Traffic cops in KS will start fingerprinting motorists

[proud2BlibKansan]

Pulled over in Kansas? Get ready to show your license, registration — and fingerprints

By BENITA Y. WILLIAMS
The Kansas City Star
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.”

more . . .
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/14155275.htm

[MadMaddie]

1. So if you get pulled over for a minor traffic stop they are going to

print you.....this is scary!!

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Sucks, doesn't it?

[CrazyOrangeCat]

2. I've never been fingerprinted in my life.

I can see a move to Rhode Island coming in my future. The Midwest is getting more neandrethal every day. sigh.

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. I was for the first time at a bank a year or so ago

[msongs]

17. a bank tried that on us, here is what we did....

went to cash a check a neighbor gave us. the bank said they wouldn't cash it unless we gave finger prints.
we tore up the check at the cashier window and told the neighbor he had to pay cash. and he did.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/impeachbush.htm

[Lerkfish]

50. We were fingerprinted when we tried to adopt.

they did it in the police station. Very scary, though understandable

[kestrel91316]

61. I had to submit fingerprints to get licensed to practice veterinary

medicine in CA. I think maybe all the states do it? But to print casual traffic stops, like a taillight out??????

I want my country back.

Time to get one of those Guy Fawkes masks and start putting the circled V on all the money, folks.

[Lerkfish]

63. right. I'm not supporting this, its facsism, I was just trying to say its

scary to be fingerprinted, EVEN IF its for a good reason. How much MORE scarier it would be for this non-reason.

[BlueEyedSon]

Civil liberties violation?

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. I would think so

but I am also willing to bet this is something that is now allowed in The Patriot Act.

[BlueEyedSon]

12. DOH! (headsmack)

[jukes]

18. technically

a traffic citation is an arrest, and the officer is releasing you on your own recognizance; hence, signing the ticket as a "promise to appear".

taking fingerprints of an arrested subject is common practice & i think this will be allowed by the courts.

[BlueEyedSon]

22. wow, nerver realized it was an "arrest"

[jukes]

30. it is

by "broad" definition. the subject is "detained" for the period of time taken to write the ticket. it's considered "limited" by the courts; "search incident to a lawful arrest" does NOT apply for a traffic citation stop, & the courts MAY decide this falls outside the framework of what's reasonable for these "limited" arrest situations.

[400Years]

31. the justifiers always crawl out of the woodwork

every time another brick in the wall is laid there is somebody here who pops up and says something like "Well, this is reasonable because blah blah blah"

[BlueEyedSon]

35. Describing the legal technicality of it is not necessarily defending the

"reasonableness" of it!

just MHO

[jukes]

42. thank you!

my intent WAS merely to inform, not critique.

personally (& i'm a retired cop) i think there's FAR too much power in the hands of the police these days, & far too little discretion in hiring them.

[jukes]

41. i haven't justified shit

did you read any personal opinion in that post? if you did, you're trying WAY too hard.

i merely explained the way the system works. since i was gestapo for 20 wasted years, i thought i might be able to add a perspective on the way things are headed.

negativity and presumption is why i haven't posted in a long time. things don't change much, do they?

i suggest you not run for "final arbiter of proper posts."

and have a nice, sanctimonious fucking day!

[BlooInBloo]

48. I'm with ya! Facts be damned!!!

Let truthiness ring!

:rofl:

[jukes]

51. facts

can keep your dumb ass out of the joint. the MAN isn't your friend, & cares fuck-all about "truthiness". he's just looking for a way to stifle dissent and pursue his own personal agenda.

learn facts & stay safe until things change, or until you can escape this fucked-up country.

[Catrina]

38. I think a traffic stop where a ticket is issued is a charge.

The ticket only means that an officer is charging a driver with a violation, probably a misdeamor most of the time. Finger-printing is only allowed after an arrest. I have never heard a traffic stop called an arrest before. It is a detainment for as long as it takes for the officer to write or not write a ticket. Sometimes such a stop ends with no charge, or a warning.

This is how it happens, a little bit at a time, one more line crossed with 'logical' arguments offered to justify each new, unnecessary violation of civil liberties. The fact that there is no outrage over this yet, shows how conditioned we already are by the previous little steps.

[jukes]

44. cop-school

the act of detaining a person, even for that short of an interval, is legally an arrest. try to walk away, or start your car up & drive away.

[Catrina]

62. True, I have never tried to walk away nor has anyone I know, but that's

what I would do if anyone stopped me to ask a question, so I never thought of it as an arrest. Thanks for sharing your knowledge ~

I think far too much power has been given to the police. They work for the people, that's who pays their salary. They should be reminded of that often. If there were not cars most of us would probably have very little interaction with the police ~ and they really should be way more involved with the people they serve. They should get to know people. They are far too isolated and seem to have an 'us against them' attitude these days.

I read your above posts and agree with you ~ I hope your time wasn't wasted, you sound like the kind of person who should be a police officer. I know it's a difficult job and dangerous, but the vast majority of people are not criminals and many of us grew up respecting the police. It's getting more and more difficult to that ~

[TX-RAT]

65. try to walk away,

Ya beat me to it.

Around here it's called custodial custody.

[slaveplanet]

59. You are exactly right

about the detainment.

Many citizens fail to understand what is exactly going on in a traffic stop.

It is most civilians' only interaction with the government. The officer is an employee of the agency and is coming at you with full force. If you do not initiate and ask if you're under a state of detention, the officer will proceed under the assumption that you are in the state of detention and proceed without informing you of your rights guaranteed under the 5th amendment against self incrimination.
He is allowed use banter and a friendly attitude, but by all means he is not your friend, he is always coming with as much force as is necessary to establish control and gather evidence in the situation.

The force starts the moment the uniform is put on.
and ends with your death if need be.

This can actually apply to other agency employees as well...even the dog catcher, paramedics, fire inspector, building inspector, etc... but physical altercation or death won't be justified unless a supporting law enforcement official is summoned and en route. But they are also coming at you with force.

[misternormal]

33. Actually is it a summons... and you can refuse to sign... n/t

[BlueEyedSon]

36. then they get the cuffs out, or what?

[400Years]

37. someone has to challenge it and often that involves

being arrested so that it will be taken to court.

[jukes]

52. i agree, 400Years

but some understanding of the machine is necessary.

refusing to allow the officer to 'print you on-sight will probably result in an "actual" arrest, and you will be taken to the station, booked, & fingerprinted.

any courtcase will be to determine whether the actual traffic offense occured, not whether the on-scene fingerprinting was a violation of your civil rights.

lower courts tend to give "carte blanche" to police in these matters. a lawyer MIGHT be able to 'suade the court, but that's VERY expensive, & may not avail in any case.

IF the charges are deemed to be valid, THEN you can appeal on the basis of a civil-rights violation, but the appeals court may well decide that, since the issue of fingerprinting was NOT a factor in your conviction for a traffic violation, the appeals court has no jurisdiction. again, you're facing extensive legal fees, unless you can interest the ACLU, Southern Poverty Law Centere, or some other "pro bono" organization to try the case gratis.

the ONLY time that the appeals court wd HAVE to render a verdict is if you were charged for some crime base SOLELY on the fingerprint evidence, in which case your appeal wd only have merit IF you were fingerprinted @ the scene. failure to cooperate & subsequently being arrested wd generate booking-procedure fingerprinting, & there's tons of precedent to justify that scenario. so you MUST submit in order to have an appealable issue.


MY APOLOGIES IF THIS SEEMS CONVOLUTED, BUT THE LAW IS NOT GEARED TO PROTECTING ANY BUT THE RICHEST OF US. PLEASE DO NOT TAKE ANY OF THIS MISSIVE TO MEAN THAT I APPROVE OF ON-SCENE FINGERPRINTING, I AM MERELY EXPLAINING THE MECHANICS OF THE SYSTEM LEST SOME OF US MISS_STEP & PAY AN UNWITTING PENALTY.

oh, and any1 stupid enough to think i'm a troll or an apologist can kiss my streisand collecting, fonda-revering, socialist ASS!

[Iowa]

57. Hey jukes, you're clearly NOT an apologist...

Good posts, and thanks for the info. I'd like to pick your brain a bit more if you're still following this thread.

This reminds my of the NYPD Blue episode where Andy Sipowitz went to bat for his son to keep him out of the system. As a cop, (or if anyone else who wants to comment) maybe you can clarify something for me... What are the reasons one would not want their prints in the system? These are my assumptions:

Assumption 1: It increases the chances of being accused of a crime you didn't commit. Example: you buy gas at a Quick-Trip and 5 minutes after you leave, someone holds up the place - and your prints are on the counter. Your prints are processed and the police show up at your door and haul you away. If they don't have your prints, the likelihood of this type of thing is decreased. Is that an accurate assumption?

Assumption 2: The govt. can track your whereabouts. Example: Our government turns on the people and imprisons dissidents. Everyone posting on DU is on their wanted list and we all go into hiding. But an explosion in the use of taking prints could make it almost impossible to disappear. They can track your whereabouts and scoop you up in a blink.

Are there other reasons one would not want their prints on file? Also, is it correct to assume that once your prints are on file they'll be there indefinitely (no requirements to purge once the fine has been paid?).

[jukes]

43. yes, you can refuse to sign

and the "courtesy" of the summons will be revoked & you will be arrested, booked, & fingerprinted, at the officer's discretion.

the "paper" is a summons, the "stop" is, none-the-less, viewed by the court as an arrest.

[Gormy Cuss]

55. Missing from the article is any mention whether it's done after citation

Wanna bet the cops will print first, cite later?
The potential for abuse is enormous.

[ThomCat]

67. I preduct and ACLU lawsuit in the near future.

There is no way this can be legal.

[Cyrano]

3. Fascism is on the march. Goose stepping every inch of the way.

I can hear it already. "Why care if they fingerprint you if you haven't done anything?" Anyone who can't figure out the answer to that question is helping to drive one more nail into democracy's coffin.

[Nikki Stone 1]

11. Exactly. Every day we get further and further into mass servitude

nt

[nonconformist]

7. Oh fuck that.

They would HAVE to take me to the police station, because I would never consent to that.

[truebrit71]

39. Me either...I don't fucking think so....

Want my prints? Arrest me for refusing m****f*** and prepare to get sued into a job working security at Wally-Mart...

[xultar]

8. I would reach in my nose and pull out a green hairy one just before

the ink goes on.

[MADem]

10. They're probably going to use the digital system

No ink needed--just stick your hand on the glass.

It does suck. And what happens if there's no crime? Do the prints get dumped, or do they get stowed in a gub-mint data base?????

[proud2BlibKansan]

15. Yes it is some kind of electronic system

[xultar]

26. Better yet then they'll have to scrape my booger off the glass!

[Gormy Cuss]

9. So, all those broken tail light stops...

I predict stops for DWB will go way up.


But I have nothing to hide, so why not?
:sarcasm:

[converted_democrat]

13. Finger printing in KS, arresting people for public intoxication INSIDE of

bars in TX, how much farther is this going to go before the people say enough?

[proud2BlibKansan]

19. I wish I knew the answer to that

[kath]

14. In OK, they take prints of both index fingers when you get a driver's l

license. Digital prints of two fingers, plus a digital picture of you using that facial recognition software.

Helloooo, Big Brother! oh, but wait, they say they are doing this for our PROTECTION, to protect us from identity theft.

Uggghhh.

[proud2BlibKansan]

20. They are going to do prints of both index fingers

[acmejack]

23. They put paper strips on commode seats for your protection

This is for their data base. If you aren't prepared to fight, take flight. Now, because soon it will be too late, the new AmeriKa is damn near here. With Diebold I can see it now-Sam Brownback in a landslide!

[msongs]

16. Kansas - more science book burning creationists fascism eh? nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. This has nothing to do with creationism

Fascism I will go along with though.

[BushOut06]

64. Careful there, I had a thread locked for picking on Kansas

You're not allowed to say bad things about states.

[rodeodance]

24. they tried that in Green bay, WI--but there was an uproar. Not doing it no

w as far as I know.

[pitohui]

25. i hate to say it but i'm about ready to support this

too many cases now of identity thieves who also got your license getting someone else in trouble

i think it most happens w. family members, for instance, i know of a brother arrested in nevada, gave his brother's id, somehow they didn't get his fingerprints, and then the second brother ends up being the one in jail on the bench warrant when the fine is not paid, by then, the cop sees a million faces and doesn't know who he issued the ticket to


it can get ugly when you have a drug addict in your family who has no conscience abt helping himself to your id and vehicle

[400Years]

32. bend over, here comes the anal probe for your protection

[Catrina]

40. So, because of one incident you know of, you're willing to throw away

all of our rights to be protected from 'unreasonable searches' (you know, that old 4th Amendment the Founding Fathers thought was so important). They certainly were aware of the fact that there would be a few incidences along the way that would be unfortunate, but fixable. What you CAN'T fix is giving up your rights to the government.

For the most part this doesn't happen. We can't fix every, little 'problem' with more laws, and more laws. Of course a fascist state is happy when they get citizens to willingly try to do so. This country is so full of wimps who have no idea how dangerous all this is, it's a dictator's dream come true.

We can fight this ~ write letters and let them hear some outrage, which there should be each time they try a new way to violate the constitutionally guaranteed freedoms we supposedly have. One day soon, and it's getting there, it will be too late. Prevention is better than cure ~

[Feron]

56. On the flip side..

your fingerprints end up in a database and you are wrongly fingered ,no pun intended, as a suspect in a crime you didn't commit.

After the terrorist bombing in Spain, the FBI discovered that the fingerprint of an ex-military man was similar to the one lifted from the crime scene. The man was fingerprinted when he joined the service. Since the man in question is Muslim and married to an Egyptian woman, they figured he fit a profile and hauled him off to jail even though the prints didn't match and the man is innocent. Eventually he proved his innocence and was released.

Even if you can prove your innocence, it can be costly and take time. Not to mention that your reputation likely will be ruined because they media rarely picks up exoneration stories. Then there are people like the Anthrax suspect that are never charged ,but harassed anyway.

Your fingerprint is not necessary for a traffic ticket and can be faked. Nothing is foolproof. And the more information the authorities have, the more likely a mistake will be made and the potential for abuse grows. That is why there are procedures in place to make sure that the data collected is necessary and on the up and up.

I hate to be cliched and pull the obligatory Ben Franklin quote, but it certainly applies here.

The Nevada police are at fault in your brother's case. I have an addict in my family and I don't see how this would stop him in his endeavors. It's also a good idea to keep your personal papers private and away from someone untrustworthy.

[LuCifer]

27. POLICE STATE, ANYONE?!?!?

You have GOT to kidding me, right?!?!?!?!? So, other than helping this already way screwed up country become and even more intrusive police state, WHAT THE HELL DOES THIS ACCOMPLISH?! Oh yeah, NOTHING!

[proud2BlibKansan]

28. see post #25

[DrGonzoLives]

29. Fuck that

They'll haul my ass to jail first.

[lonestarnot]

34. Stay the fuck out of Kansas Dorothy!

[proud2BlibKansan]

53. Does that mean you won't be coming to visit me??

LOL

[pinniped]

45. The plan is almost complete.

All they have to do is stop every car at the sobriety checkpoints and every driver/passenger will be at their mercy.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

46. The devices have existed for a long time

I know, I've seen them in action. As far as I know, they've never been used in the indiscriminate way that the fucktards in Kansas want to use them.

I have heard of them being used to track gang members in some cities. We're only pissed now because they're going to start using them on us middle-class white folk.

[MadHound]

47. And sadly, it looks like this POS procedure will go nationwide

"State officials said similar tests are being planned for New York, Milwaukee and Hawaii" This is how a lot of police procedures start, in just a few locations, followed by a few more, then a few more, etc. etc., until the whole country is doing it.

So don't laugh too hard at Kansas, your jurisdiction could very well be next.

[proud2BlibKansan]

54. My thoughts exactly

[Lerkfish]

49. Is it fascism yet? 'Papers! ve vill be seeing your paper!"

[truebrit71]

58. Um, isn't a drivers license enough identification?

When you get pulled over don't they already run that through their computer? Why would they need your fingerprints unless thay were collecting them for some other purpose?

In a traffic stop a drivers license is more than sufficient ID. This is in direct violation of the 4th amendment and constitutes an illegal search. What's next, retinal scans?

Fuck that...

[Joe Fields]

60. It won't be long before random stops, or even...

DWI style roadblocks. Possibly, within my lifetime we will need to produce papers to prove we have the consent to travel where we tell big brother we are travelling to.

[suegeo]

66. Sieg Heil! Here are my papers, dear leader.

What else can I do to please my feudal lord?