User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:07:12 PM EDT
[#1]
The Feds don't destroy fingerprint records for any group which includes former military and civil service personnel.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:09:53 PM EDT
[#2]
depends
If the charges are completely bogus (say an ex files a complaint to get the other in trouble, the scam is discovered, and everything is ok) then yes, they should be out of the system. If it's something here, say, someone is investigated but they don't have enough to charge, but the case is still open, then no, they should stay on file. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:12:03 PM EDT
[#3]
They submitted to being fingerprinted voluntarily. But, since you brought that point up, should those records be destroyed once the person leaves the military or civil service? Why should thier fingerprint records be retained? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:14:40 PM EDT
[#4]
Heheheh. Fat chance.
The .gov wants every bit of information on you possible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:24:37 PM EDT
[#5]
I don't see any reason .gov should be allowed to keep records on someone who's been found not guilty or had the charges dropped. here in NY your records are destroyed when you are acquitted, but only upon request. At least thats what they claim happens.
-K |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:25:17 PM EDT
[#6]
What is the big deal about them having your fingerprints in the first place? I am not trying to be confrontational. I just want to know why people on arf.com seem to think it is such a bad thing for .gov to have your prints?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:26:06 PM EDT
[#7]
Exactly. Should? Absolutely. Does/will it happen? Riiiiiight. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:27:02 PM EDT
[#8]
Should be, but wont. Theyve got my prints and my DNA, enough to get me anywhere I go if I leave anything behind. Of course they need a crime first, which they wont find.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:28:51 PM EDT
[#9]
Justify why they need them. (When you are innocent of charges brought against you) |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:33:04 PM EDT
[#10]
Well have dead bodies ever been identified by prints? Have people been arrested because they were stupid enough to leave prints behind? Those seem like good reasons to me. Just because you are innocent of those charges does not mean you are innocent of others. They have used DNA to link crimes all across the US or add charges to rapists. If they did not keep these records they would not be able to link the crimes. Is that bad? I am just trying to learn here not be an asshole. What is bad about it? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:40:51 PM EDT
[#11]
They are very handy for identifying bodies. They are also very handy for proving you did NOT do a crime.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:42:30 PM EDT
[#12]
A not guilty verdict does not mean the jury believed the person was innocent. It means they believe the prosecution did not prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt. That is all.
Cases are dismissed all of the time without the cause being belief or evidence of innocence. There is a procedure for erasing evidence of an arrest that resulted in an aquittal or dismissal of charges though, and in Texas we call it an Expunction. It must be sought out by the person arrested. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:43:37 PM EDT
[#13]
They eventually become historical records. The records will still be there 200 years from now when your descendants do their family history search. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 3:46:05 PM EDT
[#14]
My fingerprints are in so many different files with so many different agencies, if I were to commit a crime and leave prints behind they'd probably be waiting for me when I got home.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 4:16:35 PM EDT
[#15]
Me too. My government employment files are deep in a old salt mine in Boyers, PA, but depending on the type of record and age, the government has stuff stashed all over the place. Lots of stuff in St. Louis. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 5:18:48 PM EDT
[#16]
So, a fingerprint card in the safekeeping of your attorney with your will and trust records would serve the purpose just fine, without the government needing to have their greasy, fat little fingers in your personal information? jim |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 6:56:28 PM EDT
[#17]
If you have been arrested once, there is about a 90% chance you will be back. If you get a CCW, teaching certificate, government background check or bonded you give prints. If you join the military you get printed. They have prints on more people than you think. At this point, bitching about prints is something criminals do.
My problem is when they release them over the internet for any asshole to search through. They are doing it with cell phone and private information. Any freak can access your life for 90 dollars, that is a REAL problem. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 7:04:56 PM EDT
[#18]
Well, if it's bullshit charges brought about like by an angry ex, then yes, they should be destroyed.
The other situations are less clear. If for instance, he were acquitted in a court of law by evidence that clears him, then yes. However, if the acquittal results from lack of evidence proving his guilt.... then who knows. THAT is why I'm really pissed off at the CA gov, and especially at the UCLA Bruin Republicans. In the '04 election, the sheeple passed a DNA collecting proposition. ANY arrest for ANY reason leads the cops to taking a sample of your DNA and running it through the crime database. The DNA sample REMAINS in the database, even if you are cleared of any wrongdoing. It's a slippery slope that leads to EVERYONE being in the database. Why the anger with the Bruin Republicans? These 'tards SUPPORTED it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 7:05:16 PM EDT
[#19]
where does this number come from? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 7:06:31 PM EDT
[#20]
I said no, but my no is not a hardline no. I believe that certian reasons for being fingerprinted should be destroyed after their need expires. However, other's should never be destroyed. Anyone involved/suspected in drug trafficing/murder/rape/etc, or ex-con's should be kept indefinatly. However, I have fingerprints on file in so many places it's pointless for me to care any more. Military, police academy, CCW app (wyo and FLA), etc. In my case, it wouldn't matter because of the reasons I was printed.
I don't really see why having a set of prints is bad for you..........if you aren't going to/or have committed a crime. If you didn't do anything to warrent your prints being sent through the system, why should you care? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2006 11:53:48 PM EDT
[#21]
No but the Feds should keep them on file with what the actual conviction is if any .
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2006 12:55:13 AM EDT
[#22]
If the charges get dropped whats the big deal. If they have your prints then they can exclude you with out interupting your Medal of Honor online tourny. Get over it......And move on.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2006 1:07:26 AM EDT
[#23]
fingerprints no big deal, unless later on your planning the big caper lol
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2006 1:38:24 AM EDT
[#24]
Hell no, in the UK we already have the DNA of something like 5% of the population on file. It's taken (by force where necessary) in most arrests.
They dont have to dstroy it, even if you were never charged, similarly if you "volunteer" to donate DNA to rule you _out_ of a rape invsetigation, that gets kept too. Bugger that for a game of soldiers. Oh, and now the police powers of arrest have extended to minor offences that previously they weren't able to bef.re As it stands the charge has to be worth more than five years (without a warrant anyway). now you acn get arrested and have your DNA taken by force for... littering, and graffitti. *Tightens tin foil hat* /PHil |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2006 2:36:59 AM EDT
[#25]
His ass. I was arrested once for obstruction of justice (BS faggot ass cop), and then joined the service, and haven't been arrested for anything since. I've gotten a few tickets, but no 'criminal activity'. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2006 2:59:27 AM EDT
[#26]
So according to the voting...
If some turd gets arrested on 5 separate occassions but the charges are dropped (witness doesn't show to court, victim doesn't show to court, cop fails to show for court, etc) his fingerprint records should be destroyed? Using this logic I hope none of you are ever a victim of a crime. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2006 7:24:27 AM EDT
[#27]
So. EVERYONE ever fingerprinted is going to have to keep an attorney on retainer? The govt is also going to have to keep a national list of those same attorneys and whose fingerprints they have? What happens when the attorney dies/retires/moves? How does one find the attorney with the fingerprints when you have an unidentified body? You guys are so damn funny sometimes. 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2006 7:32:08 AM EDT
[#28]
Recidivism rates are VERY high though. I don't think his numbers are far off. You are most likely the exception to the rule. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2006 6:29:42 PM EDT
[#29]
|
||||
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
