🚀 go-pugleaf

AMKipple wrote:
> 
> I am an ISD contractor at a Tennessee bank, which just jumped on the
> fingerprint bandwaggon.  I have requested the facts internally, and believe
> that what I have discovered may be of interest to those on the group.  The
> information provided is from the Tennessee Bankers Association and although
> it is specific to the program as presented in Tennessee, it is probably
> very similar to that in other states since there is currently only one
> vendor involved.
> 
> Fingerprints are not requested, only one single thumb print.  A thumbprint
> is not sufficient to identify any person in any fingerprint database
> (Fart, Barf and Itch (FBI) is willing to ATTEMPT a match with three
> prints)..  Its only purpose is to overcome an objection at trial, " I am
> not the one that passed the check".
> 
> Primary value is the intimidation factor, and the reduction in the number
> of attempts at passing fraudulent checks.  This program is supported by the
> Banking System, By the courts, and by law enforcement.  This is a difficult
> group to overcome.
> 
> The thumbprint left can not be copied, will not appear on xerox copies of
> the check, is not visible or recoverable by the person who issued the
> check, and will not appear in microflinch.  The only known and documented
> recovery methoid is held by the vendor, and is applied when the check is
> presented together with a court request. (And a $56.00 fee)
> 
> In actual tests, the recovery rate is between 50 and 60 percent, with the
> other fourty percent or more failing to recover.
> 
> Less then 1/10 of one percent of all checks are actually presented in
> person, or through any procedure beyond the normal banking system.  These
> 1/10 of 1 percent of check presented include almost 70 percent of all
> forged or fradulant checks.  With todays desk top publishing equipment, it
> is almost impossible for a teller to discover a forgery today. It is also
> just as easy to produce state type identification on desk top publishing
> units.
> 
> This procedure is supported by current laws in 40 states and prohibited in
> 10 states.  The fastest and most effective level for any objection is with
> your state legislature, not federal.  The FDIC not only supports this
> program, but was in the fore front of its national introduction.  The FDIC
> is not looked apon with distrust in DC, and will testify in favor of the
> printing process, at any hearing.
> 
> Friends in the bank security section inform me that the entire process can
> be nulified by an action as simple as painting your thumbs with glue before
> entering the bank.  The glue forms a crust that will mask your thumbprint.
> 
> There has been a lot of opinions posted on this subject, I just though I
> would offer a few facts without opinion.
> 
> Al Kipple

So you support the system -- then inform others how to "beat the
system?"

Wow!

(News-Net)