Or you could use the fag lighter to burn your fingertip.

seriously...

has the home office been indoctrinated by the stazi hard liners that thought shooting people was too good for them?

why not go the whole hog and lets tatoo a number on our fore arms and embed an rfid chip in everyone's brain stem, just incase they try to remove the number

whats wrong with nicking people and printing them under caution.... oh yeh they may get a solicitor to stick up for them

fought a long and bloody war against precisely this sort of obscenity.

And, in only a couple of weeks, we'll see the hypocrites who are stamping out our liberties pretending to "honour" the memory of our war dead, whilst conveniently forgetting the ideals of freedom for which they laid down their lives.

And they wonder why we, the public, have come to regard politicians with the same contempt they demonstrate for us?

rozzer: i would like to take your fingerprints

citizen: i haven't broken any law, have i now?

rozzer: i would like to take your fingerprints before I have to take you into custody

citizen: have I broken some law I'm not aware of and what's the charge

rozzer: you are now resisting and i'm going to have to taze you to get your fingerprint

citizen: well it you're going to arrest me and take me into custody I'm not resisting

rozzer: KEEERRRRZZZZZAAAAAPPPPPP!

rozzer2: BLAM BLAM BLAM That'll teach those damn no2id yoof

rozzer: she was old enough to be your mum

rozzer2: hell, that was my mum

I know someone who buys a shitter of a car giving false details. He drives uninsured and until recently he was driving whilst disqualified for several offences, including driving whilst disqualified. If he gets stopped he simply gives someone else's details (gleaned from 192.com) the car is normally confiscated and he goes on his merry way.

You can't be arrested for no insurance so there was no chance of him getting his fingerprints taken and the other offences discovered. The fact that he got away with it for the whole of a 3 year ban despite using about 8 different cars speaks volumes.

This was despite calls to the police who simply said that until they caught him there was nothing they could do!

I would say that is not an example of need. Who cares if they can't curtail someone's freedoms successfully if they have to curtail everyone's freedom AND right to privacy in order to stop it?

If this was used intelligently - then I can see the benefit. Unfortunately British cops have had their intelligence sacrificed on the great public alters of Political Correctness, League Tables and Performance Reports.

Before anyone shoots me down (I left my table leg and Oyster card at home) - there used to be a time where your average beat bobby knew exactly who the 8 or 10 little scumbags in his area were, and generally left everyone else alone unless they were doing something stupid. Even if you were caught for a High Crime, such as missing the bin with 1 errant chip, he'd probably just ask you to pick it up. No arrest, no DNA taken, no £100 fine and criminal record for attempting to defend yourself in court (e.g "the street lamp hasn't worked for 2 months - I didn't see I'd missed the bin").

Anyway - I'd be for these scanners if the cops *did* use such a device to take back control of the streets from "untouchable" little scumbags who know fine well it's too much effort for the cops to arrest them, take them down the nick etc to confirm their identity.

Alas - I suspect the "Papers, Citizen" poster has got the right end of the stick.

Which is why I'll say it again - every cop, plastic plod, for-profit "enforcement" muppet should have "always-on" copper-cams when they're on duty. End of every day - the whole lot is downloaded into a big database, and this DB is put under the custody of an independent civil liberties group. Citizen A (actually, it would be Subject A in the UK) complains about rozzer1 being a prick and tazing her for legitimately questioning why she was being detained/forced to give fingerprints unreasonably - then at least the conversations would be recorded, and be made available to SubjectA on a FoI request. Subject A could then sue Rozzer1 for harassment, unlawful detention, assault etc.

Of course, the bad cops out there would squeal like pigs (er...) about their "civil liberties" - but f*ck em. We are all monitored 24/7 now. Emails/Comms, ANPR, Oyster, CCTV,financial transactions blah blah. It's about re-balancing the equation.

I know it will never happen, but it's nice to dream :)

p.s - I'd also want the gits at British airport security on camera as well. Try being a lying obnoxious little Hitler if Customer A could complain and have the interaction reviewed independently when he comes back! Especially the cow who threatened to have me arrested "because she could".

Mine's the one with the serious chip on the shoulder ;)

There IS NOT a need. That attitude is the one that leads to us sleep-walking out of our civil liberties.

So to ensure that people like that are kept in line you're willing to give up your own freedoms?.. Maybe we should send a few cops around your home just to make sure you're not doing anything illegal, just in case, you know like you said - better safe than sorry...

If they are just checking your print against what might be in the DB then I don't see a real issue with it.

If they start capturing the data and then storing it against the name you gave, then it's a serious problem.

Surely just a right of the police to pull someone in for driving without insurance- which is both bloody antisocial, pig-headed and illegal- would suffice rather than a law introduced to combat this problem that can be greatly overused?

I have no problem with uninsured drivers being pulled in (quite the opposite, in fact), but would rather that the legislation allowing this didn't affect anyone who wasn't driving or was driving with insurance.

@Anonymous Moron #1 :

"You can't be arrested for no insurance."

<Road Traffic Act 1988 s143 (C2)>

It is an offence to use (or permit to be used) a motor vehicle on a road or public place when there is not in force a relation to the use of the vehicle such a policy of insurance in respect of third party risks as complies with the Road Traffic Act.

</>

What do you think the ANPR cameras in traffic plod's cars are for, dimwit ?

And even if that weren't the case, that is simply an argument for a need for powers of arrest for uninsured drivers, not an argument for universal stop and fingerprint and all that goes with it.

@Anonymous Moron #2:

"To many people talk about civil rights etc but its the criminals who are being protected."

Which criminals are being protected, by whom, and against what, exactly ? Go ahead, convince me.

are out in force on this one.

Do you *really* want to live in a 'society' where absolutely everything you do, say, read, write, watch and listen to (and most likely, think) are monitored, controlled and proscribed by the *Government*?

Because I'm fucked if I do.

Wake up to what's happening. It does NOT give anyone any more freedom or security, just FEAR.

In the meantime, I'll be damned if they're taking my fucking fingerprints.

Pass the Caustic Soda, will you.

Oh, never mind, they're all around us having their fingerprints taken by plod!

Checks map then history books. I thought Australia was the penal colony?

they will be marching towards me, their hands outstretched with this fingerprinting machine, and a camera on top of their head almost poking my eye out. What the hell is going on?

If the crime/suspicion is bad/strong enough they ought to be arrested at the time and taken to be locked up then and there. If the person looks like a suspect, finding out what his fingerprint looks like, that he was done for having 'extreme cartoon porn' 5 years ago and that his name is definitely Peter J Smith is not going to help you figure out if it's the person that just punched someone down the road and ran away.

AND, if there is no crime, there is no reason to fingerprint anyone. Unless of course they will randomly fingerprint 'suspicious' people.... So what exactly is the point of this? (probably fear)

I have a print I'd willingly give them but it comes off the bottom of my shoe at considerable force.

This machine is not an evidential fingerprint taker. Think of it this way.

If you are driving and you do something stupid you will get stopped by the filth. If the relevant criteria are met you may be required to provide a breath test. Now this is purely a screening device which will tell the operator whether or not you are likely to be over the drink/drive limit or not. The evidential machine is back at the nick.

Now suppose you are the sort of person that tells lies. You have committed an offence for which you could receive a summons, caution etc. You decide that your name is Micky Mouse and so on just to be a twat. The police officer could now arrest you for the purposes of establishing who you are. This piece of legislation is used with foreign lorry drivers/itinerants and good old Travellers to name but a few.

If you have your fingerprints on police files then this little gizmo, of which you rant, will do a similar screening job to the breath test device from the earlier scenario.

It will say one of the following -

1. No trace so you still get nicked to establish who you are.

2. Your real name is Daffy Duck so that a summons can later be served or

3. It fails to read your print so you still end up at the nick.

Back at the nick you will be live scanned which will establish that you are Mr Duck and everyone goes away happy!

A mobile scanner is not Judge, jury and executioner and as with most of the shit the police are given it will be neither use nor ornament.

Kim and Aggie would have a field day with this little wonder... how the fsck do they clean it between "swipes"??

Fsckwits.