Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Attachments: (Clear attachments)
Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB
Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached
Click or drag files here to attach them.
(Clear attachments)
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
How many sides does a stop sign have? (numeral):
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by Michelle
 - Feb 21, 2003, 01:32 PM

Quote from: PeterFonda on Feb 21, 2003, 01:00 AM
I am new to this board, and would like to find out where people stand on the following questions:

1) Does ANYONE on this board believe that the machine alone
can give enough data to a poly operator to determine truth or a lie?

2) Would anyone oppose catching "bad guys' by way of confession, because of fear of the poly?

3) Related to (2)..Does anyone feel it is wrong to trick a suspect into a confession, if threats or violence are not used?

Thanks,
Peter

1)  From what I have learned on this board, no.

2)  Should those same criminals also fear that the trolls that live under bridges are going to 'git them in their sleep?  ;D

3)  Can you provide examples of what you are talking about?
Posted by PeterFonda
 - Feb 21, 2003, 01:00 AM
I am new to this board, and would like to find out where people stand on the following questions:

1) Does ANYONE on this board believe that the machine alone
can give enough data to a poly operator to determine truth or a lie?

2) Would anyone oppose catching "bad guys' by way of confession, because of fear of the poly?

3) Related to (2)..Does anyone feel it is wrong to trick a suspect into a confession, if threats or violence are not used?

Thanks,
Peter