On 1/8/2016 11:58 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 06:01:47 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

"The Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System,

I think that if they actually had a good computerized fingerprint
system, it might call into question the infallibility of fingerprints.
I wonder how many matches they will have with different people and how
many points match if they did a global search of the database.
There are a number of cases where "experts" have positively matched
fingerprints and then found out they were wrong. This is really more
of an art than a science and there is a lot of opinion in the
identifications. The examiner decides which points match, which don't
and which are inconclusive.

A computer does it, at least initially. Inquiry results are
almost instantaneous. They don't have a bunch of FBI examiners looking
through books anymore. :-)


If this does get melded with a number of other biometric parameters it
would be much more useful but fingerprints alone are usually only
valuable when you have the print and an otherwise implicated suspect.
The first step might be to get better samples of everyone's
fingerprints because those smudgy cards they have now are far from
perfect. That is from the fingerprint guy at my sheriffs office. He
said that when they actually submit these to the FBI for something,
about half of them are rejected.

The most recent ones I've had done were done digitally, not with ink.
Up here and until about a year or so ago, your digital fingerprint was
taken every time you purchased a gun from an FFL. It was transmitted
electronically at the gun shop while you waited and the approval of the
sale was almost immediate. The purpose was to ensure it was really
*you* and that you had an active and current gun permit ... which also
means you had had a background check. The state replaced this system
with a "pin" number assigned to you. You have to provide it as well as
present your gun permit in order to purchase a firearm.


The up side of the computer is that it takes a lot of the "art" out of
this discipline and adds more impartial science. The computer will not
look at them with an opinion in mind.

On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 12:21:27 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 1/8/2016 11:58 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 06:01:47 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

"The Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System,

I think that if they actually had a good computerized fingerprint
system, it might call into question the infallibility of fingerprints.
I wonder how many matches they will have with different people and how
many points match if they did a global search of the database.
There are a number of cases where "experts" have positively matched
fingerprints and then found out they were wrong. This is really more
of an art than a science and there is a lot of opinion in the
identifications. The examiner decides which points match, which don't
and which are inconclusive.

A computer does it, at least initially. Inquiry results are
almost instantaneous. They don't have a bunch of FBI examiners looking
through books anymore. :-)



The question then is how good is the computer and how many hits do
they get on a partial set of prints?

If this does get melded with a number of other biometric parameters it
would be much more useful but fingerprints alone are usually only
valuable when you have the print and an otherwise implicated suspect.
The first step might be to get better samples of everyone's
fingerprints because those smudgy cards they have now are far from
perfect. That is from the fingerprint guy at my sheriffs office. He
said that when they actually submit these to the FBI for something,
about half of them are rejected.

The most recent ones I've had done were done digitally, not with ink.
Up here and until about a year or so ago, your digital fingerprint was
taken every time you purchased a gun from an FFL. It was transmitted
electronically at the gun shop while you waited and the approval of the
sale was almost immediate. The purpose was to ensure it was really
*you* and that you had an active and current gun permit ... which also
means you had had a background check. The state replaced this system
with a "pin" number assigned to you. You have to provide it as well as
present your gun permit in order to purchase a firearm.



Sorry, I guess I am old ;-)
The only tome I have had a digital fingerprint was at Busch Gardens
and they had problems with it. I kept being rejected.
Maybe my fingers are a little different than the general public.

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/finger%20wound.jpg

My wife said "good thing you don't have an I phone"

On 1/8/2016 7:39 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 12:21:27 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 1/8/2016 11:58 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 06:01:47 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

"The Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System,

I think that if they actually had a good computerized fingerprint
system, it might call into question the infallibility of fingerprints.
I wonder how many matches they will have with different people and how
many points match if they did a global search of the database.
There are a number of cases where "experts" have positively matched
fingerprints and then found out they were wrong. This is really more
of an art than a science and there is a lot of opinion in the
identifications. The examiner decides which points match, which don't
and which are inconclusive.

A computer does it, at least initially. Inquiry results are
almost instantaneous. They don't have a bunch of FBI examiners looking
through books anymore. :-)



The question then is how good is the computer and how many hits do
they get on a partial set of prints?

If this does get melded with a number of other biometric parameters it
would be much more useful but fingerprints alone are usually only
valuable when you have the print and an otherwise implicated suspect.
The first step might be to get better samples of everyone's
fingerprints because those smudgy cards they have now are far from
perfect. That is from the fingerprint guy at my sheriffs office. He
said that when they actually submit these to the FBI for something,
about half of them are rejected.

The most recent ones I've had done were done digitally, not with ink.
Up here and until about a year or so ago, your digital fingerprint was
taken every time you purchased a gun from an FFL. It was transmitted
electronically at the gun shop while you waited and the approval of the
sale was almost immediate. The purpose was to ensure it was really
*you* and that you had an active and current gun permit ... which also
means you had had a background check. The state replaced this system
with a "pin" number assigned to you. You have to provide it as well as
present your gun permit in order to purchase a firearm.



Sorry, I guess I am old ;-)
The only tome I have had a digital fingerprint was at Busch Gardens
and they had problems with it. I kept being rejected.
Maybe my fingers are a little different than the general public.

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/finger%20wound.jpg

My wife said "good thing you don't have an I phone"


Maybe you shouldn't sandpaper your fingertips. ;-)

On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 20:02:30 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 1/8/2016 7:39 PM, wrote:

Sorry, I guess I am old ;-)
The only tome I have had a digital fingerprint was at Busch Gardens
and they had problems with it. I kept being rejected.
Maybe my fingers are a little different than the general public.

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/finger%20wound.jpg

My wife said "good thing you don't have an I phone"


Maybe you shouldn't sandpaper your fingertips. ;-)

Hole saw

It is a lot better now tho but my fingerprint will never be the same.

On 1/9/2016 1:45 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 20:02:30 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 1/8/2016 7:39 PM, wrote:

Sorry, I guess I am old ;-)
The only tome I have had a digital fingerprint was at Busch Gardens
and they had problems with it. I kept being rejected.
Maybe my fingers are a little different than the general public.

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/finger%20wound.jpg

My wife said "good thing you don't have an I phone"


Maybe you shouldn't sandpaper your fingertips. ;-)

Hole saw

It is a lot better now tho but my fingerprint will never be the same.



Just think of what you can get away with now. BTW, I know a guy
who learned not to get a finger too close to a running fan belt pulley.