(UTC)
(Moderator: Administrator)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]  ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) H.R.2213 (Read 35802 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Ronald S
Guest


Re: H.R.2213
Reply #60 - Jan 7th, 2019 at 4:10pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
George

I was not aware of this.  It appears the polygraph lobby was able to get polygraph nominated as the primary device.

Since Senator Romney from Utah he is probably helping the company as most politicians give strong support to the base.

If CBP wants this technology bad enough, someone will pull the right strings to make it happen.   
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box John M.
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 179
Location: Tampa, Florida
Joined: May 3rd, 2017
Gender: Male
Re: H.R.2213
Reply #61 - Jan 7th, 2019 at 4:19pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Ron

Quote:

I suppose the Eye Detect is easier from what I read and have heard about.

Being easier has nothing to do with the accuracy or validity of a test that is fundamentally flawed.

For further info, see Dr. Richardson's testimony to US Senate - https://antipolygraph.org/hearings/senate-judiciary-1997/richardson-25-10-99.sht...

Is the use of the EyeDetect system even covered by the EPPA? Theoretically, you could spread rumors that it will eventually be used in every case - everywhere there was ever a question of truthfulness.
  
"The polygraph examination is a supplement to, not a substitute for, other methods of investigation.  No, unfavorable administrative action shall be taken based solely on its results."  ~ DODI 5210.91.
Back to top
Twitter  
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box John M.
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 179
Location: Tampa, Florida
Joined: May 3rd, 2017
Gender: Male
Re: H.R.2213
Reply #62 - Mar 21st, 2019 at 6:28pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Looks like ol' H.R. 2213 has been resurrected and is now called H.R. 1609: To amend the Anti-Border Corruption Act of 2010 to authorize certain polygraph waiver authority, and for other purposes.

Dan Crenshaw (R-TX), is the Sponsor.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr1609
  
"The polygraph examination is a supplement to, not a substitute for, other methods of investigation.  No, unfavorable administrative action shall be taken based solely on its results."  ~ DODI 5210.91.
Back to top
Twitter  
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 
ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
H.R.2213

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
                       
Change Text Color
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align
resize_wb
resize_hb







Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx ics psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
X
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board Top  

AntiPolygraph.org Message Board » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge