Page 36 - Automated Fingerprint Identification Systems (AFIS)

INTRODUCTION 21

standing of the scope and opportunities offered by AFIS systems may cause mil-
lions of dollars to be spent on systems that are not only misdirected, but that
actually pull resources away from programs that have proven their worth as suc-
cessful identification technologies. These two questions are considered below.
The purpose of fingerprinting arrestees is to perform a criminal background
check on the individual to determine if there is an outstanding warrant, if the
person has previously been arrested for a violent offense, or if there are other
charges pending. Has the person in custody been fingerprinted in the past
under the same or a different name? Government has a right to know this for
the safety of its citizens, as well as personnel providing custody. Who is finger-
printed and what is done with those records are defined by law. No agency may
collect or keep records to which it is not lawfully entitled.
The purpose of fingerprinting job applicants is to determine if there are past
deeds, perhaps unknown or previously unreported to the prospective employer,
that might have a bearing on the applicant’s employment. Are there incidents,
perhaps crimes, that might preclude employment or advancing the person to
a position of trust within an organization? Can a company require that all of its
employees be fingerprinted? (Yes, it can, if it has a policy to do so.) And if so,
what databases are searched for a criminal record?
The question of “What is the purpose?” should also be considered when
deciding on the level of security necessary. To gain access to a room in an
already secure building might require a thumb to be placed into a reader that
matches the images of an enrolled, approved individual. At the other end of
the spectrum, it would not be unreasonable to require that for known and sus-
pected terrorists, they are fingerprinted by rolling all ten fingers, palm prints
are taken, a DNA sample is collected, and a mug shot is taken. This might result
in a soldier in the field matching a mug shot with an enemy prisoner, or a mil-
itary investigator at headquarters matching finger images for a positive identi-
fication. Each biometric has its applications.
The question of “Is this the best approach?” requires an understanding of
the trade-offs when pursuing one course of action over another. The govern-
ment, like individuals, does not have an endless supply of resources. Choices
have to be made as to which approach will provide the greatest public good
and the greatest public security. With limited resources, it may not be possible
to have an identification system that can hold a database of 100 million records,
with an accuracy of 99.97% and a return of results in under 10 seconds. Each
element is individually possible at a reasonable cost, but the combination of all
three would require tens of millions of dollars. The question to be answered is
whether it is worth the cost to meet these targets.
In addition to understanding the technologies, there must be a clear under-
standing of the expectations of the personnel who administer and use these