Harry Posted August 16, 2013 Share #1 Posted August 16, 2013 City public housing tenants should all be fingerprinted, Mayor Bloomberg said Friday, sparking an uproar from Democratic mayoral hopefuls. “What we really should have is fingerprinting to get in," Bloomberg said during his weekly appearance on “The John Gambling Show” on WOR-AM as he spoke about ways to improve safety in public housing. Within an hour, mayoral hopeful Bill Thompson likened the fingerprinting idea to Bloomberg's stance on stop-and-frisk, and called it "disrespectful" and "disgraceful." "Just like stop-and-frisk, this is another direct act of treating minorities like criminals,” Thompson, a former city controller, said in a statement. “Mayor Bloomberg wants to make New Yorkers feel like prisoners in their own homes."Read more: Source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted August 16, 2013 Share #2 Posted August 16, 2013 Not to be funny, I'm really starting to think that Bloomberg is seriously psychotic, his comments has been way off the mark to the point it's surreal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbo19 Posted August 16, 2013 Share #3 Posted August 16, 2013 Not to be funny, I'm really starting to think that Bloomberg is seriously psychotic, his comments has been way off the mark to the point it's surreal. At this point he couldn't give two f**ks. He's leaving office anyway, so to him it must mean that he feels the need to perpetuate more crap to rile up the masses. This just further demonstrates the personal agenda that Bloomberg holds, and how he is willing to disregard personal, civil, and constitutional rights in the name of what he considers "safety". There are other methods of restricting those with a criminal record from entering, so I fail to see why treating everyone like a criminal would be anymore efficient. Also, on a side note I wouldn't be surprised if many of the supporters of stop and frisk supported this as well, under the reasoning of keeping out the "thugs"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted August 16, 2013 Share #4 Posted August 16, 2013 Not saying I fully agree here, but I can see the point of this as there have been gangs and other crimes in the projects. It's the silent majority who don't seem to want to address the issues with their own neighborhoods in fear of being snitches or fear of retaliation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDTA Posted August 16, 2013 Share #5 Posted August 16, 2013 Ok,i'm a supporter of stop and frisk and all, but this is definitely, NOT OK. This is definitely going way too far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted August 16, 2013 Share #6 Posted August 16, 2013 Bloomy's Loony!! My friend just said that.Had me ROTFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted August 16, 2013 Share #7 Posted August 16, 2013 This is not going good for community relations, that is my concern for this. Again maybe they should implement this at Yorkshire Towers on the UES. If they can do that then I wouldn't even be responding to the article. Because then it wouldn't be a race issue apparently from what Bloomberg projects from his barrage of enforcement with policies that clearly insults minorities. For a reason that some are afraid to tackle. I'm not that's for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted August 16, 2013 Share #8 Posted August 16, 2013 This is not going good for community relations, that is my concern for this. Again maybe they should implement this at Yorkshire Towers on the UES. If they can do that then I wouldn't even be responding to the article. Because then it wouldn't be a race issue apparently from what Bloomberg projects from his barrage of enforcement with policies that clearly insults minorities. For a reason that some are afraid to tackle. I'm not that's for sure. All fair point Realizm.Its as if he doesn't care a bit for the majority of the people under his juresdiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted August 17, 2013 Share #9 Posted August 17, 2013 At this point I'm pretty sure he's saying these things for shock value, since as a lame-duck mayor he doesn't have much political capital left to support anything major. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoSpectacular Posted August 17, 2013 Share #10 Posted August 17, 2013 Not to be funny, I'm really starting to think that Bloomberg is seriously psychotic, his comments has been way off the mark to the point it's surreal. He's mad that Stop and Frisk was deemed unconstitutional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted August 17, 2013 Share #11 Posted August 17, 2013 He's mad that Stop and Frisk was deemed unconstitutional. That's what a lot of my people are saying. Since he lost his battle on the justification of the controversial stop and frisk policy, he just can't deal with himself. So now he resorts to this proposal to imprison and criminalize the poor in public housing just because. I think it's outright ridiculous. The good news however is that this is receiving stiff opposition from advocacy groups, the press, even the other mayoral candidates *including* Christine Quinn, as I've learned watching NY1 this morning. I doubt this is going to stick. As Bobtehpanda stated he is nothing but a lame duck mayor who is trying to get his last hurrah before he has to leave office by making grandiose proclamations for the shock value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbo19 Posted August 18, 2013 Share #12 Posted August 18, 2013 Without out doubt Bloomberg will for sure go down as one of NYC's biggest failures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion VII 4 Life Posted August 18, 2013 Share #13 Posted August 18, 2013 I don't have too much of an issue with this. I mean, plenty of states fingerprint driver's license applicants, it's a condition of taking advantage of these services. It is a little out there and not something I completely agree with, but I don't mind fingerprinting those looking to take advantage of public housing. Projects are high crime areas, and having photos and fingerprints of everyone living in them could help to bring down crime This is not a racial issue. No matter what a person's race is, if they want public housing they have to be photographed and fingerprinted and that, to me for the most part is reasonable. Calling racial profiling on everything makes the left look bad. My only issue is that these fingerprints obviously aren't erased when someone no longer needs public housing, they stay in the database even if the person never committed a crime. And before I get negative rep, remember that Harry specifically said not to downvote things we don't agree with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted August 18, 2013 Share #14 Posted August 18, 2013 Calling racial profiling on everything makes the left look bad. My only issue is that these fingerprints obviously aren't erased when someone no longer needs public housing, they stay in the database even if the person never committed a crime. Racial microagression in politics on the part of the extreme right makes them look equally as bad. An act of racial microagression, coined by psychologists, is a subtle racially motivated attack without the straight use of racist obscenities. It's clearly seems to me and the general public that Bloomberg is full of it. It's been the talk of the town on the radio news networks. I don't think the race card is being played here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion VII 4 Life Posted August 18, 2013 Share #15 Posted August 18, 2013 Racial microagression in politics on the part of the extreme right makes them look equally as bad. An act of racial microagression, coined by psychologists, is a subtle racially motivated attack without the straight use of racist obscenities. It's clearly seems to me and the general public that Bloomberg is full of it. It's been the talk of the town on the radio news networks. I don't think the race card is being played here. I mean, I just don't see how it's racist just because the projects are predominantly minorities. There's white gangs and criminals too, believe me, I know. Crime is crime in my book. And also, I do NOT like Bloomberg at all, but I gotta say this one isn't such a bad idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbo19 Posted August 18, 2013 Share #16 Posted August 18, 2013 At any rate I see this more of a class issue over all else. Whether anyone is in agreement or not this is very discriminatory to those of a lower income level and social class, as all residents will be subjected to this regardless if they chose to or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realizm Posted August 18, 2013 Share #17 Posted August 18, 2013 Which was my original point on this page from the very first post on page 2. I wouldn't pass it by Bloomberg for a minute though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted August 18, 2013 Share #18 Posted August 18, 2013 I'm gonna keep this short. All this is, is a slick way of getting more people into the system (database).... Once the fed's & local law enforcement have your fingerprint on file, forget it. It would then be assumed that patrons of public housing all have a criminal record of some sort - Which is the running assumption/stereotype anyway..... Even though you may not have a criminal record, your fingerprint comes up as a match as BEING on file... Ha ha, surprise surprise, you MUST be on here for a reason - and the immediate suspicion would NOT be just for being a public housing tenant... Man, f*** that...... I don't give a shit what it is - from being a prospective employee somewhere, to cash a check at a bank that you don't have an account at (BoA does this BS), or whatever, Anything that requires me getting fingerprinted, I'm not for it..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider Posted August 18, 2013 Share #19 Posted August 18, 2013 Not saying I fully agree here, but I can see the point of this as there have been gangs and other crimes in the projects. It's the silent majority who don't seem to want to address the issues with their own neighborhoods in fear of being snitches or fear of retaliation. tell that to turbo... I'm gonna keep this short. All this is, is a slick way of getting more people into the system (database).... Once the fed's & local law enforcement have your fingerprint on file, forget it. It would then be assumed that patrons of public housing all have a criminal record of some sort - Which is the running assumption/stereotype anyway..... Even though you may not have a criminal record, your fingerprint comes up as a match as BEING on file... Ha ha, surprise surprise, you MUST be on here for a reason - and the immediate suspicion would NOT be just for being a public housing tenant... Man, f*** that...... I don't give a shit what it is - from being a prospective employee somewhere, to cash a check at a bank that you don't have an account at (BoA does this BS), or whatever, Anything that requires me getting fingerprinted, I'm not for it..... I have a secuirty guard license. To get it, one of the steps was I had to be fingerprinted. By your logic, red flags would be poping up left and right now becuase of that for anyone else who has such a license. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted August 18, 2013 Share #20 Posted August 18, 2013 I have a secuirty guard license. To get it, one of the steps was I had to be fingerprinted. By your logic, red flags would be poping up left and right now becuase of that for anyone else who has such a license. Well, yes, that's my logic & I still stand by it.... It would be nothing for a 3rd party to turn your fingerprints over to law enforcement or whatever (for any reason), and they'll put that shit right into their database (however they do it).... I mentioned prospective employee; you so happen to fall under that category. Say what you will, but I do not trust anyone with my fingerprints..... Regardless of the reason it was obtained for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted August 18, 2013 Share #21 Posted August 18, 2013 I'd rather have people info in the database so if a Crime is committed it doesnt take as long to solve it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider Posted August 18, 2013 Share #22 Posted August 18, 2013 Well, yes, that's my logic & I still stand by it.... It would be nothing for a 3rd party to turn your fingerprints over to law enforcement or whatever (for any reason), and they'll put that shit right into their database (however they do it).... I mentioned prospective employee; you so happen to fall under that category. Say what you will, but I do not trust anyone with my fingerprints..... Regardless of the reason it was obtained for. And? What exactly do you think they'd do with them? In my circumstance there is no third party, the state already has my finger prints. It was a requirement of the state that I get my prints taken to get the license, and you can't, legally atleast, get a secuirty job in New York without that license. Therefore, unless you don't have any hands, you can't get a secuirty job without have your prints on file with the state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted August 19, 2013 Share #23 Posted August 19, 2013 And? What exactly do you think they'd do with them? And, what.... Furthermore, it aint about what law enforcement would "do" with them... AFAIC, it's the fact that they would have them - for people that haven't even been admitted to any jail or prison or whatever.... Why would law enforcement (or the feds or the state or whoever) even need your prints if that's the case..... ....It was a requirement of the state that I get my prints taken to get the license, and you can't, legally atleast, get a secuirty job in New York without that license. Therefore, unless you don't have any hands, you can't get a secuirty job without have your prints on file with the state. I understand all that... I'm not exactly sure why you're even telling me this, or the fact that you have a security license, as it relates to what I originally said.... Again, I already stated that there are other reasons as to why someone would get fingerprinted..... It's like you're posting about your situation to try to show somehow that there are other reasons for getting fingerprinted..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted August 19, 2013 Share #24 Posted August 19, 2013 Therefore, unless you don't have any hands, you can't get a secuirty job without have your prints on file with the state.If you don't have hands, I don't think you'd do very well at the job. That's a pretty tough disability to overcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider Posted August 19, 2013 Share #25 Posted August 19, 2013 And, what.... Furthermore, it aint about what law enforcement would "do" with them... AFAIC, it's the fact that they would have them - for people that haven't even been admitted to any jail or prison or whatever.... Why would law enforcement (or the feds or the state or whoever) even need your prints if that's the case... You are illogically equating fingerprinting with being arrested. Fingerprinting is one of the most secure methods for confirming one's ID. My laptop has a built in fingerprint scanner that can not only be used to log into the computer in place of a password, but log into secure websites instead of signing in. Where as a key can be replicated and a password guessed, a fingerprint is more complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.