Something’s askew in Packerland and it has nothing to do with Brett Favre and the boys losing the game against the Chicago Bears on Sunday.
Somebody knowledgeable please tell me this is unconstitutional? Please? Inevitably, I know it doesn’t matter if it is or not; this government is hell-bent on instituting Total Information Awareness (TIA) databases all across the country, but hearing the words will do wonders for my sanity. Repeat after me:
"Fingerprinting people who are stopped only for traffic infractions is blatantly unconstitutional in the United States of America."
Apparently, the police in Green Bay, Wisconsin didn’t get the memo.
Now, it may be a bit of a stretch to associate fingerprinting traffic offenders in Green Bay, Wisconsin with the government's TIA program. But given the public outrage when the TIA program was announced a few years ago -- it was subsequently defunded in 2003 -- does anyone really think that YOUR government wouldn't implement this program slowly, behind-the-scenes so no one notices it?
From Wikipedia:
The Information Awareness Office (IAO) was established by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the research and development agency of the United States Department of Defense, in January 2002 to bring together several DARPA projects focused on applying information technology to counter transnational threats to national security. The IAO mission was to "imagine, develop, apply, integrate, demonstrate and transition information technologies, components and prototype, closed-loop, information systems that will counter asymmetric threats by achieving total information awareness". Following public criticism that the development and deployment of these technologies could potentially lead to a mass surveillance system, the IAO was defunded by Congress in 2003, although several of the projects run under IAO have continued under different funding. (emphasis mine)
So which of the programs target fingerprints? Perhaps, it's this one:
Genisys Privacy Protection technology:
• to ensure personal privacy and protect sensitive intelligence sources and methods in the context of increasing use of data analysis for detecting, identifying and tracking terrorist threats. These technologies were intended to enable greater access to data for security reasons while protecting privacy by providing critical data to analysts while not allowing access to unauthorized information, focusing on anonymized transaction data and exposing identity only if evidence warrants and appropriate authorization is obtained for further investigation, and ensuring that any misuse of data can be detected and addressed.
Additional references:
TIA Lives On -- National Journal -- Thursday, Feb. 23, 2006
Research under the Defense Department's Total Information Awareness program -- which developed technologies to predict terrorist attacks by mining government databases and the personal records of people in the United States -- was moved from the Pentagon's research-and-development agency to another group, which builds technologies primarily for the National Security Agency, according to documents obtained by National Journal and to intelligence sources familiar with the move. The names of key projects were changed, apparently to conceal their identities, but their funding remained intact, often under the same contracts.
The entire article is enlightening. (and scary)
One more:
Technology Review, 26 April 2006:
Washington's lawmakers ostensibly killed the TIA project in Section 8131 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal 2004. But legislators wrote a classified annex to that document which preserved funding for TIA's component technologies, if they were transferred to other government agencies, say sources who have seen the document, according to reports first published in The National Journal. Congress did stipulate that those technologies should only be used for military or foreign intelligence purposes against non-U.S. citizens. Still, while those component projects' names were changed, their funding remained intact, sometimes under the same contracts.
But, I digress.
If you’re motorin’ in Green Bay, Wisconsin and get pulled over in a traffic stop, you’ll be getting more than a fine. You’ll also get fingerprinted. It’s a new way "police are cracking down on crime." And, if you believe that, I’ve got some beachfront property in Arizona to sell ya.
The story appears on the WBAY-TV website in Green Bay, Wisconsin:
If you're caught speeding or playing your music too loud, or other crimes for which you might receive a citation, Green Bay police officers will ask for your driver’s license and your finger. You'll be fingerprinted right there on the spot. The fingerprint appears right next to the amount of the fine.
Police say it's meant to protect you -- in case the person they're citing isn't who they claim to be. But not everyone is sold on that explanation.
"What we've seen happen for the last couple of years [is] increasing use of false or fraudulent identification documents," Captain Greg Urban said. (emphasis mine)
Police say they’re only trying to prevent the same identity theft problem that, neighboring city, Milwaukee has, where 13 percent of all law violators give a false name. But, for Green Bay, police say they average only about five cases per years, and some drivers consider the new policy extreme and gratuitous:
"That's going too far," Ken Scherer from Oconto said. "You look at the ID, that's what they're there for. Either it's you or it's not. I don't think that's a valid excuse."
"I would feel uncomfortable but I would do it," Carol Pilgrim of Green Bay said.
Now, police stress that citizens do have the right to refuse to be fingerprinted.
"They could say no and not have to worry about getting arrested," defense attorney Jackson Main said. "On the other hand, I'm like everybody else. When a police officer tells me to do something, I'm going to do it whether I have the right to say no or not."
That’s the reason most citizens are uneasy about the finer print in the new fingerprinting policy. But, police say the prints are just to make sure you are who you say you are, and that no one’s fingerprints go into any kind of database; the prints simply stay on the ticket for future reference if the identity is challenged. Again, if you believe that...
Coming to a police force near you!
Welcome to fortress America.
Peace