Background checks

[CLBuffalo]

There was a thread or a question in a thread about background checks and identity theft. Seems to me this could be much worse if it happens to you.

Yahoo News Story

[NCASAUmp]

Yeah, I'm not surprised. I have a cousin with the same first and last name, and I know he has a DUI in Wisconsin. I'd hate to have that count against me. Another person with my name happens to be an accomplished writer, having written a number of naval history books. Maybe that might work to my benefit?

Unfortunately, a couple of times, someone with a similarly-shaped middle initial got a few things on my credit report. And for some reason, my student loan agency decided to send things to HIS address and not mine for no apparent reason. Probably had my SSN on it, too.

The whole damn system is flawed. Terribly flawed. I normally wouldn't be a proponent of National IDs, but at this rate, something's gotta give.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Yeah, I'm not surprised. I have a cousin with the same first and last name, and I know he has a DUI in Wisconsin. I'd hate to have that count against me. Another person with my name happens to be an accomplished writer, having written a number of naval history books. Maybe that might work to my benefit?

Unfortunately, a couple of times, someone with a similarly-shaped middle initial got a few things on my credit report. And for some reason, my student loan agency decided to send things to HIS address and not mine for no apparent reason. Probably had my SSN on it, too.

The whole damn system is flawed. Terribly flawed. I normally wouldn't be a proponent of National IDs, but at this rate, something's gotta give.

And what makes you think those would not be vulnerable? What has caused this mess is the bleeding hearts and attorneys who have convinced cowardly judges who have turned what used to be a pretty decent country into a socialistic quagmire.

Of course, the moronic electorate is so gullible, I don't believe it will get better in my lifetime.

And AFA background checks are concerned, they are a feel-good joke that is an embarassment to any intelligent human being.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

And what makes you think those would not be vulnerable? What has caused this mess is the bleeding hearts and attorneys who have convinced cowardly judges who have turned what used to be a pretty decent country into a socialistic quagmire.

Well, one would hope that it would eliminate the confusion over whether which John William Smith. Speaking as someone who designs databases, giving someone a unique identifier is the only possible way to prevent confusion.

This all, of course, hinges upon the proper use of said identifier. If some systems circumvent it, then we're right back to square one.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Of course, the moronic electorate is so gullible, I don't believe it will get better in my lifetime.

And AFA background checks are concerned, they are a feel-good joke that is an embarassment to any intelligent human being.

Agreed. Background checks prevent nothing.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Agreed. Background checks prevent nothing.

They don't prevent those with a shady past who have taken efforts to disguise that past from getting themselves into situations that they should be allowed in. They do, however, prevent those who are making NO effort to disguise their past (and thus probably don't pose any threat) from getting into those same situations. Ironic, really.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

They don't prevent those with a shady past who have taken efforts to disguise that past from getting themselves into situations that they should be allowed in. They do, however, prevent those who are making NO effort to disguise their past (and thus probably don't pose any threat) from getting into those same situations. Ironic, really.

IOW, they only catch those who have already been caught and don't make any effort to hide it.

[txtrooper]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

And what makes you think those would not be vulnerable? What has caused this mess is the bleeding hearts and attorneys who have convinced cowardly judges who have turned what used to be a pretty decent country into a socialistic quagmire.

Of course, the moronic electorate is so gullible, I don't believe it will get better in my lifetime.

And AFA background checks are concerned, they are a feel-good joke that is an embarassment to any intelligent human being.

You got it rite.

[EsqUmp]

Background checks work differently depending on where you are. In New York, most officials have to be fingerprinted in order to work public high school games. In order to get fingerprinted, officials have to go to police stations or Dept of Ed offices that have "live scan" fingerprinting. Because it's based on fingerprints (not merely a name or date of birth), there is virtual no possibility of mistake. The Dept of Ed then gets a fingerprint response for the individual. Should the official be arrested, a response is automatically generated. Should the official choose to stop officiating, he/she can apply to have the fingerprints destroyed. Contrary to what many have argued, merely having a prior conviction doesn't bar officials from certification. The Dept of Ed takes into account the nature of the crime and when occurred. Aside from having to pay around $100 for this, there really haven't been any problems.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

Because it's based on fingerprints (not merely a name or date of birth), there is virtual no possibility of mistake.

Should the official choose to stop officiating, he/she can apply to have the fingerprints destroyed.

Contrary to what many have argued, merely having a prior conviction doesn't bar officials from certification. The Dept of Ed takes into account the nature of the crime and when occurred.

Aside from having to pay around $100 for this, there really haven't been any problems.

I wish we had an icon for COLOR ME SKEPTICAL. I would make it bold for all 4 comments.

[Steve M]

It's been said before, but....
They are a waste of time. There's a local school district who's assistant AD was just arrested for inappropriate stuff. He was fully checked on his background check, passed all of the state's requirements for school employees, ... all of this while in a relationship with a student athlete.

[EsqUmp]

You clearly speak while having no experience with this. I know officials who have convictions, but based on the age or type of conviction, can still officiate. Fingerprints are regularly destroyed in NYS, such as when someone who was arrested gets acquitted. For officials (or teachers or anyone else fingerprinted for work), you simply fill out a form. The state is legally required to return your prints. No two people have the same fingerprints (unlike DNA with identical twins). With the 10,000 or so fingerprint responses I've dealt with, I've never had the wrong person.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

You clearly speak while having no experience with this. I know officials who have convictions, but based on the age or type of conviction, can still officiate. Fingerprints are regularly destroyed in NYS, such as when someone who was arrested gets acquitted. For officials (or teachers or anyone else fingerprinted for work), you simply fill out a form. The state is legally required to return your prints. No two people have the same fingerprints (unlike DNA with identical twins). With the 10,000 or so fingerprint responses I've dealt with, I've never had the wrong person.

How can the state "return" your prints if they're digitized?

In NC, they no longer "ink" your fingertips. It's all digitally scanned on-site.

[EsqUmp]

"Return" is the old term that is still used. Even when they used ink to print you (many still do this), the prints were then scanned into a computer data system. So even then, they had to be removed from the database. In New York, the prints are removed from the system and you are given a certified confirmation of such.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

Background checks work differently depending on where you are. In New York, most officials have to be fingerprinted in order to work public high school games. In order to get fingerprinted, officials have to go to police stations or Dept of Ed offices that have "live scan" fingerprinting. Because it's based on fingerprints (not merely a name or date of birth), there is virtual no possibility of mistake. The Dept of Ed then gets a fingerprint response for the individual. Should the official be arrested, a response is automatically generated. Should the official choose to stop officiating, he/she can apply to have the fingerprints destroyed. Contrary to what many have argued, merely having a prior conviction doesn't bar officials from certification. The Dept of Ed takes into account the nature of the crime and when occurred. Aside from having to pay around $100 for this, there really haven't been any problems.

You have conveniently missed the point.

If one's fingerprints are not in the system, then they are useless. Again, unless someone has previously been caught or volunteered information, they will not be prevented from any type of licensing, certification or anything else.

IOW, as has been so apparent in recent discoveries that a BI prevents absolutely nothing and is a waste of time and money.

[okla21fan]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

You have conveniently missed the point.
Again, unless someone has previously been caught or volunteered information, they will not be prevented from any type of licensing, certification or anything else.

OTH, not checking at all has the potential to stop no one, right? By conducting these 'worthless' checks, does it also detour some who have no business being there in the first place? I am not sure that is a bad thing.