fingerprints to drive? what's your take?

[mercynurse]

WOW.... I agree. I don't plan to commit a crime either, but aI don't think they should be able to make us give prints. I agree...they keep witling away at us and soon we won't have any privacy. Where are you that they are making you print for a drivers license?

Mercy,, Driving is a priviledge, not a right, you have to pass a test, albeit an easy one, and not every one is allowed to drive..... well maybe some who shouldn't.

As another poster said your picture is on your license so what's the diff??

And you are much more vulnerable right here on the internet than you would be at the DMV.

JMHO..

WR,,, three commas for Becca

The name's changed but I will always be WindingRoad

A friend is someone who knows the song in your heart and sings it back to you when you have forgotten how it goes.

[cassioo]

you know after the thumbprint for bank was mentioned I remembered one of the tanning bed places I go to (went Friday as a matter of fact) uses your right thumb to ID you so you can't share tanning time with friends...but I guess that's the choice you have to make if you want to use that tanning salon vs another one. I stick my thumb up there without blinking when they say right thumb.. I don't think they'll be doing anything with that print info but guess you never know they also have my personal information name, address and a credit card number

[HemoStat]

I have to clock in using my fingerprint - I wonder what else they do with it????

[Aaron C.]

It is the principle. A little here, a little there, and soon you have nothing left.

[nursinghumor]

[ QUOTE ]
shortbus said:
So, in order for me to get a new drivers license, I have to give my fingerprints.

I'm not too happy about this. I DO NOT think that the government should be able to require this when I haven't committed a crime. It's none of their damn business what my finger prints are.

[/ QUOTE ]


Hello Aaron,

I would support a law requiring every American citizen being fingerprinted and a national database maintained. Driving is a privilege, not a right. They can attach a requirement for fingerprinting (and with identity theft being such are problem, they are smart to) if they want in order for you to have maintain that privilege.

I've had my daughter fingerprinted since she was six months old, to protect her in case she is ever kidnapped or later gets into trouble.

Fingerprints are a major tool in the investigation of criminal activity. There would be a lot less unsolved crime if that were the case.

In New Jersey, before you can work with vulnerable adults, you must submit to fingerprinting and a criminal background check.

If you are a law-abiding citizen, it will never affect you. If you're a criminal, you can no longer hide behind the fact that "you've never been caught." It would be a powerful deterrent.

Andrew Lopez, RN

[nursinghumor]

[ QUOTE ]
cassioo said:
I agree with you why do they need finger prints? Non of the politicians are in it for the common man. I don't think any of them know what they are doing and make it up as they go along. Who are the protecting? You think the criminal element will go get their liscense or just drive without one???? maybe in a stolen car. Same with take away the guns then who has them??? criminals. Tax laws who pay? The common person who skips out?? criminals and big wigs with lots of money who hide it elsewhere...you're on the right band wagon.

[/ QUOTE ]


That's easy, to catch criminals, prevent illegal aliens or criminals from getting licenses under false names/identities, and to monitor for known criminals with outstanding warrants.

If a criminal moves to another state, he can't just apply for a new license there under a false name without his real identity being discovered.

A rogue parent, can't kidnap their kids and run off to another state, never to be seen again if when they get there they'll need to apply for a license and get fingerprinted.

Andrew Lopez, RN

[nursinghumor]

[ QUOTE ]
1mg.epi said:
What's wrong with finger prints? You let them take your picture for the license. Prints are just another form of I.D..
I don't think that prints, retina I.D. is a invasion of privacy. This stuff needs to be in the data base to catch bad people who want to hurt others.

[/ QUOTE ]



I agree and I don't by into any civil liberties arguments that it's a violation of our privacy.

It will help save lives, prevent crimes by getting criminals off the street faster and help find lost children.

For those two reasons alone I'd support it.

Andrew Lopez, RN

[nursinghumor]

[ QUOTE ]
shortbus said:It is the principle. A little here, a little there, and soon you have nothing left.

[/ QUOTE ]


In my mind, it is a matter of the greater good.

Criminals will no longer be able to apply for drivers licenses under false names, aliases. Ones that have committed crimes and been fingerprinted in the past will be instantly identified and caught.

Sex offenders that relocate to other states and want to drive there, will need to apply for a license.

The streets will be safer with criminals identified. That's well worth giving up a little personal freedom to me.

Andrew Lopez, RN
http://www.nursinghumor.com

[Aaron C.]

We are certainly going to have to agree to disagree...

In my mind, I feel like many of our legislators are using 9/11 and terrorism to push through legislation that Americans would normally not allow.

For instance, online gambling. There is no way around it, to be honest. With that being said, I do think that it causes some problems. Athletes, can now get online and bet against their own teams. People can now gamble much more easily, etc.

BUT, the MAIN reasons I have seen for passing this legislation are money laundering, and money for terrorism.

That is total BS. It just sounds good to the general public who doesn't know any better.

If they really want to attack an online business or industry, why don't they try PayPal, or sites like www.rentacoder.com or www.elance.com.

I know for a fact those sites exist in large part to money laundering but you NEVER hear them mentioned...

It's the same thing with the anti gun legislation that Diane Fienstein touts, which will ban automatic shotguns...

I mean, come on! I shoot one, and it holds 5 shells. I use it to quail hunt, and plug it to Dove hunt where it only holds 3 shells...

I know this is a whole different issue, but the principle remains the same.

BTW, I'm giving in and renewing my license today or tomorrow.