dumb, feckless, amoral female dog-handler.

What new statute is there that says anyone for any reason can and will be fingerprinted?

I thought only people under ARREST for certain violations could be fingerprinted. Tickets that don't require a court appearance don't usually count as an arrest.

Are they going to make up reasons to arrest people now just so this experiment will work in their favor?

[Brian]

BTW, my guess as to why the REAL reason this is going on...

3.6 Million dollars

Wonder how much Morpho had to pay their lobbyist to get this through?

-Brian

[Jodi]

Brian, you're right. There is a difference between voluntary and involuntary. Last time I drove, going 10 miles over the speed limit was voluntary. Getting caught was not. You break the law, you provide identification. While fingerprints are not 100% reliable, they are definitely not easily altered like a driver's license.

You talk about the scare tactics used by politicians. Frankly, I don't trust politicians. However, I've been fingerprinted in the past for job interviews, I've been drug tested, etc. and I have no problem being fingerprinted if I get pulled over. Too often we hear of the rapists, child molesters etc. that are on the streets because of some foul-up somewhere. If this process gets one violent criminal off the streets, then it's worth it.

Reality Check, it's unfortunate that you've have some bad experiences with those on power trips. However, with the line of work my husband is in, I know quite a few law enforcement officers, and the vast majority do not fall into the category of those on power trips. Again, I would gladly be in your shoes of inconvenience on that day in Arkansas if it takes one violent criminal off the streets to make my kids safer. It's worth it to me.

[Jake]

If you have the resources, check this out:

In the Supreme Court of the United States

CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS, ET AL., PETITIONERS

v.

JAMES EDMOND, ET AL.

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI
TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES
AS AMICUS CURIAE SUPPORTING PETITIONERS

[Reality Check]

Jodi, would you gladly be in my friend's shoes, too?

I recognize that the behavior of certain officers I and others have encountered stains the reputation of the 65% of law enforcement who conduct themselves within the limitations proscribed by law.

Indianapolis v. Edmond

[Jodi]

Reality Check, I don't know your friend's situation. Of course I don't condone police brutality. Nor do I condone the way you were treated.

However, I have no problem with inconvenience if, as I stated before, it takes just one violent criminal off the streets. So many people are talking about their rights being violated. My fingerprints have nothing to hide, nor do I. My rights are violated when some rapist is out on the streets that should be behind bars. There is a warrant out for their arrest, but they've altered their ID, or better yet, an old database does not pull up their fingerprints until it is too late. Hmmm...what do we tell the victims? Sorry, we couldn't update the equipment because Brian, the Patriot, didn't want to be fingerprinted after he got caught speeding. He felt his rights were being violated. Something just doesn't seem right here...

[Jodi]

OK, I just re-read my post. Brian, in no way did I intend to state that you were the rapist in my comment above. Only that the new fingerprinting process, in my example, did not take effect because too many people, such as you Brian, are upset because their rights are being infringed upon. I apologize for being unclear. I should have "previewed" before posting.

[D.W.]

So you believe that sacrificing your freedom(s) is worth being so called safe?

Does anyone here realize that the cops by their very definition are not out there to PREVENT crime? Their main purpose is to investigate crimes after they have been committed.

Are there times where they in fact do prevent one? Sure, but it is not until after 90% of all crimes do the police become involved.

The government cannot keep you completely safe and the reckless intrusion into our private lives all in the name of "safety" has reached new heights.

I am sure we all can remember the case in MO where the boy was dragged to death by a man who was released from one of the local jails, only to find out afterwards there was an outstanding warrant for his arrest in another jurisdiction. Yes, the police and the jail failed; but I have yet to see anyone of prominence take issue with the mother.

Does she not bear the blame as well? She left her SON in an unlocked, running vehicle? So even if the jail has kept that particular individual behind bars, that is not to say it still would not have happened; further, it also begs the question that if SHE had locked the damn doors and turned the ignition off, would her child not still be alive today?

No law, regardless of how well written or intended can keep you safe, and when those same laws limit your ability to move about freely, they in fact decrease your level of safety.

This would work great for getting rid of all the illegal immigrants. I am all for it GO GO GO GO GO!!!!!! back to your home country your so proud of. MUAHAHAHAHA if your so proud of it why did you ever leave?

[Faith]

D.W. said above: I believe the Honorable Benjamin Franklin said it best when he penned these words:

"The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either."

Really...quoting Ben Franklin and saying that his words and the meaning behind them should and CAN apply to today's society is being a bit naive and simplistic, dontcha think? The man lived in a completely different world than the one we live in now.

I'm not an idiot or "scary dumb", as you put it, Scarlet Letter. I just don't see what all the hubbub is about when it comes to police getting fingerprints from people when they get pulled over for a traffic violation. I'm a law-abiding citizen, and I try to make an effort to contribute to society in a productive manner, rather than constantly complaining about lack of privacy this, or Big Brother government that. (If it makes you feel any better, I am a grown woman who doesn't have children and doesn't plan on having any in the future. And I don't see where you get off calling me "dumb". I still haven't seen anyone respond to my question of how this is a violation of anyone's rights. People sure do get wordy when they're calling names, though.)

I just wish people would live well, contribute to society in a productive manner, and stop bitching all the time about this sort of thing. If you don't like it, then I don't see how reading a "blog" and posting nasty comments about other commenters is going to help you get anything done about said thing you don't like. (Brian, I don't see how my being conservative - which I openly admit to being - makes me any less of a patriot. But whatever floats your boat, man...)

You may wish people to live well and contribute to society but who's to define what standard are living well and what is contribution? What if i disagree with your standards? Who the hell are you to tell me i need to contribute? I believe i'm a free person to do what i want. I'm sorry if you feel some people aren't living up to your standards but afterall they are only your standards so its really only important for you to live up to them.

I actually believe that there is no reason why Ben Franklin's quote has lost any significance. He is speaking to a general principle and political theory, not some specific facts regarding the times.

Hell people quote the bible all the time, and that was made up long before Franklin was here.

Do you know how much over the years has been done out of fear? Fear is one of the leading instruments of conformity.

Call me crazy, but I am pretty sure the justice system was set up with the philosophy that it would rather let 9 guilty men go than put 1 innocent man in jail (reasonable doubt).

It would take killers off the street to barcode everyone, is that ok. It would really cut down on crime if we just put everyone in jail that we thought might have committed a crime. I know this is extreme, but where do we draw the line for the common good? I dont care how "scary" the world gets, I will not let this country turn into a Police State.

In case you can't tell, I have been harassed by police more than once. I have been searched for almost an hour because my front license plate was not properly attached (it was in the window b/c I just bought my car), and that is just one instance out of many. its funny that this all occurred when I drove a crappy car, now that I have a Lexus and wear a suit, I haven't been pulled over in years and I drive exactly the same.

I dont care how great most cops are (I actually agree that most are good), the same power still goes to the bad ones. What happens when one of the bad ones is in control?

I like this idea. This way we can crack down on all these mother****ers who get like 5 speeding tickets a year and plead guilty to lesser charges so they dont take point hits on their licenses.

Being a patriot to today's america is being a traitor to the constitution.

[Brian]

Jodi,

If you'll go back to my first comment, which was backed up by some others on here, my concern is that if we don't say *ENOUGH* now, how far away is an RFID implanted in your forearm? As far as law enforcement is concerned, this would be a fantastic solution. They could just sit on the side of a busy street and ping everyone that drives by. Wouldn't you feel infinitely safer given this solution?

As for your comment about "Too often we hear of the rapists, child molesters etc. that are on the streets because of some foul-up somewhere." I work in an environment where we watch the major news networks 24 hours a day, and I have to respectfully disagree with your stance. Maybe you're privy to information that I don't have, but I don't think it's really all that 'often' that these miscreants are still roaming the streets from some 'foul-up'

I assume that we'll most likely have to agree to disagree on this, but I refuse to submit to these scare tactics the current administration uses to keep the masses in line, and will fight for my rights, just as I fought for yours while serving in the military.

-Brian

I searved in our millitry aswell. if your so into your right why did you server? When you join you aare giveing up alot of your rights. Also are you a criminal Brian? What are you worried about the goverment already has their hand up your @$$ and has your prints on file. What makes you some much more free?

[openmind]

for the record, the ben franklin post a couple up from here was mine. brian, I have to agree with you again.

thank you for your service.

Not certain if anyone's mentioned this fact, but it is an officer's discretion as to whether or not he allows you to post a signature bond, i.e. the common practice of signing your ticket and sending you on your merry way or arresting you for said ticket, taking you to the station and having you post an actual monetary bond. There are custodial arrests and non-custodial arrests. For those that mentioned that getting ticket is not even a misdemeanor, but is a city charge, that is only partially correct. Depends on who you are getting the ticket from. Try getting a ticket from a State Trooper. That's NOT a city infraction. Same thing if you get a ticket from a Sheriff's deputy.

[D.W.]

I did not call anyone an idiot, dumb or use anyother name directed towards you.

Please be careful to attribute comments such as those to the correct person.

No, I do not believe that it is being simplistic or that his words have lost any significance since the words were penned.

What we are talking about here is basic freedoms of which should not ever be discarded in the name of safety.

We are far less free today than we were 50 years ago. I am certainly old enough to recall those days.

The Honorable Benjamin Franklin also said that it would be better for a hundred guilty men to go free than to imprison one innocent man. I have no desire to trek down that path in this discussion, but the fact remains that if you start to allow your freedoms and liberties to be curbed, it is only a matter of time before those restrictions become more restictive and before you know it, you have no choice.

If you truly want to keep your kids free from harm, get involved in their lives, know who they associate with, what they are doing, when they are doing it, etc.

Take an active interest in your childs welfare instead of hoping the government can protect you.

We are human and thus we make mistakes, to attempt to legislate mistakes out of the system is futile at best.

Now, when I used the term "you" in the above paragraph, I am in no way referring to any particular individual but rather referring to society as a whole.

[John Ecklund]

How many forms of ID does one need? The finger print issue is just another example of a police state. I gave my birth certificate to the Department of Justice when I applied for a Pass Port and for my drivers license they know who exactly I am. Personally I would tell any Kansas Officer that wanted my finger prints that they are on file with FBI and Justice Department and I would certainly not feel afraid to tell the law-enforcement officer to FUCK OFF! if he wanted my prints without being charged with a crime.

[akakafka]

You are way too late in objecting.

You are okay with the government licensing your car, yourself to drive the car, and your needing to carry your government identification card around to drive the car ... but you now object because they want to change the manner in which they identify that it is you in the car.

You come too late to the protest.

[Reality Check]

One of my primary concerns is that mandatory fingerprint checks shifts the burden of proof. The state used to be (and under the fourth amendment, which I quoted above, should still be) required to prove to a judge that reasonable cause existed that a crime had been committed before ANY search of any person or place.

Today--and this proposed move in KS is another example--the populace is often required to prove to the state that they are NOT criminals in order to avoid being detained:

Prove your identity (so the state can determine whether you're a terrorist) so we can allow you to board a plane.

Prove your identity (so the state can determine whether you're involved in the production or distribution of meth) so we can allow you to buy over-the-counter cold medicine.

Prove that unusual banking transactions (like taking out $7000 in cash to buy a used car, or paying a large credit card bill in full) are not related to criminal activity or an attempt to launder money.

I can go on.

[Faith]

Not that I can speak to anyone specifically, since you didn't put up a name or anything, but the person who commented, "...who's to define what standard are living well and what is contribution?"

IMO, a productive contribution to society would be making an effort to not break the law, helping one's neighbor in a time of need, and generally putting forth an effort to be a good person a majority of the time. You're right, it's a very subjective concept, for sure. But let's not go nuts here...it's pretty easy to break it down, I think.

But don't get huffy. I'm not saying that you "need to contribute" anything in particular except the effort to abide by the law as best you can and to be a good person to those you come in contact with. Jeezy...is that so hard to conceptualize?

And I'm fine with a general level of conformity as long as it means I can live in peace while I'm on this earth. But saying that one is trading their freedom when it comes to being protected by laws? Come on now. That's oversimplifying a general truth, and just another way to point fingers at the government for doing their job.

Can we please just be responsible for our actions, for cryin' out loud? Or do we always wanna blame the overbearing police officer, or the "thugs" that live close to downtown, or the fact that our mother didn't love us enough. Give me a break...

[Faith]

Read my second comment again, D.W. I attributed the Ben Franklin quote to you, and was talking to "Scarlet Letter" about their decision to call me "scary dumb". I thought I was rather clear on that. Whatever.

[frank]

This is gotta be a joke! cameras on streets,chips in your body, Fingerprints,Cell phones. Big brother will know everytime I need to take a dump. Some of these people are really to young or stupid.

[Reality Check]

Frank, Big Brother won't only know when you take a dump, he'll also tell you when to do it.

Havent you all figured out that all this sex offender registry and stuff is just a prototype? They are using the "sex offenders" and "lynching" them, using them as guini pigs for tracking technology that all of us will soon be required to partake in.

John, Why would you tell the Cop to f off? Why are you mad at the cops? Are you so ignorant that you don't realize that the cops do not make the laws? And, if you want to tell a cop that, go ahead, it will give them something to laugh at in roll call the next day.

In Missouri, police cannot require fingerprints from you if you are not under custodial arrest for certain offenses.

Read RSMo. 43.503. It has juvenile in the name, but read subsection 2 and you will realize that it does not apply just to juveniles.

Now, when read in conjunction with 43.506 RSMo, you will learn that the enumerated charges are the only ones the police can require prints on.

The real problem here is not whether they can or cannot. The problem is they will act as if they can, and then write their report up that the person consented. This is the same thing that happens everyday on vehicle searches.

Since when does being pulled over by a traffic cop make you guilty. As I recall, the law states PLAINLY innocent until proven guilty. Now, if I am proven guilty of a crime, I will submit my fingerprints. Until then the cop will have to dust my ticket......If he can find a reason to cite me one.

[kcwatcher]

I'm all for law and order but the fingerprint thing is ridiculous.

Since we're not able (not willing?) to enforce our borders and since most states will hand out a driver's license to anything with a pulse (rendering the DL pretty much worthless as ID), the solution is to treat everyone like a suspect.

To the "nothing to hide" crowd... can you imagine the problems you'll have trying to correct a false hit from the fingerprint scanner? Biometrics may be pretty reliable but I wouldn't hang my life/liberty on it.

If you think getting a credit report error fixed is tough... and VISA can't hold you in jail until it is.

[Ian]

If the government wanted your fingerprints on file, it would have your fingerprints on file. I have yet to see a dark suited man with dark glasses and an earpiece following me or anyone else around picking up everything we just touched and dusting it for fingerprints.
Let's be a little more crazy, can we?

[Patriot]

Let them try and take your fingerprints and reject their request. Then take them to court in a jury trial and let the jury nullify the law. It is a bad law.

[Patriot]

Go to http://www.rbnlive.com and listen to the live radio feed to stay informed. Join others in this country if you love freedom on RBNLIVE.COM.

[Brian]

lets all be tracked by satelite. we can skip the finger print and have our speeding tickets emailed to us.
we will know who the murders are because we will know who was together when one heart stopped beating. we will be able to zap killers from space instantly by lazer. we can have a hearing with out them there..the satelite evidence will be overwhelming. and no one will ever fight a speeding ticket agian.

[Shocker Alum]

Personally, what's the big deal. You either have your driver's license or you don't. If you don't they will verify who you are by your fingerprint.

BUT,

Correct me if I'm wrong...they will only be able to verify your ID via fingerprints if your prints are already on file for a past crime.

Don't like it? Don't commit crimes and always have your license when driving.

Go Shox.

[Tom]

All that "stricter laws" means is that some government person has decided to remove more of our supposedly inviolable rights. It's amazing how many people fall for the excuses. Or is it?

[jp]

Sorry folks but I'm another one of those nasty conservatives (to a degree). I'm not going to name call because some of you are afraid fingerprinting would falsely incriminate you? But some of you people sound like you have covert agents following you in "black" helicopters etc...

We live in a world now where we have to protect ourselves from foreign and domestic terrorists and terrible criminals. Officers do need new tools to help them in the field.

I will agree with some of you to a point. Minor traffic infractions don't warrant being fingerprinted but when an officer makes a stop and they have the ability to run a warrant check and discover criminal warrants or during the stop make a criminal arrest you are going to be fingerprinted anyway. I say give them the ability to do it in the field but regulate how they are able to use this tool.

[ron]

brian and reality check are dead on right here. this is the government once again taking a little more freedom away.
remember when you mearely got a ticket? then it went to socalled voluntary searching of your vehical if the police felt like it. of course if you refused they would take you to jail and search anyway. then it went to again socalled voluntary breathalyzers and sobriety checks if the officer decided it was necessary(or according to your skin color or tone of voice depending on the officer. and again if you didnt submit you get taken to jail. now its up to fingerprinting at the discretion of the cops. and of course with the patriot act if the government just decides to they can circumvent all of out rights anyway. its madness to think that anything about this country is free.
And if you think the government cares about keeping you safe then you lying to yourself and might as well go bury your head in the sand. if they were then there wouldnt be thousands of illegal immigrants swarming over the rio grande each year unchecked. if they were then they would be sending the armed forces after the people who actually attacked our country not protecting oil fields in iraq.
if you keep letting laws like these get passed you will eventually figure out what some of us here are talking about. only by then it will be far to late.

[jp]

wrong

There are a TON of you, who have posted on the blog, that apparently need to remove themselves from society, and relocate somehwere of the grid; possibly in rurual Idaho. Otherwise the men in black and their black helicopters will undoubtedly get you. I've never seen such a collection of consipiracy theorists. Perhaps you should not even get a driver's license, but upon being stopped by an officer you should just declare yourself a king or queen, present your sovereign nation ID card saying you are not subject to laws of the US; which have been enacted by democratic means.

Driving has, over and over again, been considered a privilege by our courts. It's not a fundamental right. You pay taxes on your car, you register the car, when you accept a driver's license you are in fact giving your implied consent to subject yourself to the laws of the road. Like it or not.

These laws were established, ruled upon and are enforced under the same laws of the land that you use to attempt to prove the establishment of a big brothe state that you claim is eroding your personal freedom. And in all seriousness who among you have truly been the victim of a goverment consipiracy? I've never met anyone who has that I wouldn't consider patently crazy.

Part of the beauty of the consitution is that it's a very fluid document that's open to interpretation and to change. The founders themselves understood this and thus built in ways to change it through policitcal process.

I personally don't really care, one way or another, if they ask for my fingerprints, hair sample, saliva sample, or whatever else they might come up with. I've got nothing to hide. And if it would facilitate and officer's job in any manner I would voluntarily co-operate. I don't need them to pass a law telling me to do something like that.

[BigAL]

ip...you're an idiot!

[Big AL]

To Tom, Brian, ip and all the other idiots... Driving a car doesn't cancel out your civil liberties!
You're nothing bunch of jack-booted NAZI's. Don't forget to say "Heil Hitler!" each and every day.

[Patriot]

Another method of resistance is: Don't let them take your finger print because it is yours and they don't have jurisdiction. Force the court to prove that they have jurisdiction. Clue: They can't. No court in the land can prove that you are the one that signed a drivers licence. No court can prove that you are a US citizen either. (Unless they get you to say something to admit it). If the court can't prove jurisdiction over you, they can't enforce any traffic laws or any ticket.

[Robin]

I just wanted to let you know that biometrics is already filtering in on my occupation. I am a nurse, and work all over in both KS and MO. We had to submit fingerprints to access the medication machine to pull medications for each patient. And at another place, our ID tags are scanned at every doorway we cross so that they know exactly where we are at all times or if we exit the building. I am not saying whether this is right or wrong or if i agree or disagree with it. Just wanted to make you aware that it is probably coming to other occupations as well.

[Valorie]

I would have to be suspicious of anyone in "law enforcement" gathering personal identification data in a routine traffic-related stop.The claim that this expensive experiment in data collection was not going to be stored makes the "experiment" seem foolish. Do any of we adults really believe the data is not being at least "evaluated", as a crude study of some sort?
Sooooo, tell me Officer, how do you plan to dispose of those so-called accurate identity indicators, my personal fingerprints?!?!

[jp]

To Big Al who called me and several others idiots...oh well...at least I won't feed your psychosis! It's obvious your overly paranoid. Maybe you need you medication dosage adjusted. I'm not worried about losing my "civil liberties" by allowing someone to identify who I am.

Here's another one for you...You're the bigot for even suggesting that because we freely express our OPINIONS that we are Nazis! A right, I might add, that I and I'm sure numerous others here have fought for so that you can express yourself the way you choose. You just choose to be nasty about it. A good thing you can hide out in this blog because I guarantee you wouldn't have the "cajones" to say anything like that to my face. (An American who has every right to express himself as you do!)

IP I Agree with you 100%

[jp]

Hi Valorie,
What makes you think when you're pulled over by an officer or stopped by an officer who requests your name that they're not trying to gather personal infomation data to try and accurately identify you? Besides, when a police officer asks you for your ID you are REQUIRED to provide it.

The means to ID you in a fingerprint database already exists with the KBI and FBI as long as you're in the database.

The police have had the ability to ID you from the fingerprint database for some time. This just gives them the ability to do it remotely without having to take you to the police station or jail in order to do it. As I said previously, I believe this is a useful tool for law enforcement but I don't think a traffic stop warrants a fingerprint check as long as you provide the officer other means of "valid" identification.

But others pose a good question. It's just another means of identification. What are you really afraid of?

[mojo]

This is a fingerprint SCANNER, it is not a fingerprint taking machine. If you have not already been fingerprinted at a police station, it won't be able to tell who you are.

[ron]

ip, what the hell are you ,bush's add campaign writer? i am so sick of the BS excuse of we have to protect ourselves from terrorists. and like i said if the government was so worried about the damn terrorists it would be going after osama and not protecting iraqi oil fields. its sheep like you who got the worst president in history reelected.

for those of you saying "i have nothing to hide" -you are completely missing the point. they keep passing these laws hoping they get that exact response from the public.

Mojo-

You really think that they, the police, are going to despose of your finger print along with your information if they dont have you in their files already?

Are we all supossed to believe that the police are going to delete any of the finger prints taken?

No way! If you get pulled over and they dont have your finger print in the system you better believe that they will take your information and match it up to the fingerprint scanned on sight. If you really think that they wont you are living life with your head in the sand.

[ciajoe]

BEING FINGER PRINTED AT THE BANK

I would think it would be unconstitutional for any party to have to give his/her finger prints when attempting to cash a check at a bank.

The two times I've encoutered it, I felt like a criminal.

[Jake]

Ahhhh another disenchanted (Ron) liberal; you just don't get the mechanics of the "fingerprint identifcation machine." Don't worry, the machine cannot distinguish liberal from conservative....you're safe!!!

A brief scan of these posts leads a reasonable person to believe that many deadbeats on this site don't like authority. They want the cops around when they are in dire need of something but when everythings ok they want the cops to beat it! What a bunch of pukes.

Can't please everyone all the time! How that for summing up this stupid thread. Give your fingerprints or go to jail. Hows that!

[Rick]

I am amazed after reading through these blogs, the amount of fear that is coming from those who think they are losing their "Civil Liberties". I have never heard of so much self-centeredness in one place before. You are more concerned about "YOU" not being finger printed than giving the police the tools they need to help get the criminals off of the street. You are the same people who grip and complain when the police are not doing the job you think they should be doing in getting these people off of the street. I have never understood this mentality of people wanting the police to do their job and expect them to do it with their hands tied behind their backs.
I served my country too, and the last time I checked, Our freedom did not come free and it still doesn't.

Sounds like too many people on this blog nursed their mommy too long! Either that or they didn't get their butt spanked when they were a kid. Or they didn't have a father figure in their life.

The problem is most of these people don't know what its like to serve their county, their city or do anything for another person. They were born with a silver spoon in their mouth or food stamps in the mail box and don't know what its like to have to work for something. Their freedom is something the take for granted, now and always!

BEING FINGER PRINTED AT THE BANK

"I would think it would be unconstitutional for any party to have to give his/her finger prints when attempting to cash a check at a bank.

The two times I've encoutered it, I felt like a criminal."

Did you feel violated! Go live in another county then! This is the United States and this is reality.

[akakafka]

While i'm sure there are "black helicopter" believers in the Civil Libertarian crowd ... most are looking out for future generations. We don't believe the abuse will be widespread this week, or next, or even next year ... the concern is down the line.
Someone above spoke of Libertarian selfishnes. Au contraire ... the selfish party is the one that gives up rights for all future generations so that they can feel safer now.
Once we citizens give up a right (or conceed that we do not have a certain right in the first place), we never (or only very very rarely) get it back.

[Patriot]

Perhaps those that think it is always okay to go along with whatever government wants to do, should just give your fingerprint and volunteer for the mark on your right hand or forehead. You will make an excellent slave. May your chains lay lightly upon you, for your future is not good. You do your country a great disservice when you act in such a way.

For those that cherish their freedom (rights which come from God, some of which are listed in the Constitution) and are of the same mind as the founders of this nation, you have placed yourselves in good company and a rich heritage. You have many friends and we are proud to be counted with you as our fellow countrymen/women. Stand strong and fear not, for those that give up freedom for security or safety, will have neither.

"Au contraire"

Why don't we have all american vote on democracy or anarchy. Lets try anarchy for a while and see how these non-police, I'm violated, unconstitutional, silver spoons like it without the police for a day, week, or month. They'll be crying to have the police back. Why because they'll be victims.

[Rick]

Patriot,
You stated "rights which come from God, some of which are listed in the Constitution". I am a born again Christian and I don't remember reading in my Bible where God gave us rights. He gave us promises with conditions and free will to choose to or choose not to do them, but I am drawing a blank on the "rights" bit. Can enlighten me as to where you found this in the Bible?

You have the right to refuse to give your fingerprints, so refuse and then watch the cops hold you down and take them once you get to the jail. If you're all so concerned why aren't you complaining to the people making and passing the laws you feel uncomfortable with?

[Hakee]

Hi ! Your site is very interesting. Thank you.

[Ricko]

Wireless Headphones