FBI Building New National Watchlist

I caught This piece from The Intercept over on full-spectrum-dominance's page. The FBI's RapBack program will give enrolled employers real time updates on their employees' encounters with law enforcement, including arrests that do not end in conviction.

From the article:

The FBI’s Rap Back program is quietly transforming the way employers conduct background checks. While routine background checks provide employers with a one-time “snapshot” of their employee’s past criminal history, employers enrolled in federal and state Rap Back programs receive ongoing, real-time notifications and updates about their employees’ run-ins with law enforcement, including arrests at protests and charges that do not end up in convictions. (“Rap” is an acronym for Record of Arrest and Prosecution; “Back” is short for background.) Testifying before Congress about the program in 2015, FBI Director James Comey explained some limits of regular background checks: “People are clean when they first go in, then they get in trouble five years down the road [and] never tell the daycare about this.”

A majority of states already have their own databases that they use for background checks and have accessed in-state Rap Back programs since at least 2007; states and agencies now partnering with the federal government will be entering their data into the FBI’s Next Generation Identification database. The NGI database, widely considered to be the world’s largest biometric database, allows federal and state agencies to search more than 70 million civil fingerprints submitted for background checks alongside over 50 million prints submitted for criminal purposes. In July 2015, Utah became the first state to join the federal Rap Back program. Last April, aviation workers at Dallas-Ft. Worth Airport and Boston Logan International Airport began participating in a federal Rap Back pilot program for aviation employees. Two weeks ago, Texas submitted its first request to the federal criminal Rap Back system.

Rap Back has been advertised by the FBI as an effort to target individuals in “positions of trust,” such as those who work with children, the elderly, and the disabled. According to a Rap Back spokesperson, however, there are no formal limits as to “which populations of individuals can be enrolled in the Rap Back Service.” Civil liberties advocates fear that under Trump’s administration the program will grow with serious consequences for employee privacy, accuracy of records, and fair employment practices.

theintercept.com...

Well here's another mechanism for the boys in the boardroom to rake you poor corporate hacks over the coals with, courtesy of the FBI. What could possibly go wrong? Well, according to the article:

“This type of infrastructure always tends to undergo mission creep,” explained Jay Stanley of the American Civil Liberties Union, referring to how agencies often find secondary uses for data beyond its original function.

There are no laws preventing the FBI from using the data it collects for other purposes, said Jeramie Scott, an attorney with the Electronic Privacy Information Center. A massive trove of digital fingerprints collected by the FBI, he noted, could be used to open up devices like smart phones without the owner’s consent. In addition, Scott pointed out that the FBI often collects a photo of Rap Back participants’ faces. “Although the FBI has stated that they do not use these photos in facial recognition searches,” he said, “there is no legal barrier from the bureau changing this policy.” The agency is no stranger to mission creep. As documents obtained by EPIC show, the FBI’s use of facial recognition searches is increasing and the NGI database continues to expand.

In January, EPIC obtained two years of monthly statistics for the NGI system under the Freedom of Information Act. The summary sheets show that the database’s expansion has been fueled by submissions of non-criminal identifiers, such as the prints submitted for background checks. Fact sheets from January 2015 through August 2016 show the database growing at a much higher rate from its collection of data from civil settings than from criminal justice purposes. During that period, civil submission rates constituted nearly 70 percent of new submissions. “Through the Rap Back program the FBI is collecting biographical and biometric data on potentially millions of civilians for purposes not associated with criminal justice,” Scott said.

The article goes on to list other details and concerns of the program. It was interesting reading. What do you think?

I don't like it. There's more of our privacy going by the wayside. I don't like the idea of teams of bureaucrats collecting reams of material on my asinine behavior. It's bad enough trying to live it down without a bunch of goons saving it up to trot out to me whenever it suits them! Jeez.

Seriously though, reminds me of control files. Something like, Senator Cabbie, we're going to need you to vote no on Prop. 215, otherwise we'll have to publish this photo of YOUR OLD NOSE!

Not quite that nefarious(they keep those files in another room down the hall), just another notch in your privacy that you may have to submit to along with the DNA sample, hair follicle, urine sample, blood sample, and physical exam, if you want to punch the clock at Citigroup. Or McDonalds. Or your local mom and pop. I think any employer can subscribe. Employees have no say in the matter, of course. Not if you want the job.
Edit to add: Here's the link to the page where I originally found this story linked:
www.full-spectrum-dominance.com...

a reply to: TheBadCabbie

Trump being at the top of the list i imagine.

Fact is there is no anonymity any longer, after all "They" do love those lists.

a reply to: TheBadCabbie

So this is one of those conundrums, where arrest information is public record. I don't think people want secret arrests.

The issue is with employers and what weight they give to arrest history. I'm on the fence on that issue. I see valid arguments on both sides.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

Trump being at the top of the list i imagine.

Fact is there is no anonymity any longer, after all "They" do love those lists.

When employees everywhere crap all over themselves by posting on facebook or twitter, this doesn't seem to even matter. It will catch employees who are illegals who get caught and released in sanctuary cities because they faked their ID's to their employers.

a reply to: TheBadCabbie

employers enrolled in federal and state Rap Back programs receive ongoing, real-time notifications and updates about their employees’ run-ins with law enforcement, including arrests at protests and charges that do not end up in convictions.

Accessible to your employer to use as an axe over employees heads.

"I see it says here you were charged with driving under the influence...?"

"It was thrown out."

"Doesn't matter, you were under suspicion."

So, to get federal employees fired all we have to do is call in reports about them driving erratically or making obscene gestures while licking the glass.

a reply to: TheBadCabbie

All arrests are public record anyways. This could just as easily be a private firm offering this service. As far as this reads, a business would need to sign up and pay for this service. They could just as easily hire someone to call in for arrest records every week and compare that list to employee names.

I kinda don't like the sound of it at face value but honestly, nothing has changed except the quality of database search engines and practical application.

The fees will likely be small for a business to enroll. probably far less expensive than individual background checks, which i do on every one of my employees already.

Still, it does sound like the walls of 1984 are closing in around us.

a reply to: loam

I am of the opinion that it's in everybody's best interest that ex criminals are lawfully employed.

But I understand the argument against.

Is there any chance that the FBI might find the time to investigate these three guys?
Abid, Imran, and Jamal Awan.
I think most of their employers already know about what they have done... with the exception of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and she may never pick up on it.

a reply to: intrptr

It's so disturbing. No room to be human anymore. Just a social media brand, internet footprint or database stat.

originally posted by: loam
The issue is with employers and what weight they give to arrest history. I'm on the fence on that issue. I see valid arguments on both sides.

The Personnel Office always warns me when somebody's got a record. It's a rare thing when a criminal applies for a job I'm offering. If somebody got busted for a DUI, I'm willing to overlook that ... just as long as it's not happening on my watch. You don't come to work for me unless you're all grown up. If you've got a problem drinking and driving at that stage of life, maybe you wanna be looking at the Custodial Department for vacancies. LOL

I got busted once for hunting without a valid license. I don't know if it ever made it into the electronic record keeping systems, but I doubt anyone ever held that one offense against me.

You show me someone with a Rap Sheet as long as my arm ... even I'm not gonna waste the time in due consideration. Habitual offenders are gonna offend again ... it's just a matter of time and opportunity.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: intrptr

It's so disturbing. No room to be human anymore. Just a social media brand, internet footprint or database stat.

Well, two out of three ain't bad. The word mistake and forgiveness are being expunged from the dictionary.

One day:
The most important thing to remember is their whole construct, rules and regulations are just part of the shadow play in Platos Cave.

I'm technically still an employer, where do I sign up to get access to this database?

I'm going to run my kids first.

a reply to: loam

The issue is with employers and what weight they give to arrest history. I'm on the fence on that issue. I see valid arguments on both sides.

i agree, i know a fella that got in some trouble over thirty seven years ago, during a time in his life where he was reacting to his marriage breaking up. made some stupid chioces, did some stupid things, got arrested twice and convicted once, for possession of marijuana less than 5grams.never did any jail time, and has a clean record ever scene.

he had lost out on a couple of jobs, because of this. one potential employer told him that they could have overlooked once.
but he had two and they see a pattern in that. never mind that that was 37 years ago and he has a clean record scene then.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
never mind that that was 37 years ago and he has a clean record scene then.

People can be real butt-heads. That's not even enough to negatively influence a security clearance adjudication.

I think all encounters with police should not only be recorded and made available to employers, but cops should wear body cameras during all encounters and the video uploaded automatically to youtube on the world-wide-web.

We don't just want to see the cop's report, which contain's a one sided view of what happened. We want to see what actually happened, to make up our own minds.

When someone is arrested and appears before a judge, the public can sit in the court room to see justice at work.

But, that's not enough. We want to see justice at work in all situations, where we pay these public servants to do our bidding.

We want to see the good, the bad, and the ugly, side of the law enforcement and justice system we support with our tax dollars.

We the people have the right to know.

a reply to: Snarl

you would also think people would look at the time span, and clean record and know that if he was a risk, or had problems that it would have shown up. hell he even explained to them the circumstances that made no difference to them.

we've spoken of this a couple of times few through the years, and have wondered if the jobs he applied for and never heard back from felt the same way. he always listed those, felt it was better than to have them find out on their own.

a reply to: TheBadCabbie

Anyone who supports this...

There's a space against the wall in their future, that's all I am saying.

a reply to: TheBadCabbie

The power that rule are in a never-ending race to acquire more control and authority over the rest of us.

I see this as another piece of technology that will likely be abused and, as the article mentioned will undoubtedly present the problem of "mission creep" and "non-primary" uses.

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

So this is one of those conundrums, where arrest information is public record. I don't think people want secret arrests.

The issue is with employers and what weight they give to arrest history. I'm on the fence on that issue. I see valid arguments on both sides.

I think the real issue that is not addressed is the fact that people will become fearful of arrest, as opposed to fearful of conviction.

If after the winning of a case the arrest records were destroyed then that would. be a bit better.
If people have to Fear losing their job and become unable to protest about important issues that need change then you have successfully killed off all dissent.

All democracy is based on right to protest and the duty to voice dissent, when the governing body becomes this totalitarian you have lost all democratic rights.

All Americans must fight this to the death. Your beloved constitution hangs in the balance.

originally posted by: ThoughtIsMadness
All Americans must fight this to the death. Your beloved constitution hangs in the balance.

Nah, I disagree.

We want to know which people are being targeted for harassment, without it leading to arrest, because it reveals law enforcement behavior when there's no good grounds and when nobody is looking at them.

It's all good.