Sebastian tells us about a Random Conversation About Fingerprinting. A woman (who happens to be very anti-gun) doesn’t want to get her fingerprints taken just so she can be a crossing guard near a school. Sebastian compares it to gun owners exercising constitutionally guaranteed rights having to submit fingerprints first. Which leads to his observation:
What goes around, comes around. You can’t expect to empower the state to take away liberty from people you find undesirable, and then expect the state to respect your liberty when you end up in the cross hairs. When you find yourself in that situation, the people who’s liberties have already been trampled on may not be sympathetic enough to help you.
Of course this reminded me of the famous Niemoller quote and I mentioned it in the comments and figured that will be the end of it. But then commenter ParatrooperJJ says the FBI just checks the fingerprints and discards them after they come back clean. That set off my alarms because just a few days ago this came out:
FBI effort will build biggest biometric database
The FBI is embarking on a $1 billion effort to build the world’s largest computer database of peoples’ physical characteristics, a project that would give the government unprecedented abilities to identify individuals in the United States and abroad.
Digital images of faces, fingerprints and palm patterns are flowing into FBI systems in a climate-controlled, secure basement here.
Next month, the FBI intends to award a 10-year contract that would significantly expand the amount and kinds of biometric information it receives.
And in the coming years, law enforcement authorities around the world will be able to rely on iris patterns, face-shape data, scars and perhaps even the unique ways people walk and talk to solve crimes and identify criminals and terrorists.
The FBI will also retain, upon request by employers, the fingerprints of employees who have undergone criminal background checks so the employers can be notified if employees have brushes with the law.
If the technology exists it will be used, data obtained will be kept, used, and abused. The features will creep into areas that were promised would never happen. Remember that NICS records were supposed to be destroyed and then Janet Reno kept them for “audit purposes”. Then they used those “audit records” to see if suspected terrorists had purchased firearms. My SS card says “FOR SOCIAL SECURITY AND TAX PURPOSES–NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION”. None of my childrens SS cards have any such markings. It used to be something like a $10K fine if anyone tried to use your SSN for anything other than tax purposes. No so anymore.
We are creating all the mechanisms necessary for an effective police state. Remember what Milton Friedman said.
Another subtle labeling change (although not directly related): Prescription bottles used to say something like; ‘use before [date]’. Now they say something like; ‘not valid after [date]’.
Most pharmacists and doctors will tell you that they drugs don’t “spoil”. They just lose their potency. *But*, if you re-use a smaller bottle (say for traveling with less than the full 120-count bottle), you may violate federal law. Annoying.
Mine say “use before” (Walgreens.)
I don’t think they throw any away, unless it’s the physical card after scanning it to an electronic record. I know that, for instance, if you’re printed for background check for a carry permit, the prints and the fact that they were run stays in the III database, pretty much forever. That goes for pretty much any background check, if I’m not mistaken.
So the teachers are OK with forced drug tests for students wishing to participate in after school activities, such as school sports or the chess club, but don’t want anyone to be able to check THEIR identities against past criminal activities? It don’t just come around, it comes around and smacks ’em in the nads.