Obama wants National Fingerprint registry

[PocketProtector]

http://blog.heritage.org/2008/06/09/...rint-registry/

[sjl127]

Now we're all criminals unless proven otherwise.

[Tootie]

They've had my fingerprints on file for years now. I was bonded when I worked at a bank.

From what I got out of it only people that work at mortgage or real estate companies will be fingerprinted not everyone. Or am I wrong in my assessment?

[D-FENS]

From what I got out of it only people that work at mortgage or real estate companies will be fingerprinted not everyone. Or am I wrong in my assessment?

Should it matter?

What about people that work for Universities that receive Federal funding? What about people that work for State Gov't? What about anyone receiving Federal funds?

How about just gun owners?

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

[Tootie]

Yeah but what about people that work in banks? Do we repel the rules that they fingerprint their employees?

I get your point, I really do, what I'm saying is if you are in charge of someone else's money whether on paper or in reality should not the person that is doing so be checked to make sure they are not a person with a criminal history? Maybe I'm completely wrong here in my assessment, are they talking about bonding these people or just taking their fingerprints for record? If the latter then yes I don't agree with it, but if it for security purposes like bonding then I really don't see anything wrong.

[Pa. Patriot]

Scary... I think we will need a new bumper sticker for this...

They can have my fingerprints when they lift them from the gun that they pry from my cold dead hands!

[D-FENS]

Yeah but what about people that work in banks? Do we repel the rules that they fingerprint their employees?

I get your point, I really do, what I'm saying is if you are in charge of someone else's money whether on paper or in reality should not the person that is doing so be checked to make sure they are not a person with a criminal history? Maybe I'm completely wrong here in my assessment, are they talking about bonding these people or just taking their fingerprints for record? If the latter then yes I don't agree with it, but if it for security purposes like bonding then I really don't see anything wrong.

Private companies can do what they like and people can choose to work for them or not or deal with the company or not. It's a whole other story when we're talking about Federal mandates. It's one thing for my employer to ask for my prints. It's another for the Federal Gov't to mandate I provide prints.

My question is how is this not a violation of rights? Is a blanket mandate for prints from any or all industries not a violation of privacy, or due process? Your prints will be searched repeatedly. Does it make a difference if it's your finger prints or your house or your car? What about a brain scan? While we may not be there yet, we're certainly getting closer. Would it not be an infringement of your rights to have a mandatory brain scan or polygraph?

Like I said, it's one thing when a private company does it. Personally, I refuse and have refused employment based upon drug testing, polygraphs, finger-printing and other reasons. Fortunately I am able to pick my employer. But when there's a Federal mandate to forfeit your rights based upon Industry Employment, that's really friggin scary.

As for whether it's a good idea to know if the people handling your money are criminals. Well, I leave that to the company which I trust to hold my money. I go by their reputation and history. As a consumer, I make the choice of who I let hold my money. That's my responsibility. Should we finger print cashiers and waitstaff because they run off with an AMEX after dinner? Don't they have the opportunity to be just as corrupt as a banker or mortgage broker? What about corporate CEO's that have billions of people's retirement invested in their company?

As a final thought, all rights and privacy infractions aside, what use is this going to be? This isn't a background check of these employees (which their employers can do), it's a database of personal data that will be held to scrutiny after every single crime.

Allow me to present an example. Say you work in a mortgage firm. You pickup a guy or girl after a night of drinking and go back to their place for a while. 6 months later that guy or girl ends up dead and their apartment is dusted down and your prints are found. You are flagged as a match for your print and automatically escalated to suspect status. Nevermind that there's no motive. Nevermind that you may or may not even remember this person or when you stopped by their place. All that matters is that your fingerprint was found at their place and you're on file because of your job. Not because of criminal conviction in the past, not because of any other reason than going to someone's house and working at a bank. Now, you get to explain to the police, DA, judge and jury why you were flagged...

[CarolinaGuy]

1) This is proposed for mortgage/real estate professionals.
2) It enjoys bipartisan support.
3) Compared to the "Patriot Act", this isn't jack shit.

Republican Mel Martinez co-AUTHORED the bill..why isn't he listed as evil, or mentioned in the subject line?

[D-FENS]

Republican Mel Martinez co-AUTHORED the bill..why isn't he listed as evil, or mentioned in the subject line?

Because he isn't running for President.

[CarolinaGuy]

Because he isn't running for President.

Ok, so Obama backs a GOP co-written bill, supported by the GOP... and is evil.

Gotcha.

Sounds a little like calling up the fat girl the night before the prom to me.