NEWS: Motorists That Refuse To Give Their Thumbprint Will Go To Jail

But, if you say no, you don't consent, and you're not drunk or anything like that, all the cop can do is let you go. They get all indignent, and try to persuade you that if you have nothing to hide, why not, etc..... but just insist that you do not consent and they can't do it legally.

...and then he'll make you sit there until his partner arrives with a signed search warrant.

At least, that's what you'll be threatened with.

Originally posted by CyberKat
First of all, I don't know about the rest of you, but I have never had my identity stolen, .. Also, I don't know anyone, or know anyone who knows anyone, who knows anyone, etc... who has had their identity stolen.

I'm going to guess you don't have any wealth to speak of. I have had mine stolen, as have several of my coworkers in our small company.

Although ID theft is for real, as is terrorism, but that doesn't justify turning the US into the USSR with internal passports, and tracking the movement of average citizens.

I wonder if people really are as afraid as the government and media would like us to believe.

Those who say that this is nothing big, are blind. You simply cannot have roadside cops collecting biometric data from drivers.

Identity theft is a problem, yes, but those who are victims of it are also choosing to use the electronic lifestyle. It's no mystery that when a waiter returns your credit card, the numbers may have been copied down. Duh.

But to create this sweeping rule (test balloon) in order to combat illegals and ID theft when our borders are porous in the extreme? Come on folks. Wake up.

Also, I've driven fast (not recklessly) and do not like authority, so I've heard cops tell me, "You know, I should write this up as a misdemeanor!" and they never do. Questions for a traffic stop:

1: Why was I stopped?
2: What is your jurisdiction?

If answers are not satisfactory, tell them: "I do not believe you have the right to detain me." ...and let them react. Based on their reaction, you can gauge what comes next. Sure, a cop might take you to jail and fingerprint you anyway, but often, if you sound like an informed citizen, they'll say "Have a nice day" and drive off.

Also, if you indicate strongly that you will be fighting the ticket, it helps. I've had cops not file tickets, even after giving them to me, just because I said I was going to challenge it. "How did you catch me?" "Wasn't there a lot of surrounding traffic?" "May I see the radar?" ...All good questions to ask.

If asked to step out of the car, ask "Am I being detained?" ...They must answer your questions directly. Cops will try stuff because they know the people are ignorant dopes. Sure, they can detain you, even cuff you, but drag you down to jail? Not unless you're saying these lines above in a smart-ass voice. I like to use my lawyer-voice. "Am I being arrested?"

Based on these words, I've been asked out of my car, cuffed, etc, but NEVER taken in despite all the bluster and threats from the cops. They know they are accountable for each citizen they haul in.

The main question is: How much should road cops be able to mess with you?

[EDIT]

I should mention I am white. Minorities' mileage will vary.


[edit on 22-10-2005 by smallpeeps]

Blind Man's Duff

Originally posted by smallpeeps
Those who say that this is nothing big, are blind.

You know, someone warned me that if I posted to ATS too much, that could happen.

Hey this is a conspiracy site, so of course it's perfectly reasonable to get all bent out of shape about this.

My point stands that the law has already allowed this for years in Arizona in cases of criminal traffic violations.

If motorists don't want to give a thumb print, they don't have to. Instead, they can give a full set of prints and a mug shot at the county jail -- just like before.

Biometric data is collected at the DMV -- and plenty of other places -- to identify people, because being able to identify people is necessary to prevent fraud. The need to prevent ID fraud is nothing new, and I would be very interested in seeing what your opinion would be if law enforcement didn't do anything about it.

If you're concerned about the government being able to identify people, I ask you to consider what the effect would be if the government was unable to do so.

Personally, I don't like the idea of the government randomly imprisoning the wrong people for crimes others commit, or not arresting criminals due to an inability to identify them.

If you're really worried about this and not just blowing smoke, your problem predates this issue by at least two centuries. My advice is to talk to legislators, because they're the ones who write the laws, not the sheriff.

If you think this is a bad idea and have a better one, by all means contact Sheriff Arpaio and share your idea with him. I'm sure he will appreciate the gesture, especially if you really do have a better idea.

County sheriffs aren't federal agents. They are local law enforcement and accountable to the people who vote them into office. As such, if their constituents don't like them, they get replaced.

The most typical reason for replacing a sheriff: not doing a good enough job fighting crime. Go figure.

Frankly, I find it amazing when people bag on law enforcement for enforcing the laws.

I thought that's why we have them in the first place.

Silly me, I must be blind.

Originally posted by Phenomium
I know they already have approx. 600 empty (but manned) new prison camps already in place in case of a riotous populace and Montana apparantly the worst because of the militia, but maybe the "supposed" Republicans and Democrats (they are one in the same really) should ask themselves the one question that Bush does when he acts like he represents America to the world....................Despite the military and the prison camps waiting on us.............DO "YOU" TRULY KNOW THE RESOLVE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE?. The Dumbing down of America was a nice touch, but we are not as dumb as you would have us and the world believe. We see what's happening Bush's daddy.

Do you live in montana?? I do! Montana is no worse then anyplace else in the country for "militias" In eastern montana we have the freemen and honestly thats about it. All they do is bitch about paying for their vech tags and insurance. No murders of goverment officials or anything like that.

"You know, someone warned me that if I posted to ATS too much, that could happen.

Hey this is a conspiracy site, so of course it's perfectly reasonable to get all bent out of shape about this. "


If you post too much at ATS your refered to this test:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Those who say that this is nothing big, are blind.

[...]

Biometric data is collected at the DMV -- and plenty of other places -- to identify people, because being able to identify people is necessary to prevent fraud. The need to prevent ID fraud is nothing new, and I would be very interested in seeing what your opinion would be if law enforcement didn't do anything about it.

Yeah, but are you really so unable to see the difference between A: the DMV and B: the side of your car after having been pulled over?

The DMV is where drivers are registered. They already have my thumbprint. Let Sgt. Dulcimer or whomever go dig it up from them if he wants my fingerprint. This policy would obviously be abused, considering that some cops (especially in California) practice profiling and harrassment at traffic stops. If you don't know this, you don't get out much.

If you're concerned about the government being able to identify people, I ask you to consider what the effect would be if the government was unable to do so.

What the hell are you talking about? They cannot collect biometric data from car-side. That's a violation of a person's right to travel in their conveyance between destinations. Just because you enter your car and begin to drive to a destination, does not give the cops a window to collect more biometric data. Driving should not place one at risk for police harrassment. Even if you are speeding, cops can and will lie to you about A: How fast you were going, B: How they caught you, and C: What their intentions are at the side of your vehicle.

This is not just about criminal traffic stops because that's a smokescreen. Criminal = misdemeanor and even the most stupid of traffic violations can be inflated into a misdemeanor by a road-cop. So ANYTIME you get pulled over, the cop could probably make enough of a case for reckless driving. I'm not saying I don't value the role of road-cops, but their power must be strictly controlled.

Judge, jury and executioner at the side of every car would make America safer, that's for sure. I don't disagree with you there.

Personally, I don't like the idea of the government randomly imprisoning the wrong people for crimes others commit, or not arresting criminals due to an inability to identify them.

If you're really worried about this and not just blowing smoke, your problem predates this issue by at least two centuries. My advice is to talk to legislators, because they're the ones who write the laws, not the sheriff.

If you think this is a bad idea and have a better one, by all means contact Sheriff Arpaio and share your idea with him. I'm sure he will appreciate the gesture, especially if you really do have a better idea.

Why should I advise a sheriff about the general privacy rights Americans have traditionally held? Why should I educate his stupid ass regarding how power gets abused?

Majic, are you really saying that this is no problem? You think this will result in a more secure America? Carside biometric gathering? Say they have only DNA from a recent murder, and they know a murderer is going to flee the county. Can't they then set up a checkpoint and swab your mouth for DNA so as to catch the guy?

The most typical reason for replacing a sheriff: not doing a good enough job fighting crime. Go figure.

Sheriffs get removed for criminal behavior, harassment and stupid policies also.

Frankly, I find it amazing when people bag on law enforcement for enforcing the laws.

Uh, these aren't "the laws" we're talking about. It's something a sheriff in some AZ county thought up. If accepted, however, it will enable more biometric collection at carside. Hopefully this sheriff will become aware of "the laws" because they protect the privacy of citizens.


[edit on 23-10-2005 by smallpeeps]

Hum. . . another state that I will not be moving to or visiting any time soon, I think my list have been growing for the last 4 years.

And by the way if you don't want to be fingerprinted for third party checks just deposit them in your personal account.

I have never to this day have been asked to give away my fingerprint in my Bank.

DHYHRYYHHJHJTUJJJTJTJT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Arizona is CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AGAIN CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What a bunch of clowns. MY GOD, WHAT HAS ARIZONA BECOME!!!!!!!!

GIVE UP YOUR RIGHTS PUNKS!!!!!!!!!

What a worthless give up state. I'll NEVER, NEVER go to your worthless NOTHING STATE. Your ALL a bunch of CRAWFISH!!!! WORTHLESS!!!!!!!!

Edit for me to say 98% of you are worthless instead of 100%.

[edit on 23-10-2005 by TexasConspiracyNut]