TexasCHLforum.com

Tim the Teacher wrote:...I also worked at a top secret location in Nevada and couldn't get on the site unless my fingerprints matched the ones stored digitally on a computer...

Whoa, dude! Which "top secret location" in Nevada did you work at?

Groom Lake perhaps...

dawg wrote:I was told by my instructor that when the DPS gets behind processing applications (which is often) they will look for the slightest imperfection on the print cards and send the applicaiton back to the applicant.

I sincerely hope that isn't true...although, I can unfortunately visualize this sort of thing occurring in an office full of civil servants.

Thanks again for the responses, guys. I feel pretty good about the quality of my fingerprints now.

Jbirds1210 and Seamus TX:

Thanks guys, your responses were informative and put me a bit more at ease about the fingerprint issue. Jbirds1210, I appreciate the link to the FBI fingerprinting guidelines that you included in your reply. I checked it out, and compared their examples of "good prints" to the photocopies I have on-hand of my own fingerprint cards (yep, I photocopied every form that was submitted to DPS just to have my own complete record of the application). In sum, according to the standards set out in that FBI website, my prints should be good-to-go. We'll see if that holds true...

SeamusTX, you made a very compelling point about the budgetary limits placed on the activities of the federal government. I only hope that those guys are still "playing by the rules," know what I mean? As a practical matter, the feds' inability to effectively identify illegal immigrants does suggest that big brother's powers of surveillance are, in fact, limited by a mixture of real-world factors and a bit of ineptitude. Funny, It's both tremendously frustrating and yet somehow strangely reassuring to realize that our government is incompetent in some matters!

Thanks again,
-BK

seamusTX wrote:

badkarma56 wrote:... I've personally been fingerprinted at least five times in my life ... including this most recent set for the CHL application. Surely, there's got to already be a "classifiable" set of my prints previously stored in some government database with either the Feds or Texas or both!!

Personally, I don't want that kind of cross-referencing to take place. It has potential for abuse.

- Jim

SeamusTX,

I totally hear you, loud and clear dude! I'm by no means a fan of big brother; however, I wouldn't mind "them" doing a little "data mining" for the limited purpose of classifying fingerprints and thus expediting CHL permit issuance for law-abiding Americans.

Sadly, the cynic in me believes that they've already "cross-referenced" nearly every American's private information for other debatable purposes (e.g., the provisions of the Patriot Act, NSA-managed domestic surveillance programs, etc.). I believe it's simply the case that our current government wants to and likely already has cataloged many citizen's personal information in furtherance of a sub rosa "security" agenda, while simultaneously the same government hacks publicly pretend to be "back-logged" and incapable of quickly processing licenses, passports, etc. Have you tried to renew your passport recently? Let me assure you that the passport renewal process is completely out of control! I've been waiting three months already for that issue to get squared-away...

Perhaps I'm just too mean and critical of bureaucrats, or maybe I'm listening to far too much Coast to Coast A.M. with George Noory and Art Bell!

nitrogen wrote:Is there any reason we aren't on a computer system for this?

When I lived in California, my wife had to get her fingerprints to get her teaching license. Most police stations and DMV places there had automated computer fingerprinting stations that speed up the processing time considerably...

Good point, Nitrogen. I know that I've personally been fingerprinted at least five times in my life (some examples: while in the Navy, post-military employment with the federal government, heck even as a kid in elementary school , etc.) including this most recent set for the CHL application. Surely, there's got to already be a "classifiable" set of my prints previously stored in some government database with either the Feds or Texas or both!!

txinvestigator wrote:DPS uses a computer to classify prints. It rejects prints that a person would lkely classify. I have seen a local LEO fingerprint actually classify a set of prints that the computer rejected.

Txinvestigator, thanks for the reply. Your response has shed a little light on the subject for me, but provoked a few new questions!

Ultimately, it's got to be humans that solve crimes not computers, right? Computers can certainly be helpful tools in many occupations, but it's us "real people" who must make judgment calls and use common sense to resolve logical dilemmas. Why then would DPS utilize a computer system that rejects prints that actual LEO's would classify? The computer, like any machine, is probably trying to acheive some sort of arbitrary standard of perfection with human fingerprints. Guess what though, humans ain't perfect creations and probably have all sorts of physical quirks when it comes to individual fingerprints! Once again, I'm no expert, but my common sense tells me that the DPS process is poorly conceived to say the least.

If such stringent standards of computer perfection have to be met in order to obtain "classifiable" prints, how the heck are real-world crimes EVER SOLVED via fingerprint evidence? Are convicts in the habit of leaving "perfect" digital prints on items at crime scenes, and thus getting convicted accordingly? Of course not. So on what legitimate basis is DPS sending CHL applicants to get digitally fingerprinted for an extra fee? I tell you what, this whole situation smacks of simple bureaucratic foot-draggin' and profiteering to me.

Hey all,

After familiarizing myself with much of this forum's intriguing scuttlebutt , I'm struck by the sheer volume of CHL applicants who have issues with their fingerprints. Good Lord willing, this will not be an issue with my pending application ; how and why precisely does this problem occur with such frequency?

I realize that mistakes can and are made everyday by all sorts of professionals, but how does an LEO/LEO-trained fingerprinter fail to realize on-the-spot that they haven't "rolled" a classifiable set of prints? Shouldn't they inspect their own handywork and immediately ascertain whether the prints will be rejected? Recently, when I did my CHL class, I noticed that the fingerprint technician seemed to scrutinize each student's prints after completing them. His behavior implied that he would re-print anyone who had a "bad" set. Don't other fingerprint technicians that work CHL courses immediately review their work?

I'm obviously no expert on this matter, I just fail to see the reason for this lingering issue with so many people's delayed applications.

-BK