Finger Printing at the Road side.

Although this is only a pilot scheme it does look like
it will go ahead and spread nationwide?

As its only a plot scheme you can however
refuse to have your finger prints taken.
But not for too long.

Drivers who get stopped by the police could have their fingerprints
taken at the roadside, under a new plan to help officers check people's
identities. A hand-held device being tested by 10 forces in England
and Wales is linked to a database of 6.5m prints.

Police say they will save time because people will no
longer have to go to the station to prove their identity.

Officers promise prints will not be kept on file but concerns
have been raised about civil liberties.

Bedfordshire are the first force to use the equipment, which is
being distributed among the forces in Essex, Hertfordshire,
Lancashire, North Wales, Northamptonshire, West Midlands and
West Yorkshire, as well as to British Transport Police and
the Metropolitan Police, over the next two months.




Officers will scan a vehicle's number plates using a special
camera that checks if the car is subject to an offence, like being uninsured.

If the driver does not convince police he is giving them a correct name,
they will fingerprint him and verify his identity on the spot,
instead of taking him to the police station.

Police Minister Tony McNulty said:
"The new technology will speed up the time it takes for police
to identify individuals at the roadside, enabling them to spend
more time on the frontline and reducing any inconvenience
for innocent members of the public."

Under the pilot,
codenamed Lantern, police officers will be able to check
the fingerprints from both index fingers of the suspect -
with their permission - against a central computer database,
with a response within a few minutes.

"The handheld, capture device is little bigger than a PDA,
" said Chris Wheeler, head of fingerprint identification at
the Police Information Technology Organisation PITO.

"Screening on the street means they [police] can check an
identity and verify it." Currently an officer has to arrest
a person and take them to a custody suite to fingerprint them.

The device will be used with the Automatic Number Plate
Recognition team, who identify vehicles of interest.
If a vehicle is stopped, police will be able to identify
the driver and passengers. At present about 60% of drivers
stopped do not give their true identity.

Bedfordshire Police said officers using the device in Luton
on Wednesday had arrested a man suspected of being an
illegal immigrant and a woman for driving a stolen car.

Inspector Steve Rawlings said it takes two sets of
fingerprints and the fingerprints are not retained.



"The encounter can be 15 minutes on the roadside rather than
three hours in the police station," he said.
The device has an accuracy of 94-95% and will be used for
identification purposes only, say police, and there are
electronic safeguards to prevent misuse.
It sends encrypted data to the national ID system using GPRS -
a wireless system used by many mobile phones.
More than 6.5 million fingerprints are cross-referenced
and sent back to the officer.

Mark Wallace, who represents the civil liberties group
the Freedom Association, told BBC Radio Five Live that
he had "concerns" about the scheme.
"I don't think we should be reassured by the fact that at
the moment it's voluntary and at the moment they won't be recorded," he said.
"Both of those things are actually only happening in the trial because
the laws haven't been passed to do this on a national
basis compulsorily and with recording."



So are you in favour of this or not?

I read this on the BBC website this morning. Finger printing is not accurate enough for anything much, but I think it would certainly be a good idea to bring it in for things like this.

You see far too many people lying to the police about thier identity and the police eventually find out, but it wastes a lot of their time trying to find out.

Hopefully this will put an end to all this crap. The question is though, does it work? We have all seen that the police VNPR camera's are not accurate a good deal of the time, and we all know how questionable fingerprinting is and how inaccurate it can be.

I wouldnt want to see a trail of motorists who are wrongly arrested for something due to the fingerprinting machine not detecting them as the person they say they are and the machine being wrong.

I think it's a great idea, but as Matty said, how accurate will it be?
I know there are figures given, but them figures mean for every 100 people stopped, there could be 5 or 6 people, if not more who are wrongly accused of something or let off when in the wrong.

Maybe it will prove to be very sucessful, we'll have to see.

What about the electronic safeguards? Will they be enough to prevent misuse? Also, data encryption is never 100% secure.

Surely its only any good if the police already have your prints on record, if your prints havnt been recorded thers nothing to match them too...

Maybe a good idea for persistant offenders

I was actually watching Traffic Cops special on UK Gold from 2003 last night and the DWP and customs have been using this to find the identity of people at roadside checks for years.

It seemed to work well, and seemed very accurate, but who knows what the police system will be like...

good idea for catching car theives etc,also like the idea of immediate info of uninsured cars by scanning the reg plate. but TBH.if i got pulled for doing 70 in a 60 and asked to give them my fingerprint,i'd be a bit miffed. only for suspected cartheives or criminals,not for me

wat r they ment 2 do if the havent got ur prints like stuy said

well they aint taklin my prints for a kick off

What do you mean Gary? If they ask for your prints, you will refuse? You will be taking a trip to the police station for your troubles then mate, theres no point in not giving them your prints, unless of course you have something to hide...

Its only Volentary at the moment so you can refuse....

Yes, whilst it is on trial maybe. But as soon as it becomes nationwide, it will be compulsary, afterall what would be the point in it otherwise.

if ive got my licence with me or sumat else to prove my ID then they can whistle for my prints.

and unless they nick me they aint takin me to the police station neither.

no not a thing to hide at all but do you honestly believe they wont keep them on a database of some sort??

Im also pretty sure they can only store your finger prints following a caution / conviction, they cant just scan your prints for the record....

Basically, as I already mentioned, if your prints arent in their database, taking them will be useless to them, all it will show is who your not lol

Gary, I dont see what is wrong with them being kept on a database. Your DNA will be kept on a database anyway before 2009, as ID cards are being bought in.

Stuy, they wont be able to get matches to law abiding people, but anyone who has been in trouble with the police before will have the prints on record. Im not sure if you have ever seen Traffic Cops on the BBC, but literally every week they have bagheads and the like claiming to be people they are not, giving in false names etc...

Yet, they always find out who they are eventually and 99% of the time they have long criminal records, so their prints would already be on record. I think this is the people the bacon are aiming it at.

It is a massive waste of police time trying to find out the persons real identity.

matty because if i havnt done anything wrong then i dont see why i should be fingerprinted in the first place, if ive got my licence with me which i would have then theyve no need to take it have they ?

I know what you mean Gary, but their argument is guaranteed to be if you have done nout wrong, then you wont mind.

I suppose it rings true, and them having a database of everyone is the only way they can match someones identity.

Im still not convinced by the reliability of finger printing anyway.

well nothin wrong and i do mind so it aint gona happen

Matty, its called a right to privacy.....

Maybe so, but Scooby, you moan about uninsured drivers etc in some threads, so you have to agree that if this can help crack down on them (which it will, even though its not the schemes main objective), is it not a good thing?

I agree with privacy to a point, but we all have passports, NI numbers, electoral roll registrations etc, so whats wrong the authorities having our fingerprints, if we have nothing to hide and we arnt criminals?

As I say, the bacon are going to have everyones DNA samples when the ID cards are launched, so fingerprints is nothing really.

I agree with Gary, if you have some form of ID on you, I'd much prefer to be using that as a first form of identification rather than fingerprinting.

It should only be used when necessary i.e. as a last resort for failure to provide their real name. But like everything else, it's powers will get abused and they'll become lazy and just try and use it on everyone they stop.

I do moan about uninsured drivers but why should my right to privacy be compramised coz of these ..........

Isnt that why we have the MID ?

i dont mind giving my finger prints. if u have nothing to hide, dont worry about it.
i know it probably wont happen but i reakon they should take everyones finger prints, it would help alot with crime.

Exactly, the only reason people have for not giving their fingerprints in is to avoid being caught doing something...

Its not like the plod can then go selling your prints to 3rd party organisation

So if you are not a criminal and arnt intending to be one at any time, then you wont mind.

i agree wid mosta ya good idea to get car theives n it wud be quiker than gettin station to find details over phone. but i do feel like they startin to go too far wid fingerprintin n tha its like big brother, but then the arguement of sayin if ya done nuin rong ya wont mind pops up again. what if they take ya figer prints then ya cut ya finger and the prints change on ya hand theyll do ya for tryin to be sum one else by mistake lol

Lol, well finger printing is NOT reliable anyway, id rather DNA swabbing, but it is very complex to work out and require a fair amount of processing power to give accurate results.

But anything that lowers/prevents/deters crime, im all for it!

yeh same ere i they gunna vring it in permanent nuin we can do bout it but id just feel that it cud have many errors in first couple of years, ya no while gerrin everyoes printes n tha

Well they are moving towards a compulsary DNA database, and they are developing a mobile DNA system iirc, that may be able to be stored in Police cars in the future.

Atm, the mobile one they have is like the size of petrol pump lol and usually they only hire them for special operations iirc, but they will eventually be made smaller, and small enough to be carried on every police car.

The ID card (which I am very much against) will contain your DNA profile too, so they wont have to swab, except to prove identity!

i herd bout them they wer on news enit i was a bit shocked they were guna bring them out i mean wat if ya lost it bet theyd make ya pay like 80 quid for newen the scaves

its just another money makin scheme our goverment ave put together lol i am totally against the idea but only time will tell

you can always ask for a calibration certificate with any device used by the police and by law they must provide it or they cant use the reading as evidence so if ur good no need to worry!

so long as they give a kfc wipe to get rid of the ink...

..really?...any device?...hmmmm!

lol...

yeah, no cert an it no good...