Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Privacy Government United States

FBI Bringing Biometric Photo Scanning To North Carolina, Via DMV 221

AHuxley writes "The FBI is getting fast new systems to look at local North Carolina license photos via the DMV. As the FBI is not authorized to collect and store the photos, they use the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles. The system takes seconds to look at chin widths and nose sizes. The expanded technology used on millions of motorist could be rolled out across the USA. The FBI's Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System is also getting an upgrade to DNA records, 3-D facial imaging, palm prints and voice scans."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FBI Bringing Biometric Photo Scanning To North Carolina, Via DMV

Comments Filter:
  • by Lord Byron Eee PC ( 1579911 ) on Tuesday October 13, 2009 @11:30AM (#29732457)

    Write your governor, state representatives, federal representatives, and your DMV to let them know how you feel.

    Especially if you are a resident of NC. I for one would be pretty pissed off if I was forced to participate in a (virtual) line-up.

  • by z4ns4stu ( 1607909 ) on Tuesday October 13, 2009 @11:31AM (#29732461)
    In Oklahoma and a few other states (Connecticut for sure) all adults are required by law to have photo identification on them at all times. If you don't qualify for a DL, you can still get a State-issued ID card.
  • by StikyPad ( 445176 ) on Tuesday October 13, 2009 @11:39AM (#29732571) Homepage

    This is a common misconception, but you're only required to identify yourself if asked. Carrying a license is obviously required when engaged in the relevant activity (driving, hunting, selling alcohol, etc.)

  • by LordAndrewSama ( 1216602 ) on Tuesday October 13, 2009 @11:46AM (#29732661)
    That's not the case in Britain. Nor iin South Africa. Although it was for black people during apartheid. I guess I'll start calling your country the land of the less free every day?
  • by qwerty shrdlu ( 799408 ) on Tuesday October 13, 2009 @12:26PM (#29733175)
    Keeping the pictures on hand does help to prove identity theft. Back in the 90's I sold a couple of cell phones to a guy who'd actually gotten some one else's nfo by rooting through his gym bag. The ID looked like a genuine ID from the DMV because it was. But being the criminal mastermind he was, he didn't realize the DMV would have a copy of the ID with his picture and the other fellows name. Awkward. By not keeping the photos, you'd make it much harder to prove it wasn't you.
  • disturbing... (Score:3, Informative)

    by ZenDragon ( 1205104 ) on Tuesday October 13, 2009 @12:29PM (#29733209)
    All this information collection as of late is getting a bit disturbing. I work for a bank and I had managed to go 28 years without being fingerprinted, until this year. I have nothing to hide nor fear but I definately do not like having my biometric information floating around out there. I could care less about my social security number and all that, its just inforamtion that can not be directly tied to me. However as a law abiding citizen I take issue with ALL of my information being documented. Part of the patriot act required that every employee working for a bank get finger printed, background checked, photographed, etc. Thanks GWB Lets just make it easier for somebody to steal identities. Seems like the cold war all over again except this time its the government ploting a war against its own citizens.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 13, 2009 @12:30PM (#29733229)
  • by commodore64_love ( 1445365 ) on Tuesday October 13, 2009 @12:38PM (#29733339) Journal

    The U.S. Supreme Court over-turned those laws as illegal searches. You're required to provide basic information like your name, address, but not required to show a photo ID. You need not carry anything on your body.

  • by cats-paw ( 34890 ) on Tuesday October 13, 2009 @12:45PM (#29733421) Homepage

    I received a speeding ticket in NC WHICH I PAID - it was $100.

    5 years later I'm trying to get a driver's license in ANOTHER STATE and can't because of my "ticket" in NC.

    I have to call NC and I find out I have to send them another $25. The stupid DMV shithead on the other end of the phone won't tell me why exactly it is I need to do this considering I had already paid the ticket.

    This is why cooperation between various government agencies is not a good thing.

    Fuckers. And yes, I am still bitter about it, why do you ask ?

    I'd rather take my chances with Al-Qaeda than the government trying to "protect" me.

  • by spinkham ( 56603 ) on Tuesday October 13, 2009 @02:05PM (#29734563)

    Yeah, I didn't mean to imply that you were required to say those things over and over, just don't say much else. Most police officers are decent enough people, and just trying to offend them doesn't do anyone much good. Endeavor to be as polite as possible, but don't respond to questions that start with "May I?" in the affirmative. Avoiding saying yes is much harder then you would think as police practice how to get you to say yes without really thinking through what you've done.

    Also, if you do end up saying those things a number of times, by all means rephrase them. "Am I allowed to leave now?" "May I go now?".. Etc.. Don't be a jerk, or the courts might accept your actions as probable cause. But also realize they're trying to manipulate you, and get away as soon as you are allowed.

    Especially with drug enforcement being what it is in some districts, all it takes is an officer planting (or truly accidentally dropping) a single seed on you or your car, and your whole life can be upended. 99% of cops are decent people, but our laws are what they are to protect the abuse by the minority.

    Also, note none of this applies to border crossings or airports. The courts have mostly held that you have pretty much no rights in those places.. But even so, you can still fly without ID, just expect a rigorous search and possible short detention first.

  • by locallyunscene ( 1000523 ) on Tuesday October 13, 2009 @04:26PM (#29736449)
    Ideologically Bush [] is much closer than Obama [] with respect to Fascism []. Neither are really comparable to Hitler or Mussolini though, of course.

    Also, I hope you don't actually think anything on that site you linked is true. It's claims are the same type of scare-mongering as William Ayers [], and Obama's birth certificate [](implying Obama is a Black Panther and/or Muslim in disguise respectively, same as your link).

1 1 was a race-horse, 2 2 was 1 2. When 1 1 1 1 race, 2 2 1 1 2.