Fingerprint Rejection...Why and How?

[badkarma56]

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

[txinvestigator]

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.

[badkarma56]

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.

[nitrogen]

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...

[badkarma56]

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!!

[seamusTX]

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

Cost, most likely. The technology is available and I've heard of people using it for CHL fingerprints.

... 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

[badkarma56]

... 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!

[jbirds1210]

Fingerprint rejection is a bit irritating.....I have not had it happen to me (yet). I have a renewal packet in Austin so we shall see how it goes.

I understand the desire to have a quality set of prints on file for someone.

In Texas I believe that both thumbs are a requirement for a DL or ID (I am sure there is a procedure for folks missing their thumbs). Once a good print is obtained for that ID, which is required for the Texans that get a CHL....it takes a VERY small piece of a fingerprint to verify it is the same person.

Prints get rejected for a smudge, but usually the vital parts make it on smudged prints when a trained person is taking them. There are exceptions.

Pardon my babble.....here is some really good information about the important parts of a fingerprint.

http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/takingfps.html

[seamusTX]

Let me try to allay your fears.

The federal government must pay for whatever it does. The money must be a line-item in the federal budget. Congress is very specific about much of it.

There is some opportunity for fudging -- using funds appropriated for one purpose for another. However, it is borderline or outright illegal to do so.

There are constant battles in Congress about this kind of data-mining. The NRA is currently fighting to keep something called the Tiahart amendment, which prevents public access to firearms sales data collected by the BATFE.

The state of Texas came up with a system for administering CHLs that is independent of other systems. They did not consider the challenge of getting prints from other states or the military. The legislator did not consider it (as far as I know) or allocate the money to do so.

Our system is more restrictive than some states, and far more permissive than others. That's just the way it is.

P.S.: If the federal government had this kind of data-mining, they could identify illegal aliens working on false Social Security numbers. The can't at present.

- Jim

[badkarma56]

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]

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?

I do not trust any level of government 100%. The administration had some scary people in it in 2001, and some are still there. There is a personality type that thinks security is more important than legality or freedom.

However, when they do try to do things in secret, they often screw up and get caught. The federal government has independent inspectors general who can report irregularities to Congress or even initiate criminal charges. Also, whistleblowers sometimes come forward.

The fact that all these safeguards are triggered from time to time gives me some confidence that things are generally on the level.

I also look at the people who are opponents of the administration. If the administration wanted to get rid of them, they could be caught with drugs or child pornography, or commit "suicide" or have traffic "accidents." That doesn't happen.

- Jim

[txinvestigator]

I have been fingerprinted for CHL purposes at least 6 times, and for Private Security Board much more than that. (DPS runs the PSB, and prints go to the same place as CHL prints) I have NEVER had prints returned.

I was the director of training for a place that does 120+ Chl students month. In 3 years I can recall about 3 times a student had to come back for re-prints.


I imagine the percentage of returned prints is minuscule.

[Xander]

I don't know how much credence to give it, but the electronic fingerprint propaganda that DPS is pushing seems to claim that 25% of the ink fingerprints are rejected.

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administra ... dentix.pdf

[Hoppes]

There are constant battles in Congress about this kind of data-mining. The NRA is currently fighting to keep something called the Tiahart amendment, which prevents public access to firearms sales data collected by the BATFE.

- Jim

That would be Todd Tiarht.

Below is the URL for the Mayors Against Illegal Guns web site. These mayors want to data-mine BATFE records and use the data to support the filing of law suits against gun manufacturers. This is why the NRA -ILA is fighting this amendment. For several years, Tiarht has tied his amendment to appropriations bills and Mayor Bloomberg and other mayors are spitting mad at him. The Mayor's web site lists the key things done by the Tiarht Amendment:

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org ... ahrt.shtml

Below is Kansas Representative Todd Tiahrt's web site URL:

http://www.house.gov/tiahrt/

The entire amendment might be listed or linked on the web site for you to read. I have not verified. Below are a couple of starting URLs you can browse if you want to know more abotu the Tiahrt Amendment:

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=9723

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=9736

http://www.startribune.com/grow/story/1135433.html

Hoppes

[seamusTX]

Sorry about the misspelling. It's not exactly as easy to remember as Smith.

- Jim