I was thinking about how the police always gather fingerprints from a crime-scene and then need to find suspects and obtain their prints so they can match the two. But sometimes there isn't a suspect who matches those found at the scene. So isn't it possible for there to be a law which requires every U.S. citizen to have their fingerprints taken and stored on a database, so that why if there is a crime with fingerprints there wouldn't be a need for suspects since every person's prints have already been taken...it's just a matter then of having the computers match the prints. It would have to be mandatory though, like how we have to have immunizations.
2007-01-01 05:04:55 · 24 answers · asked by Snicker_Doodle8 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
Why are most people claiming their freedom is prohibited and it's an invasion of privacy to have their fingerprints stored somewhere? What exactly is the problem with it? Everyone just is saying "It's against the constitution. It's communist. I want my privacy." So someone with this mentality, please give me a reason on how the negative consequences of this action outweigh the positive results that it could bring.
2007-01-01 05:16:02 · update #1
The government actually has a lot more info on you then you care to know. Big brother has been watching you for a lon long time. They do already have a huge database of DNA and fingerprints stored, A lot of them have been since you were born. You just did not know this.
I agree fully that crimes need to be solved and those responsible put away. But it this done at the cost of everyone losing there freedom and privacy. Our government has done this since 9/11. Also keep in mind that fingerprints don't mean you did the crime. We already have a lot of people sitting in prisons who years later were found not guilty by DNA. Yet fingerprints said they were there. Being there and commitng the crime are two different things.
2007-01-01 05:16:45 · answer #1 · answered by logan 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
This will be addressed when by the end of '08. All states are going to be required to meet federal criteria for information on Driver's Licenses. One of those requirements will be to have your fingerprint on the card. When you do your fingerprints at the DMV, they will be stored in a database.
it really isn't an invasion of privacy, so I don't know why people are getting all worked up. If you never commit a crime, why would anyone care if the government had your fingerprint on file? With computers these days, if you havea driver's license picture, I guarantee that those pictures are also stored somewhere.
Too many conspiracy theorists out there worried about too much.
2007-01-01 08:52:34 · answer #2 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The trouble with that is, not everyone would comply, which is why a ton of felons are still carrying guns when they're prohibited by federal law.
Just an fyi, if you took your immunization setting, that's for children to enter school, and child's fingerprints would not be accurate 20 years from now when they committed a crime as an adult. Also many many parents in this country do not immunize their children for a lot of reasons.. :)
2007-01-01 07:15:59 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
the idea would help to solve crime yes.
the giving up of more of out personal private identity is not a good thing. i figure you know about DNA finger prints well if we went your route that would follow. then after that maybe even more intrusion into the life's of us all say standard voice print copies and then after that constant phone monitoring and matching of voice prints .
nope we have to draw a line and i think it should be here well really it should have been done years ago and set in stone but here will work let us set in stone the limit to our personal identity
the one guy who said that finger print matching is not like csi on tv is very right about that . a computer can take a general sort of comparison of a type of print and narrow it down that much but
a real person has to sit there and work at the job of making a match just like they did before we had computers. it is a slow difficult process and it is said to be exact but there is still such a human element to the search and the matcing that mistakes will happen and the cost will be and is very great .
2007-01-01 05:17:59 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Don't they already take fingerprints of everyone who might be considered a suspect when there are incriminating prints involved? Searching such a large database would be a serious technical challenge... Real computers are a litter slower than SCI programs on TV tend to imply.
Furthermore I totaly agree with what the Sprite guy is saying...
2007-01-01 05:11:48 · answer #5 · answered by mu5himo 1 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Whoa Dude! So the law has my prints on file. I am a repairman who was out to fix something in your house last week. OOOps you were robbed last night. The law finds My prints...get the picture ?? Now I need to be put through the wringer, time off work, run the media gauntlet , pay for a lawyer, be off work because I am a bonded employee etc... See ?
2007-01-01 17:15:41 · answer #6 · answered by ibeboatin 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Too much drama with Civil Rights groups. That is what we do with people who commit crimes, get different types of licenses and such. It is also branching out into DNA samples now. It is not practical to do every one in the world so we do the ones that need to be done at the time they need to and the database is building........................
2007-01-01 05:08:18 · answer #7 · answered by gunsmoke_70 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Man screw that idea. Not only would it go against our Constitution and as a free nation, But it would also be unethical from the judicial side of it as well. If you want to live in a George Orwell state might I suggest you move to the soviet union or some other commusit nation. I value my freedoms here and do not need nor deserve big brother!
2007-01-01 05:08:46 · answer #8 · answered by Biker 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
You are just another person who wants our country to become like all the others. Get a grip and be proud that we have some rights left. I'm not for crime at all. But, damn, what are you going to want next? Swab everybody for there DNA? I'm 51 and have lived and seen things that of coarse the younger people haven't. Instead of screaming for our rights to taken away, maybe you should scream------------ we want our rights that we are entitled too, bottom line..................
Why won't people stand up for your rights are you to afraid, have they brainwashed you enough? At least think for yourself!
2007-01-01 07:25:40 · answer #9 · answered by docie555@yahoo.com 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Also, let's take DNA samples, all be microchipped, required to phone in your whereabouts to your local police station on a regular basis (which must match your GPS location), register your shopping lists so nothing subversive is being sold to you...
How far are you people who believe everyone's a criminal prepared to go to fulfill your paranoia?
2007-01-01 07:55:08 · answer #10 · answered by The Twist 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋