odin,

   lots of people here aren't arguing that child molesters should be taken to task.  its just that the polygraph is NOT totally reliable for that task.  this is the 21st century, we sent men to the moon,  the Berlin wall has been demolished and even athletes can run under a 4 minute mile.    but, the polygraph has never proven to be effective in detecting lies. period.   
   i understand you believe in it because you are part of it.  those of us that were shortchanged by this machine will never justify its existence.  period.   
   you feel strongly about that "magic" box, we do too.

Quote:


That is a very good point Odin, however, if you want to argue that, why don't we run criminal background checks on anyone who applies to take a Criminal Justice Course bacause criminals (i.e. Child Molesters) taking criminal justice courses may learn "loopholes" to beat the system to avoid punishment for the crimes they commit.

ODIN wrote on Dec 7^th, 2005 at 5:19am:


ODIN,

I can only speak for myself, but I do believe that most of the folks that post regularly here are :

1. Anti-polygraph, not Anti-Law Enforcement
   Which means that I will under all circumstances support the work of all levels of law enforcement. I have never broken the law and never will. 

2. Anti-polygraph, not Anti-Government: 
This website wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the freedom of speech. But the use of a polygraph by any level of government is in my humble opinion a violation of my 4th amendment rights against unlawful search. Its an interrogation without a lawyer present, could also be a violation of the 5th amendment as well.

3. Anti-polygraph, not Anti-Equal Opportunity:
I truly believe that the polygragh is used as a culling tool to weed out (so called) undesireables that are not hand picked for employment positions. Circumventing EEO and Fair Hiring laws. Everyone deserves a chance, and hiding behind a pseudo-scientific machine to eliminate people is just wrong.

I firmly believe too that the information on this website is a double edged sword. It has both positive and negative ramifications if used properly or improperly as the case may be. A risk that must be taken if we live in a land where the rule of law prevails.

Now as far as a child molester and use of the polygraph, then I hope all bad things come to this scumbag !!  But this molester too is entitled to a just defense and the ability to use any information available too him. If Law enforcement infringes on the rights of any citizen, then the law has no other choice then to dismiss the charges or litigation. It may not be the optimal answer, but how many law breakers have been set free by screwups during pre-trial and discovery phases by district attorneys, or the arresting officers, who are more interested in getting a conviction, then protecting the defendants rights. When the system works, it works well and the guilty are punished. And this all can be done without a polygraph being involved. 

As far as replacing it, its the phony tool for the job. As a pressure tool it will work on the unknowing, as you can sell its invincibility. To the experienced, its just another challenge to be beat. The right tool is still not available. Technology has yet to come up with the ability to read minds.  The answer for this is not out there. And a bad tool like the polygraph is not a good stop gap either.

It will be interesting to hear your comments after you read the NAS report. I am looking forward to it.

Regards .....

Odin,

First of all, thank you for posting to this site. As the administrator noted, all viewpoints on polygraphy are most welcome on this board. This cannot be said about many other online forums, most notably www.911hotjobs.com. The whole point of a discussion forum is to have debate. Very little of that happens when all the posters have the same viewpoint. 

I apologize on behalf of the other posters making personal insults, and I implore them to cease that behavior. I hope that you will consider sticking around and representing your views.

Quote:


Pursuing this line of argument may have been effective against 1980s polygraph opponents, who were mostly liberals attacking the polygraph as an invasion of privacy. 

It is however, not effective against the arguments put forth by George and I. The modern day opposition to polygraphy that we lead very little to do with protecting criminals, the right to lie, etc. Today's polygraph opponents simply know that the polygraph is highly inaccurate even when used on uninformed subjects, and a downright joke when used on those with knowledge of the process and countermeasures. We seeks its abolition because reliance on this inherently inaccurate process can cause (and is causing) grave harm to our national security and criminal justice system.

One of the last places that polygraphy should be relied on is for the post-conviction monitoring of our society’s most dangerous and recidivist criminals. Inaccurate results produced by the process are likely to focus investigative resources away from those who continue to re-offend and divert them toward those who are complying with terms of probation.

Convicted child molesters (some states even label somebody caught urinating in public as a sex offender) should be given long prison terms. These prison terms should be followed up by aggressive monitoring using conventional shoe leather, not a pseudoscientific fraud like polygraphy.

As far as our making information on polygraph countermeasures available, AntiPolygraph.org was far from the first to do so. We are simply make the information available for free, as opposed to requiring someone to purchase a book from say Amazon.com.

Quote:

No. As I said above, the information was already available. Those who really should have trouble sleeping (but don’t) are the polygraph examiners who represent this process as being highly accurate (high 90% accuracy, etc) to the public, when peer-reviewed studies conducted under field conditions do not support these claims. Anything for the almighty dollar.

Quote:

Polygraphy is no more a “tool” than crystal balls, tarot cards, or the methods of torture described above. Logic would not dictate that we have to keep a totally inaccurate process like this around until we find one that works (this day may never come). Things can be substantially improved by admitting that the current process is a fraud and getting rid of it without coming up with a replacement.

George and I will freely admit that like the methods above, polygraphy does have one utility. It allows interrogators to elicit confessions from those ignorant about the process.

We are frequently assailed for directing sunlight onto the polygraph fraud, essentially making the process a joke against any informed subject. Regrettably, there is no way to keep the information on this site from pedophiles, terrorists, professional criminals and other reprobates while providing it to those who need it. 

Still, as long as there are law enforcement officers and applicants, military personnel, intelligence officers, and scientists falsely being accused through polygraph nonsense, we will continue to push this process into the sunlight and provide these individuals the information they need to survive when they are forced to play Russian Roulette with their reputations. 

ODIN wrote on Dec 7^th, 2005 at 4:40am:


You did, of course, omit another option: that the device simply doesn't work as advertised, and all that's left is an interrogation prop and a polygrapher's best guess as to whether or not a subject is lying.

The available scientific evidence would seem to indicate this is the most likely scenario.

ODIN wrote "Polygraph is here to stay guys. It is not a perfect tool, but it is the only tool, other than dunking chairs and pots of hot oil. Given the choice I will take the box anyday. "

So what I read from this is that "dunking chairs and pots of hot oil" are medieval means of torture.  So let me get this right, Polygraph is a civil way of torture???  I think your view of interrogation is a bit askewed.  I believe that to the uninformed, taking a polygraph without being well informed, is just plain suicide.   

ODIN wrote on Dec 7^th, 2005 at 11:42pm:


ODIN,

I thought we were done with the unprovoked attacks? You should discuss your political views elsewhere. This is not anti-liberal.org, though I'm sure something like that exists out there. 

Anyway, on to the rest of your post. Before I took my first polygraph, I would have agreed with you one-hundred percent--about the polygraph, not your other views--just to be clear.. However, the fact of the matter is, people in this country are being victimized by a procedure that is inaccurate and unreliable. You are correct in that everyone has a choice in taking a poly, but there is no other choice if you want the job or suppose you want to be cleared in a criminal invesitgation? Perhaps, your child has been kidnapped and you want authorities to clear you, so they'll move on to find the real culprit who took your child. Doesn't feel like much of a choice, now does it? Now, suppose you agree to submit to this procedure without knowing much about it. There is no such thing as informed consent when it comes to the polygraph. During the job applicant process, the examinee receives zero information about the polygraph, the only thing he/she is told is to tell the truth, but yet, the examiner doesn't really want the whole truth, only what he cares about. That is all the information given to the examinee. I also believed that since the polygraph was part of the application process, that I was bound by my signature on my application to not make any false statements--a violation of the criminal code. I told the truth of all questions asked and my procedure turned into an ugly interrogation. I didn't deserve that and neither do the countless others that this happens to. Now that I know polygraphs don't work, I won't take one. I'll also let others know, so they won't make the same mistake I did.

People's lives are forever changed when they submit to a polygraph that falsely brands them as liars. It's not just liveliehoods at stake when it comes to polygraphs, it's also freedoms--the very principle upon which this country is founded. Such a tool does not belong in the workplace and should only be used in criminal investigations when the procedure is audio/videotaped with a standardized set of regulations set forth. The Constitution doesn't pick and choose who it wants to protect--it applies to everyone. 

Tools designed to protect children of course, are a good idea, but not when they infringe upon the rights of others.  Polygraphs are not objective, they are subjective--an OPINION is required to arrive at a result. It's not fair to use such a system to determine the freedoms of others.  The rules must be fair and they must apply to EVERYONE.      

As far as your "woody" comment is concerned--have a little class, why don't you?  Again, you're only making yourself and your profession look bad. Comments like that only detract from the debate and discussions.

Quote:


I consider myself a strong conservative and feel that child molesters should have no rights what so ever.  But the main reason why I come to this site is because I don't feel that it is necessarry to subject a law enforcement candidate to the ploygraph "test."  Is it not enought for a job candidate to go through a thorough background check, fingerprint check, drug screen, and psycological without having to undergo mental torture just to get a job in their profession of choice? I, myself, have nothing to hide but have already been accused of using cocaine on a CVSA.  I will admit to experimenting with marijuana as a teenager, but thats it.  But I have heard too many cases of honest people getting branded as liars because of the ploygraph........They've passes a thorough background check that may have gone as far as to see if they've taked a dump in a bathroom that was not their own without first asking; passed fingerprint check, psychological and drug screen..........Tell me, is it REALLY necessarry to add a psycological torture test on top of all that???