Who are you? Can you prove it?
Mike, at work, needed to get his van inspected, so he left at lunch time to drop it at the garage. On the way there a local Cop pulled him over because his inspection had run out.
The Cop takes his papers back to the cruiser, returning in a few minutes to ask Mike if he'd been to Texas. Mike said no and the Cop goes back to his car.
Another cruiser arrives.
The Cop comes back and asks Mike again if he'd been to Texas. Mike said no, and the Cop goes back to his car.
Another cruiser arrives.
The Cop comes back the third time and tells Mike his name keeps coming back "Hot". A person with that name is wanted in Texas.
So arrest, handcuff, police station, mugshot, fingerprints and cell. An hour or so later, after considerable questioning, they have a faxed copy of the mugshot and fingerprints for the Texas perp and decide Mike is not their man.
Mike is both releived and annoyed, so he asked the Cop what the Texas perp was wanted for, but they wouldn't tell him. He did say they questioned about credit and credit cards quite a bit.
So he asked the Cop if there was anything he could do to prevent this from happening again, to which the Cop said no, nothing except avoid the police.
Mikes name is not that unusual, although not Jones/Smith common. A 5 minute search on the internet showed 65 guys in Texas with the same first and last name. Half a dozen with the same middle initial and two of those in the same age group. I'd guess the search could be expanded to 50 states and come up with similar numbers.
Just with this one name, there could be a whole lot of people at risk of the same treatment, should they be in contact with the police, anywhere.
By extension there must be thousnds of names being posted by the 50 states, as wanted people, without much more info than the name.
You could be "wanted" by the police.:cop:
what really sucks is that now, his prints are known prints, and will be recorded in some fucking searchable database. for no reason. i thought cops had laptops in their cruisers. was there no photo? what photo did texas have to compare it to that they couldn't email the pa cops? shennanigans
Along the lines of LJ's comment, I can't believe they processed him and THEN interrogated. Is that SOP? Such a waste of time and money, although I'd much rather the police err on the side of caution.
Could the cop have checked how long his car has been registered in PA, versus how long that guy has been wanted in TX? Would that have done any good?
Ugh. Jail sucks. Hope I never have to go again.
Sure, he could easily prove he'd been a PA resident, but not that he hadn't been to Texas.
They faxed, the photo and prints from Texas, but it took some time to get it. We don't know how long ago they had put the name on the list so it wasn't as if this was a current hot case they were on top of.
To the clerk in Texas that has to bring the information up and send it, priority is what to have for lunch because they aren't sitting in a cell.
I would imagine email is not secure enough for official business in a small time police dept. I don't know what the Texas contact was, state, county or local.
They have to arrest him to transport him to the station, and mugshot/prints to compare to the Texas info. In PA you can demand the prints be destroyed if the charges don't stick, but no way to be sure they are. For mike it's a moot point, as he has a carry permit so his prints are on file anyway, but for others it would be a concern.
Mike did say they were entirely professional, throughout. :cool:
First of all, that was a dirty trick to play on your friend, Bruce. ;)
Secondly, prints seem like the easiest way to "exclude" Mike (as they say on CSI), but I'm not sure why they couldn't run his prints through the computer (like they do on CSI) and see if they get a match (like they do on CSI).
Thirdly, that's why we named our kids "djjeisme", "mmendbbeeeeeeeer", and "32123". :cool:
Welcome to the Brave New World of "guilty until proven innocent".
You have the right to remain silent until they kick the information out of your sorry ass, by the way.
Spexxvet, you watch too much TV.:lol:
I followed me all the way here from the beginning, so I must be me.
Mikes name is not that unusual, although not Jones/Smith common. A 5 minute search on the internet showed 65 guys in Texas with the same first and last name. Half a dozen with the same middle initial and two of those in the same age group. I'd guess the search could be expanded to 50 states and come up with similar numbers.
This reminds me of the thousands of "out of state felons" who were purged from the voter registry in
Operation:
Florida.
djjeisme
Well shit, now we need to think of a new name for
our little girl.
You know Flint, that makes me wonder. If PA puts joe Blow on the list of felons, does Florida yank every Joe Blow from the roles? :confused:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A43295-2001Jun8
"...The reason so many wrong names ended up on the scrub list is that Florida ordered ChoicePoint to input questionably broad matching criteria into its sophisticated computer programs. According to various statements by ChoicePoint officials, the criteria were: First four letters of the first name. Middle initial. Gender. At least 80 percent of the letters in the last name. Approximate date of birth. Last four digits of Social Security number when available -- which was not often, since fewer than 10 percent of Floridians had that number on their voter registration forms. Certain variations were also programmed in (Willie could match William; John Richard could match Richard John)..."
Penn Jillette had the right idea. If his daughter ever shows up on the no-fly list or voter purge lists, you'll know it was deliberate!
I wonder how long it will be before we are all required to get scannable bar codes tattooed on our bodies. Or info chips planted just under the surface of our skin. Our grandchildren may have them already without our knowlege. Communism in progress. Shit.
Some hospitals attach
RFID tags to newborn's ubmilical cords as a security measure (in this case, a part of them that will fall off anyway).
I wonder how long it will be before we are all required to get scannable bar codes tattooed on our bodies. Or info chips planted just under the surface of our skin. Our grandchildren may have them already without our knowlege. Communism in progress. Shit.
more likely to become fact as part of the 'war on Terror'....
I asked him today if the cop had a laptop in the cruiser. He said yes, but since the locals didn't have the info from Texas yet, it wasn't practical for him and the three cruisers to sit beside the road, for who knows how long it would be.
I suggested he talk to his local police dept in Chester County where he lives. Make them aware of who he is and what went down. He's already known to one of the cops there that runs a gun store on the side. That way if it should happen again, they could call his department, who would be familiar with the situation and could tell the cop that stopped him, he's cool.
Can't hurt.:cool:
I would suggest he talk to a lawyer so that the keystone cops learn properly how to conduct themselves.
Innocent until proven guilty is LITERAL.
They didn't arrest him for being guilty, then arrested him on suspicion of being a fugitive. They can do that and hold you for a prescribed period of time before they must charge or release you. I think it's 24 hours but that may not be true. :confused:
If they could only arrest guilty people, nobody would be arrested because it's not their job to determine who's guilty. The courts couldn't find anybody guilty because the police couldn't arrest anyone.
I imagine only innocent people would show up for trial, voluntarily.
You have to have more than just a name. There has to be some evidence to hold someone. This was a pathetic show of ineptitude and an enormous misuse of power that should not go unchallenged so it does not happen again.
"Well Sgt. Tom Smith committed a crime in NY... go round em' up!"... tell me another one.
Suddenly Dweezil and Moon Unit don't sound like such bad names for children.:right:
Being a Zappa narrows it down considerably.
But being a Zappa probably gets you on a "watch list." ;)
But if they're "watching" you, then they know you aren't somebody else by mistake. :D
unles, of course, your name is Jean Charles de Menezes.
I think Penn Jillette and his daughter Moxie Crimefighter Jillette probably won't get on any lists accidentally...
You're right, them both being on the list will be quite intentional. :D
you gotta love the 'new world order' in all its far reaching glory! who'd've thunk that such a miracle of modern technology would be available in our lifetimes.. now where's my flying car!.. damn you George Jetson! DAMN YOU!!!
... now where's my flying car!..
I'm still waiting on my hover bike.
They can't even get the Segway right. Don't hold your breath.
They didn't arrest him for being guilty, then arrested him on suspicion of being a fugitive.
All this and an example of a NJ soldier returning to his unit when stopped (because a childhood friend stole his identity) for hours (and therefore AWOL) was discussed previously including:
A National ID Card
That discussion defined two things needed: 1) method to prove you are who you claim, and 2) method to protect your identity; verify that no one else is using your ID.
Meanwhile, a recent HP boardroom story is but another example of a system perverted. HP even released Social Security numbers of Board Members to many shady organizations. This part of a program that involved stealing board member phone records, stealing records of those who board members called, and intentionally creating and installing viruses on third party computers.
Once a SS number is distributed (as with those board members), then you are done - cooked - compromised. You cannot change that SS number. You cannot retrieve that number. It was never intended for such identification purposes (and neither was a driver's license). If you have a problem with this summary and did not read the previous details, then don't reply. Above sentences are intentionally vague so that you will assume erroneous conclusions or will read the Nov 2001 discussion.
If cops follow all current LAWS governing their behavior, at all times, we do not need a national ID card.
The card is just a more convenient method of stealing someone's ID... not the other way around.
Your example of the SSI# issue proves the point... not the other way around.
True, you do not need a national ID card......
the technology already exists to 'chip' everbody with ID info....
care to place bets when it will 'required, in the interests of National Security and the Fight against Organsised Crime and Terrorism' when it will be mandatory for all new-borns? ..... then immigrants.... tourists.... over 21's....?
They'll start with babies. Convince parents that they need it for protection from everything... kidnapping to wrong prescriptions to mistaken identity. :(
Well you got your dog chipped, do you care more for your dog than your kids?
True, you do not need a national ID card......
the technology already exists to 'chip' everbody with ID info....
care to place bets when it will 'required, in the interests of National Security and the Fight against Organsised Crime and Terrorism' when it will be mandatory for all new-borns? ..... then immigrants.... tourists.... over 21's....?
That will be the day that I go underground.
All this and an example of a NJ soldier returning to his unit when stopped (because a childhood friend stole his identity) for hours (and therefore AWOL) was discussed previously including:
A National ID Card
That discussion defined two things needed: 1) method to prove you are who you claim, and 2) method to protect your identity; verify that no one else is using your ID.
Meanwhile, a recent HP boardroom story is but another example of a system perverted. HP even released Social Security numbers of Board Members to many shady organizations. This part of a program that involved stealing board member phone records, stealing records of those who board members called, and intentionally creating and installing viruses on third party computers.
Once a SS number is distributed (as with those board members), then you are done - cooked - compromised. You cannot change that SS number. You cannot retrieve that number. It was never intended for such identification purposes (and neither was a driver's license). If you have a problem with this summary and did not read the previous details, then don't reply. Above sentences are intentionally vague so that you will assume erroneous conclusions or will read the Nov 2001 discussion.
Y'know, tw, thats probably the best post of yours I've seen. I didnt realize it was you until the very very end.
They'll start with babies. Convince parents that they need it for protection from everything... kidnapping to wrong prescriptions to mistaken identity.
So, would now be a good time to mention that Texas has a relatively new statewide database tracking kids' immunization records from birth through teens? You can still choose not to have your kid entered in it, for what that's worth.
That will be the day that I go underground.
Really? If everyone had a chip in them, think of the time it would save! You wouldn't have to sit up all night with your gun when
this happens. Have to prove that Clinton was in a hotel room with Jennifer Flowers? Just look at the record. Want to know where Osama Bin Laden is? Beep-beep-beep: there he is, in Boca Raton, or Riyadh. Want to check out who realllly goes to church every Sunday. Pop! There it is. Where's Jimmy Swaggart? In a hotel room, whacking it while looking at a hooker. I wouldn't want a chip in me, but I'm surprised that you don't support this repubican/conservative control mechanism.
Really? If everyone had a chip in them, think of the time it would save! You wouldn't have to sit up all night with your gun when this happens. Have to prove that Clinton was in a hotel room with Jennifer Flowers? Just look at the record. Want to know where Osama Bin Laden is? Beep-beep-beep: there he is, in Boca Raton, or Riyadh. Want to check out who realllly goes to church every Sunday. Pop! There it is. Where's Jimmy Swaggart? In a hotel room, whacking it while looking at a hooker. I wouldn't want a chip in me, but I'm surprised that you don't support this repubican/conservative control mechanism.
Heh, sounds a couple of steps past "
The Transparent Society".
True, you do not need a national ID card......
the technology already exists to 'chip' everbody with ID info....
The point was that nobody should need be 'chipped' - a same problem that exists with a SS number. Meanwhile a basic function of government should provide everyone with an opportunity to have identity proof AND identity protection if they so want.
To 'require' everyone to prove who they are has actually been proposed by the George Jr administration. "Where are your papers?" is the fatherland security mentality. An identity system designed to serve government - not serve the citizen. This is a major principle. An ID system must serve the citizen - not government. We have already seen how government and wacky HP women so fear honest Americans. An ID system must be protected from spying presidents and corporate chairman who have lived in the ethersphere too long.
That previous discussion was very explicit as to what is required of an identity proof and identity protection system. One is that the program must be free of government 'wiretapping without judicial reviews'. Another is the program is for the benefit of the citizen - not for the benefit of government law enforcement and not for the benefit of 'immune from prosecution' presidents.
Notice that I also did not call it a National ID for an important reason. It is not for the nation. Its purpose is to serve the citizen. Many important details were in that previous discussion:
A National ID CardThey'll sell the idea like trans-pass, just walk right through that turnstile/scanner or go wait in that line over there for three hours.
You have a clear choice to participate in the program or not. The nots will be instant suspects of course, but you have a choice.:(
That will be the day that I go underground.
info chips planted just under the surface of our skin. Communism in progress. Shit.
If there is a chip available there will be one goin in my kid...the number of pedo's and other creeps out there are just gettin worse. if my child winds up missing i want to be able to find them immediatly, and the perv who kidnapped them. Of course I won't be happy if they are able to use the technolory to find out that it was me who chopped the perv into tiny little pieces...
Even if (or when) the chip thingie becomes mandatory, it won't take a mastermind to perfect an alternate/deactivate technique. For every ping there is a pong.
I already have a chip on my shoulder.... don't need one under my skin.
If there is a chip available there will be one goin in my kid...the number of pedo's and other creeps out there are just gettin worse. if my child winds up missing i want to be able to find them immediatly, and the perv who kidnapped them. Of course I won't be happy if they are able to use the technolory to find out that it was me who chopped the perv into tiny little pieces...
There is a bracelet available... we are getting it for our son.
If there is a chip available there will be one goin in my kid...the number of pedo's and other creeps out there are just gettin worse. ..
The # of sleazy govt people increases even worse. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
The problem with the chip, and to a lesser extent the bracelet, is the person who wants it out of another person. There could be some digging around with a knife, or chopping off body parts, so that the chip/bracelet is nullified. That would be double plus ungood, IMHO.
The problem with the chip, and to a lesser extent the bracelet, is the person who wants it out of another person. There could be some digging around with a knife, or chopping off body parts, so that the chip/bracelet is nullified. That would be double plus ungood, IMHO.
Not if the chip is hidden...if they don't know its there they won't know to look for it or try and deactivate it
It's pretty easy to find in with simple equipment.
Scan all the kids coming by until you get one that has a family rich enough to make it pay. Stuff them in a metalized bag until you get them away from scanners which is not very far.
Remember the chip is not a transmitter....it doesn't send out signals. It's more like a reflector that shapes the reflection into a unique signature, but has to be within feet of the scanner, not miles. :tinfoil:
High court won't hear privacy case
The Supreme Court yesterday declined to hear a case filed by privacy rights groups aimed at reversing a 2003 amendment to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act that gives providers -- and not necessarily the patient or family members -- the go-ahead to release routine patient data.
Deborah Peel, an Austin, Texas, psychiatrist, chairwoman of the Patient Privacy Rights Foundation and a central figure in the court case, said that the HIPAA provision effectively eliminates people's control of consent.
The HIPAA rule allows physicians, hospitals and pharmacies to sidestep the patient's consent to use or disclose information for routine uses. Under the rule, that disclosure must be limited to the "minimum necessary" information to accomplish the intended purpose.
Healthcare providers said that the consent rule would handcuff them to provide timely and efficient medical services, the Associated Press reported.
Under a provision in the federal law, individuals have the right to request restrictions on personal medical data, but those requests take time and often come back rejected, Peel said.
The psychologist's involvement in the privacy movement is equal parts personal and professional. As a psychoanalyst, Peel said that privacy is "absolutely essential" in the treatment of her patients. "Like surgeons need a sterile field, we need privacy," she said.
But it was also her involvement in the care of a family member that propelled her into action. Peel said she had written to two national pharmaceutical chains requesting restrictions put on family member's medical records, but that in each case, the chains took weeks before they ultimately denied her request.
The experience, she said, helped to frame her legal argument. "Our position is: How do you have a right to privacy if you have to beg another party to exercise it?" she said. "If I have to beg someone to exercise my right, then I don't have a right."
The lawsuit, which was filed by the Patient Privacy Rights Foundation and nine other groups that represented some 750,000 patients, doctors and consumers, also claimed that federal agencies didn't follow the necessary procedures to change or amend the HIPAA rule.
In a decision the privacy advocates had sought to reverse, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that any privacy violations could not be properly blamed on the government, the AP reported.
"They've given the power to eliminate our privacy to private corporations," Peel said.
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Matthew DoBias / HITS staff writer[/COLOR]
So if I give you a beer and you get in your car and kill somebody, I'm responsible.
But the feds give the physicians, hospitals and pharmacies (for the convenience of the Insurance Companies), the whole damn brewery, then claim they're clean?
Dickheads. :mad: