Records check policy

[N A Rush]

I was wondering why is was necessary for an officer to conduct a records check for every individual they have an interaction with.

I recently had an interaction with an officer because some individual decided that the paint on my Mustang wasn't ugly enough and wanted to expose the metal underneath.

I called to report the incident and presented my D/L upon request. The first thing the officer did was request a 10-27 (Personal Records Check). The dispatcher stated that DCAFE was down. He AGAIN asked for a "27" and she retorted that DCAFE was down and NO GCIC or NCIC checks were available.

The whole interaction made me feel like the dirtbag. If I had to do it over again I wouldn't have reported it.

 

[BAMM BAMM]

You felt like a dirtbag because he wanted to check your driver's license record? Why?

 

[stu07hd]

I am betting that most departments have a policy that says that anyone that an officer has contact with is checked. You may be suprised how many people have warrants. It is also an easy way for an officer to have all of your information without having to write it all down on the spot.

 

[N A Rush]

You felt like a dirtbag because he wanted to check your driver's license record? Why?

Yeah, I did..... I just wondered what my driving record has to do with property damage? I understand the property was a vehicle but it had nothing to do with driving it.

Additionally, GCIC and NCIC checks have nothing do with driving records that I am aware of. But it does give you any wants and warrants information on the person.

Was there a reason the office felt that I would have a want or warrant? It feels like an invasion.

I look at it on the same order as someone walking into a bank to cash a $100 check and the bank manager stating he/she would have to run a credit check because you required their services.....

 

[svtcop]

If you genuinely feel this way there is no explanation that will suit you.

I have made police reports with different agencies and even after knowing I am a LEO, they will still run the info. I do not feel violated. Just the way police operate, probably policy in nearly all agencies if not all.

I will run a check on every person that gives me their information. I didn't think this needed an explanation. If you refuse to give your info in this case, how could the officer complete the report?

 

[SNCBOOM]

You always need to have your papers available.

 

[N A Rush]

If you genuinely feel this way there is no explanation that will suit you.

You are probably correct...

I have made police reports with different agencies and even after knowing I am a LEO, they will still run the info. I do not feel violated. Just the way police operate, probably policy in nearly all agencies if not all.

Thinking back, this didnt make you question the policy? You didnt think think what the hell?

I will run a check on every person that gives me their information. I didn't think this needed an explanation. If you refuse to give your info in this case, how could the officer complete the report?

And you have no reservation about it? You dont feel that you are treating EVERY person as a criminal when you do this? I am sure you had a witness to an accident give you their information which in turn lead to their arrest because of a warrant. But for every person that is wanted, how many are not?

Thank you for your time to help answer, i do appreciate it!

 

[FordSVTFan]

If you genuinely feel this way there is no explanation that will suit you.

You are absolutely correct. This is one of those "loaded" question we get here.

I have made police reports with different agencies and even after knowing I am a LEO, they will still run the info. I do not feel violated. Just the way police operate, probably policy in nearly all agencies if not all.

Me too.

I will run a check on every person that gives me their information. I didn't think this needed an explanation. If you refuse to give your info in this case, how could the officer complete the report?

It is a good policy to run everyone. There are too many open felony warrants out there for people who dont "look" like a felon.

 

[Ronin5.O]

It also helps the LEO to know exactly who hes dealing with. With all the crazy ass people out there you can never be too sure. He simply doesnt know you from anyone else and is looking out for his own personal safety.

 

[THE_EVIL_TW1N]

It also helps the LEO to know exactly who hes dealing with. With all the crazy ass people out there you can never be too sure. He simply doesnt know you from anyone else and is looking out for his own personal safety.

+1



This might come as a shock to you.... but... sometimes people lie to the police! GASP!! There are just WAY too many variables...

 

[THE_EVIL_TW1N]

Thinking back, this didnt make you question the policy? You didnt think think what the hell?

I don't. I think it's a great policy, people impersonate officers all the time. Safety first.

And you have no reservation about it? You dont feel that you are treating EVERY person as a criminal when you do this? I am sure you had a witness to an accident give you their information which in turn lead to their arrest because of a warrant. But for every person that is wanted, how many are not?

Running somebody out is NOT treating them like criminals. Treating somebody like a criminal would be taking them to jail.


Running your credit to cash in a check was bad analogy. The bank would not be doing that for their safety. Also, running your credit would have a negative effect on you're credit score whereas running a party out to obtain CGIC information has no sort of negative effect. It's a safe practice.

 

[N A Rush]

It is a good policy to run everyone. There are too many open felony warrants out there for people who dont "look" like a felon.

I agree! There is no "look".

It also helps the LEO to know exactly who hes dealing with. With all the crazy ass people out there you can never be too sure. He simply doesnt know you from anyone else and is looking out for his own personal safety.

Do I understand you correctly, the safety of one individual (the LEO) is the reason this policy is in place?

+1
This might come as a shock to you.... but... sometimes people lie to the police! GASP!! There are just WAY too many variables...

The smartass in me can't resist, "I would have never guessed!" :beer:

I don't. I think it's a great policy, people impersonate officers all the time. Safety first.

So I guess your CREDS mean nothing and the fact that you have a Union card wouldn't help you with fellow officer in another jurisdiction?

Running somebody out is NOT treating them like criminals. Treating somebody like a criminal would be taking them to jail.

I am guessing here that the above mentioned term "Running somebody" doesn't sound opprobrious either?

Running your credit to cash in a check was bad analogy. The bank would not be doing that for their safety. Also, running your credit would have a negative effect on you're credit score whereas running a party out to obtain CGIC information has no sort of negative effect. It's a safe practice.

I have to beg to differ... Insurance companies, rental companies, and others are running your credit background routinely to determine the risk (safety) of doing business with you. Yes, the safety I mentioned is not physical safety but it does ensures their financial health.

The analogy that I used can and could possibly occur. How else would the financial institution now that you are telling the truth. As was previously mentioned, people lie.



FordSVTFan, is this allowed because a search is considered a physical search and this isn't a physical search?

How did this policy become so wide spread? Has it ever been challenged before?

 

[silver03svt]

When the officer "ran" you, he didn't ask for a full criminal history of you. Although that can be done, an officer needs a valid investigative reason to access that info according to NCIC policies. When the officer "ran" your info, he was more that likely making sure your license was vaild (bc people get suspended and don't always have knowledge), and to make sure there wasn't any immediate outstanding warrants against you. This shouldn't make you feel like a criminal, as it's just a part of the officer doing his job.

 

[Lt. ZO6]

FordSVTFan, is this allowed because a search is considered a physical search and this isn't a physical search?

This isn't a 4th Amendment issue.

 

[FordSVTFan]

This isn't a 4th Amendment issue.

You've changed your name?

 

[Lt. ZO6]

You've changed your name?

;-)