Slashdot Mirror
False Information A-Okay in Primary FBI Database
blamanj writes "The FBI's National Crime Information Center (NCIC), which compiles a huge database on criminals, arrest warrants, missing persons, etc., no longer has to put up with the pesky problem of ensuring the data is accurate. I guess the Justice Department isn't particularly concerned with justice anymore." The full text of the provision which the main FBI criminal database will no longer have to adhere to is: "Each agency that maintains a system of records shall ... maintain all records which are used by the agency in making any determination about any individual with such accuracy, relevance, timeliness, and completeness as is reasonably necessary to assure fairness to the individual in the determination."
Department of Persecution is mroe like it.
As someone whos involved in a little situation with our justice system, right now i can say that the court system needs some work. They constantly lose mailed items so you better have your OWN proof of what you sent out because they dont care. Our system is backlogged so bad that if there is a mistake nobody has the time to fix it. If you call to explain a problem the person on the other line usually says something like "wow that sucks but were really sorry nobody has time to go back and fix all this".
unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
It seems perfectly clear that to make a single person or organization responsible for the information in the database would leave them open for lawsuits when people were wrongly accused, denied employment, etc. This way, when a lawsuit gets filed, everyone points fingers at everyone else... It's an interesting idea that arises anytime groups colloborate (hardware people: don't look at us; it's the fault of the software people... software people: don't look at us; it's the fault of the hardware people... )
I thought Bush never read any books, but apparently he has been inspired by one! The irony, the irony!
I dunno, my read on the article is that the reason for dropping the requirement is because so much of the data comes from other sources. I guess if the sources in question are "reliable" why should the FBI be required to recheck the data? I mean, it's like writing a term paper. You back up your statements with credible sources, and if the sources are credible you're not expected to back up their statements too. Besides the existing system hasn't prevented mistakes anyway.
Not saying it's right, but it's more like they're just making official what was standard practice (or non-practice I guess) already.
Bah. What do I care. I don't know what I'm talking about. I'm Canadian.
how exactly do we request our FBI file? i've always wanted to know!
Definely. The lack of such an audit trail in Britain probably caused the big Tony Blair screw-up, where he disclosed "current" intelligence on Iraq that turned out to be lifted from someone's thesis that was more than 10 year's old.
This happened at the critical time when Colin Powell and he were making their case to show that Mr. Hussein was developing and hiding weapons of mass destruction. Although the case was strong, the mixup story was more meme-worthy than the long, detailed chain of evidence, and probably thus hurt the cause more than it was helped.
Donate background CPU time to fight cancer.
I have long believed that the word Justice has no place in government. Seriously, Justice is a moral thing, defined by social mores and subjective judgments about fairness. That department's job should be protecting the people, not punishing the bad guys. If you take away this idea that a government can and should punish the bad guys, for 'Justice' and replace it with the idea that we should apprehend bad guys to keep them from doing harm to society, a lot of thorny questions get very straightforward.
For instance, what is the Just and Fair thing to happen to an American guy who things the taliban is morally correct and goes to Afghanistan to join them? Ok, now ask what should be done to prevent such a man from harming Americans. Different question, and a much more practical one.
Justice is institutional revenge. Our government should not be making such judgments about right and wrong, they should be making judgments on how to protect and serve the populace.
This isn't completely tangential to the topic, either - consider how this would turn out (in an ideal world) if the fbi did not look at these databases as a tool to punish the evildoers, hunt them down at any cost to deliver that punishment, but as a tool to protect those who would be victims of the evildoers - in that view (ideal world, remember) the accuracy of the data would be inherently important as a part of that protection.
In such a view, there would be no such thing as a Victimless Crime, since crime would be defined by its harm to society (no victims, no harm done).
Executive Orders added to the US Patriot Act which allow indefinite detention, no access to attorneys, no specific charges, and no access to a judge.
What was that you were mumbling about lawmakers?
Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.
There has to be a Patriotic, red blooded, flag flying, American Citizen out there who will defend the Department of Justice? After all, 85% of americans support the current reich, um, I mean government!
Don't tell me all the polls are (gasp) WRONG!?.
P.S. I'm a Disabled Gulf(1) Veteran. I earned the right to say whatever the fuck I want about the country.
Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
As someone who used to do contract work for the government here in DC, I can pretty much assure you that there was no way your information would have been accurate in the first place.
I've spent half an hour explaining to govt employees the mystical function of the CAPS LOCK and the NUM LOCK keys, and these are the same people in charge of your records. So, we were all pretty much screwed from the get-go.
slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
Apparently US journalism has no obligations to adhere to the truth.
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
In the worst case scenario (well, almost worse case), you get arrested by a local cop for something that the NCIC said you did. You go to jail for a few days, then your lawyer sorts it all out.
After that, you sue the city for relying on a database that they know is not correct. You sue the PD for false imprisonment. You sue the FBI for slander/libel. You sue the Justice Dept for allowing these idiots to ruin your standing in the community.
Hell, you could even get 10 other people together and file a class-action with millions in punitave damages. Sure, the lawyers would get 40%, but that is still 60% of something you would have never seen. Than take your money and become a naturalized citizen of Swizerland. I hear Bern is nice this time of year...
I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
I think they know damn well that innocent people would go to prison. Just like they know damn well that prohibition creates violent crime (an obviously worse problem than drug use), yet they still wage their "war on drugs" against the people. Just like they know damn well that innocent people die in the electric chair (look at the number of innocents taken off death row every year), yet they still favor the death penalty. Just like they know damn well that a foreign policy based on force creates more war than it prevents, yet they still jump at the chance to invoke military force. Just like they know damn well that corporate welfare destroys market competition, yet they still love to throw our money at their corporate allies.
No, our government leaders are not dumb. They are simply doing what serves their interest. As they saying goes: You can't rule a nation of innocents. The more criminals to arrest (or "problems to solve" in general), the more power they gain over the people.
The solution? Limited government. Reduce the size of government, and the level of abuse will reduce proportionately.
Mail? Why are you trusting it to the postal service? If the cost of the mail not arriving is high at all, use FedEx/UPS/Airborne. Certified mail is not tracked at all, but those couriers track it all. Twice I've sent important documents to people via one of those couriers and had someone say "we haven't received it yet, sorry, we can't do anything for you." So while they were on the phone, I tracked it online, saw who signed for it, and told them that perhaps they should check with S. Barney (or whoever), who signed for it three hours ago. In both cases they found the documents while I patiently waited on hold.
You're missing some details.
#1: "Gore was the whiner, trying to steal the election." The lawsuits were filed by the Bush team. Apparently, Gore's team wanted to wait for FL to follow their laws. In fact, the Gore team pushed for recounts in certain counties when the Bush team refused a state-wide recount.
#2: Many thousands of FL residents were "scrubbed" from the voter rolls, because they had the similar names to convicted felons. This disproportionately hurt Gore, because most of the people scrubbed were minorities which leaned towards Gore in the election. The scrubbing was overseen by the FL secretary of state, who happened to be in charge of Bush's campaign in FL. Even if there was no intent at impropriety, it looks really fishy.
#3: There was one count. Then there was a recount of all non-disputed ballots (the punch card was totally punched through). A recount of disputed ballots was underway when the USSC stopped the counting. The recount of disputed ballots is required by FL law.
#4: The USSC apparently thought their decision was so bad that they put in it that it does not set a precident. If what they were doing was on the up-and-up, they'd let the precident stand.
#5: A media consortium completed the disputed recount, using several different criteria. The only one Bush won was if they stopped the recount where they did, with some counties recounted and others not. A full recount, no matter what level of dimpled/hanging/pregnant chads was used, ended up with Gore the winner. A full recount would have been most likely ordered by the FL Judge overseeing it, since a full recount would be fair.(Interestingly, the headlines said the opposite, but near the end of most of the stories they covered the details).
Yeah, it's legal because the USSC gets to decide what's legal. It's not right, but there's nothing those of us who disagree can do about it except vote in 2004.
Ashcroft didn't create those Executive Orders.
I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying the enforcers aren't the ones that change/create the laws.
You think he wasn't present when they were being formulated?
Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.