Well, like, I wouldn't want Osama bin Laden visiting my hometown. Once you blow up a couple buildings here, you're pretty much not welcome anymore.
So I can understand wanting to have some level of security to ensure that you are not, in fact, Osama bin Laden.
well I think anyone in the world would recognise him without having to check his fingerprints first :rolleyes: besides even if he's had surgery... I'm sure you can get fingerprint surgery too.
So one man goes and ruins all the fun huh? How is that fair? :(
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
well I think anyone in the world would recognise him without having to check his fingerprints first :rolleyes: besides even if he's had surgery... I'm sure you can get fingerprint surgery too.
So one man goes and ruins all the fun huh? How is that fair? :(
Don't blame me. Blame that bearded son of a bitch.
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
So let me get this straight...democrates are against the Patriot Act and the wiretapping but are now oK with fingerprinting???
maybe read the bill...
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
No. Read my post on page 4 of this thread where I post the actual language from the bill.
Right.
If you want a private sector job in your state,
and it happens to be in the mortgage industry,
you MUST - AT A MINIMUM - submit your fingerprints to the FEDERAL authorities.
How many other private sector jobs could they then apply this to \ create a similar bill for?
Anyone who works for a credit card company?
Anyone who works for an accounting firm?
Anyone who works for an auto dealership?
Anyone who works for a radio station?
Anyone who works for an energy company?
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Right.
If you want a private sector job in your state,
and it happens to be in the mortgage industry,
you MUST - AT A MINIMUM - submit your fingerprints to the FEDERAL authorities.
How many other private sector jobs could they then apply this to \ create a similar bill for?
Anyone who works for a credit card company?
Anyone who works for an accounting firm?
Anyone who works for an auto dealership?
Anyone who works for a radio station?
Anyone who works for an energy company?
When I put my logic hat on, it seems to make sense to me. People in the mortgage industry have some very secure information just a click away. Do I want a background check on anyone that could look up my SSN and and credit information? Without a doubt.
I work in the mortgage industry as an escrow officer and when I took my state test, part of the process was submitting my fingerprints to the state. As a result I have a fancy plaque on the wall that says I have a "high moral character" among other things. I think the bill has to do with people (such as myself) handling the utmost private and personal information for other people. I see hundreds, maybe thousands of social security numbers in a year.
If they are going to regulate the mortgage industry, one way to begin is to filter out the riff-raff used car salesmen (no offense) that try to double as mortgage professionals.
Rather than getting your panties in a wad over the bill and blaming Obama and the co-sponsors of the bill, if you want to voice your opinion and suggest that the bill does not pass, write your Senators and demand their action.
Probably posting your outrage on a fanclub forum won't solve anything.
I still don't get it...you are OK with fingerprinting someone who is applying for a license but not OK with wiretapping a sespected murderer
Who is applying for a "license"? It allows states to make sure that mortgage companies are doing background checks (which does include fingerprinting) on its employees.
I still don't get it...you are OK with fingerprinting someone who is applying for a license but not OK with wiretapping a sespected murderer
Who is stopping anyone from wiretapping a suspected murder? If gov't has a suspicion about someone, they can easily get a warrant for a wiretap. But that wasn't good enough for this administration, they wanted unchecked power to eavesdrop on anyone and everyone they felt like.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Apples and oranges... I'm not talking about fingerprint checkpoints or whatever inside a country. I can fly anywhere in the country with just a photo ID, or drive coast to coast. But, when I enter a foreign country, I don't have a problem with being checked more in depth.
You missed my point. I was answering your question with a hypothetical situation.
Air travel is not mandatory. Neither is road travel. But since 9/11 you cannot get into the US without having your fingerprints and your picture taken.
So if you just have to comply with the US government rules and there's nothing you can do except, like you suggested, not fly.
So what if the US started taking fingerprints and pictures if you wanted to go to another state by plane or by car? Would you also say "well, travel isn't mandatory" or would you realize that's just a way of avoiding the problem?
My guess is you would stand up against it, at least I hope so, and not hide behind a cop-out phrase like "travel is not mandatory"
when i applied for my current job and was hired... i had to submit fingerprints to pass a criminal background check
call alex jones!
I don't have a problem with EMPLOYERS taking fingerprints.
I have a problem with the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MANDATING THAT EMPLOYEES SUBMIT PRINTS TO THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION.
It is outside of their constitutional authority to do this.
But i guess, like someone pointed out earlier (and what a "great" point it was), the government already oversteps its constitutional bounds, so why get upset over this? Fuck it.
I mean. They already violated it once.
May as well just get over it and accept the fact that they will continue to, right?
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
and what if my employer was the government? state government to be exact?
I don't have a problem with that.
It is government interfering with private enterprise I have a problem with.
Your question goes to some of what Tom Cryer addressed in his court case concerning his not paying taxes, and the fraud that is the income tax.
See, the income tax actualy DOES tax GOVERNMENT employees.
And the reason for that is that man has a RIGHT to work, okay?
The government can NOT infringe that RIGHT by impossing a burden on it (such as taxes) ...
however, working for the GOVERNMENT is considered a PRIVELAGE.
RIGHT vs. PRIVELAGE.
However, in your case specificaly,
the STATE has every right to do whatever the hell it wants, if that is what it's citizens vote to legislate.
So, as much as i wouldn't like the idea personaly, if i lived in that state, i would just have to up and move to another one.
But the FEDERAL government impossing this idea NATIONALY is strictly against the ideals this country was founded upon -- no matter how "right" intentioned it may be.
:cool:
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Well, like, I wouldn't want Osama bin Laden visiting my hometown. Once you blow up a couple buildings here, you're pretty much not welcome anymore.
So I can understand wanting to have some level of security to ensure that you are not, in fact, Osama bin Laden.
just in case youve forgotten, bin laden managed to orchestrate 9/11 from outside US borders, so he seriously has no use for ever visiting the US. his work is done. hes managed to get the trigger happy US government freaking out and turning the screws on its own people because...why? bin laden is sitting in his cave somewhere releasing videos and whatnot every now and again just so he can feel relevant while the most technologically advanced military on the planet chases its tail unable to find him. i have to wonder why that is. and i also have to wonder if his fingerprints are even on file anywhere in the world for comparative purposes anway. anyhoo my point is(if i actually have one) is that if the US government were deadly serious about finding bin laden, they would have found him by now. having him on the loose provides them with a very convenient boogey man with which to scare the people and push through their bullshit laws.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Instead of privately flying all of Bin Laden's family out (and a bunch of Saudis) while all other planes were grounded after 9/11....
why not just pick up and detain all his family members until the guy is forced out, or just monitor all his families communications in a nice wide circle? Something has to break there. but....ooops... Bush Sr likes to go for dinner at the Bin Ladens, and rub his greedy hands together.
I guess it's easier to wantonly bomb innocent civilians. What's the kill rate now at 90% civilians..yeah it is 90%. Nice.
What a farce....the jokes on us, as in the U.S..
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
just in case youve forgotten, bin laden managed to orchestrate 9/11 from outside US borders, so he seriously has no use for ever visiting the US. his work is done. hes managed to get the trigger happy US government freaking out and turning the screws on its own people because...why? bin laden is sitting in his cave somewhere releasing videos and whatnot every now and again just so he can feel relevant while the most technologically advanced military on the planet chases its tail unable to find him. i have to wonder why that is. and i also have to wonder if his fingerprints are even on file anywhere in the world for comparative purposes anway. anyhoo my point is(if i actually have one) is that if the US government were deadly serious about finding bin laden, they would have found him by now. having him on the loose provides them with a very convenient boogey man with which to scare the people and push through their bullshit laws.
Man, I was just having a light-hearted moment earlier this afternoon. Don't you people ever stop being so serious?
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
When I put my logic hat on, it seems to make sense to me. People in the mortgage industry have some very secure information just a click away. Do I want a background check on anyone that could look up my SSN and and credit information? Without a doubt.
there's a pretty big difference between a background check and holding somebody's fingerprints on file.
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
there's a pretty big difference between a background check and holding somebody's fingerprints on file.
So....clear them initially on the original background check and then delete them forever? I'd say that would be a handy thing to have on file in case an employee gets a wild hair to start ripping off peoples identity's.
So....clear them initially on the original background check and then delete them forever? I'd say that would be a handy thing to have on file in case an employee gets a wild hair to start ripping off peoples identity's.
So basically we just presume everybody's guilty?
What do you mean clear them initially? Are everyone's fingerprints automatically on file?
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
So....clear them initially on the original background check and then delete them forever? I'd say that would be a handy thing to have on file in case an employee gets a wild hair to start ripping off peoples identity's.
now that just screams freedom!
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
when i applied for my current job and was hired... i had to submit fingerprints to pass a criminal background check
call alex jones!
were they put into a database?
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Probably best to have their DNA on file too... just in case they cut their hands off... hmm... maybe we should just cut their hands off first and keep them AS DNA? Ya know... preventative measures and all that :cool:
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
them fuckers have MY fingerprints :( simply cos I want to go on holiday :mad: and see some of the world... sick sick sick!
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
I just don't get the paranoia of having your fingerprints on file for industry regulation, customs or whatever.
The only reasoning that I am hearing here is "they could use it to frame me"... Do you honestly believe that if the cops/gov't wanted to frame you, it would take them more than 10 minutes of following you around to be able to get your fingerprints off of something that you touched?
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
I just don't get the paranoia of having your fingerprints on file for industry regulation, customs or whatever.
The only reasoning that I am hearing here is "they could use it to frame me"... Do you honestly believe that if the cops/gov't wanted to frame you, it would take them more than 10 minutes of following you around to be able to get your fingerprints off of something that you touched?
and why would they bother when they can just make everyone give up their prints?
And I've given other reasons... they don't NEED them.. they're mine... what the fuck do they want with them? Also anything that's held on computer database anywhere has the potential to be hacked... so if you're not worried about the govt, at least spare a thought for the hackers.
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
In Hong Kong they thumbprint you when you get your Hong Kong Identity card. Makes customs a breeze at the airport. Insert card, put your thumb on a thumbprint reader and away you go. What could take an hour now takes 30 seconds.
Comments
So one man goes and ruins all the fun huh? How is that fair? :(
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Don't blame me. Blame that bearded son of a bitch.
for the least they could possibly do
No. Read my post on page 4 of this thread where I post the actual language from the bill.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
maybe read the bill...
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
It is called the "S.A.F.E. Mortgage Licensing Act", and it's bill number is S 2595 for those interested in reading what it really does.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Right.
If you want a private sector job in your state,
and it happens to be in the mortgage industry,
you MUST - AT A MINIMUM - submit your fingerprints to the FEDERAL authorities.
How many other private sector jobs could they then apply this to \ create a similar bill for?
Anyone who works for a credit card company?
Anyone who works for an accounting firm?
Anyone who works for an auto dealership?
Anyone who works for a radio station?
Anyone who works for an energy company?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
When I put my logic hat on, it seems to make sense to me. People in the mortgage industry have some very secure information just a click away. Do I want a background check on anyone that could look up my SSN and and credit information? Without a doubt.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
If they are going to regulate the mortgage industry, one way to begin is to filter out the riff-raff used car salesmen (no offense) that try to double as mortgage professionals.
Rather than getting your panties in a wad over the bill and blaming Obama and the co-sponsors of the bill, if you want to voice your opinion and suggest that the bill does not pass, write your Senators and demand their action.
Probably posting your outrage on a fanclub forum won't solve anything.
Who is applying for a "license"? It allows states to make sure that mortgage companies are doing background checks (which does include fingerprinting) on its employees.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Who is stopping anyone from wiretapping a suspected murder? If gov't has a suspicion about someone, they can easily get a warrant for a wiretap. But that wasn't good enough for this administration, they wanted unchecked power to eavesdrop on anyone and everyone they felt like.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
You missed my point. I was answering your question with a hypothetical situation.
Air travel is not mandatory. Neither is road travel. But since 9/11 you cannot get into the US without having your fingerprints and your picture taken.
So if you just have to comply with the US government rules and there's nothing you can do except, like you suggested, not fly.
So what if the US started taking fingerprints and pictures if you wanted to go to another state by plane or by car? Would you also say "well, travel isn't mandatory" or would you realize that's just a way of avoiding the problem?
My guess is you would stand up against it, at least I hope so, and not hide behind a cop-out phrase like "travel is not mandatory"
I'm for a free world, not a police state world.
naděje umírá poslední
when i applied for my current job and was hired... i had to submit fingerprints to pass a criminal background check
call alex jones!
I don't have a problem with EMPLOYERS taking fingerprints.
I have a problem with the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MANDATING THAT EMPLOYEES SUBMIT PRINTS TO THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION.
It is outside of their constitutional authority to do this.
But i guess, like someone pointed out earlier (and what a "great" point it was), the government already oversteps its constitutional bounds, so why get upset over this? Fuck it.
I mean. They already violated it once.
May as well just get over it and accept the fact that they will continue to, right?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
and what if my employer was the government? state government to be exact?
I don't have a problem with that.
It is government interfering with private enterprise I have a problem with.
Your question goes to some of what Tom Cryer addressed in his court case concerning his not paying taxes, and the fraud that is the income tax.
See, the income tax actualy DOES tax GOVERNMENT employees.
And the reason for that is that man has a RIGHT to work, okay?
The government can NOT infringe that RIGHT by impossing a burden on it (such as taxes) ...
however, working for the GOVERNMENT is considered a PRIVELAGE.
RIGHT vs. PRIVELAGE.
However, in your case specificaly,
the STATE has every right to do whatever the hell it wants, if that is what it's citizens vote to legislate.
So, as much as i wouldn't like the idea personaly, if i lived in that state, i would just have to up and move to another one.
But the FEDERAL government impossing this idea NATIONALY is strictly against the ideals this country was founded upon -- no matter how "right" intentioned it may be.
:cool:
If I opened it now would you not understand?
just in case youve forgotten, bin laden managed to orchestrate 9/11 from outside US borders, so he seriously has no use for ever visiting the US. his work is done. hes managed to get the trigger happy US government freaking out and turning the screws on its own people because...why? bin laden is sitting in his cave somewhere releasing videos and whatnot every now and again just so he can feel relevant while the most technologically advanced military on the planet chases its tail unable to find him. i have to wonder why that is. and i also have to wonder if his fingerprints are even on file anywhere in the world for comparative purposes anway. anyhoo my point is(if i actually have one) is that if the US government were deadly serious about finding bin laden, they would have found him by now. having him on the loose provides them with a very convenient boogey man with which to scare the people and push through their bullshit laws.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
why not just pick up and detain all his family members until the guy is forced out, or just monitor all his families communications in a nice wide circle? Something has to break there. but....ooops... Bush Sr likes to go for dinner at the Bin Ladens, and rub his greedy hands together.
I guess it's easier to wantonly bomb innocent civilians. What's the kill rate now at 90% civilians..yeah it is 90%. Nice.
What a farce....the jokes on us, as in the U.S..
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Man, I was just having a light-hearted moment earlier this afternoon. Don't you people ever stop being so serious?
for the least they could possibly do
*hands on hips staring off into the distance, a big red S on my chest... my cape flowing out behind me*
not so long as there is injustice in the world.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Nicely played ...
for the least they could possibly do
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
So....clear them initially on the original background check and then delete them forever? I'd say that would be a handy thing to have on file in case an employee gets a wild hair to start ripping off peoples identity's.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
What do you mean clear them initially? Are everyone's fingerprints automatically on file?
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
now that just screams freedom!
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
were they put into a database?
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
The only reasoning that I am hearing here is "they could use it to frame me"... Do you honestly believe that if the cops/gov't wanted to frame you, it would take them more than 10 minutes of following you around to be able to get your fingerprints off of something that you touched?
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
And I've given other reasons... they don't NEED them.. they're mine... what the fuck do they want with them? Also anything that's held on computer database anywhere has the potential to be hacked... so if you're not worried about the govt, at least spare a thought for the hackers.
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you