- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Twoblock
- Dec 15, 2003, 02:22 PMCivil Servant
Here goes the stuck record again.
Under the present mind-set of most of the polygraph failures, you are probably correct that the polygraph is not going away. However, if every person who tells the truth, goes by your rules and still fails the poly would file individual lawsuits to make their polygraphers prove their assertians in a court of law, then there would not be time to give very many tests. From the posts that I read here, you would spend most of your time in the courtroom.
I will agree with you that are some very good sensors out there. I do not believe, though, any of them can differentiate between the anal squeeze and an uncontrolable nerve contraction.
I can greatly advance my BP and heart rate by picturing my falling from a high altitude airplane. You or no other person on God's green earth can read my mind. All you know is that you see a spike on you machine therefore, your "opinion" is countermeasure use. Unfortunately, the polygrapher's "opinion" controls. One person, one machine controlling the livelyhood of an applicant. In my "opinion" this is wrong and none of your countermeasure claims would hold up in a court of law.
If I was a polygrapher and could accurately detect countermeasures, I would tell all my examinees "If you are thinking about using countermeasures, I WILL catch this one this way and that one that way, etc., so COME ON DOWN. Don't you think that would deter the use?
As I have said before. I am for anything, polygraph, Zerox machine, water cooler. etc., that can extract a TRUE confession in a criminal case. In some cases I might even use a rubber hose.
Here goes the stuck record again.
Under the present mind-set of most of the polygraph failures, you are probably correct that the polygraph is not going away. However, if every person who tells the truth, goes by your rules and still fails the poly would file individual lawsuits to make their polygraphers prove their assertians in a court of law, then there would not be time to give very many tests. From the posts that I read here, you would spend most of your time in the courtroom.
I will agree with you that are some very good sensors out there. I do not believe, though, any of them can differentiate between the anal squeeze and an uncontrolable nerve contraction.
I can greatly advance my BP and heart rate by picturing my falling from a high altitude airplane. You or no other person on God's green earth can read my mind. All you know is that you see a spike on you machine therefore, your "opinion" is countermeasure use. Unfortunately, the polygrapher's "opinion" controls. One person, one machine controlling the livelyhood of an applicant. In my "opinion" this is wrong and none of your countermeasure claims would hold up in a court of law.
If I was a polygrapher and could accurately detect countermeasures, I would tell all my examinees "If you are thinking about using countermeasures, I WILL catch this one this way and that one that way, etc., so COME ON DOWN. Don't you think that would deter the use?
As I have said before. I am for anything, polygraph, Zerox machine, water cooler. etc., that can extract a TRUE confession in a criminal case. In some cases I might even use a rubber hose.
Posted by emsg
- Dec 15, 2003, 05:04 AMQuote from: Civl Servant on Dec 15, 2003, 02:50 AMHOWEVER, WHAT I HAVE A HARD TIME DIGESTING IS SOMEONE WITH NO RELEVANT ISSUES WHO IS BULLIED INTO BELIEVING THEY HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO PERFORM COUNTERMEASURES TO 'BEAT' A POLY.
Where on here did you see bullying occur? Also, why do you believe visitors to this site are led to believe that they do not have a choice? Imho, ap.org does an excellent job of providing information to those who may have to take a polygraph test so that they can make an informed choice for themselves as to whether or not they want to employ countermeasures.
QuoteREGARDLESS OF THE 'MIS-INFORMATION', COUNTERMEASURES ARE DETECTED. NEW TRAINING AND INTEGRATED MOVEMENT SENSORS ARE A BLESSING TO THE POLYGRAPH COMMUNITY.
Prove it.
QuoteHUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE HAVE SUCCESSFULLY 'PASSED' THIS TEST WITHOUT TRYING TO 'BEAT' IT.
I WILL NEVER BE SO ARROGANT TO SUGGEST THEIR ARE NOT 'FALSE POSITIVES.' HOWEVER, ALL DEPARTMENTS GIVE THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT TO THE EXAMINEE. THEY HAVE TOO MUCH TIME AND RESOURCES INVESTED IN THE EXAMINEE TO NOT GIVE THEM THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.
That is absolutely absurd. Many police departments will bounce applicants based solely on DI results obtained from the polygraph. I've also never heard of an applicant for a federal LE position being hired after failing a polygraph.
QuoteUNFORTUNATELY, A SITE DEVELOPED BY A SELF-PURPORTED 'FALSE POSITIVE' IS ALSO GIVING INFORMATION TO CHILD MOLESTORS ON HOW TO ACTIVELY 'BEAT' THEIR POLYGRAPHS.
What are you so worried about? Countermeasures are supposedly detectable, right?
QuoteTO THOSE WHO HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE I WOULD SUGGEST YOU FOLLOW THE LEAD OF THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS BEFORE YOU AND AND 'PLAY ALONG' AND 'PLAY BY THE RULES.'
You advise them to 'play by the rules' even though they may face a significant risk of becoming a false positive? That doesn't seem like very good advice.
QuoteREGARDLESS OF SOMEONE'S FEELINGS PRO OR CON POLYGRAPH WILL NOT GO AWAY UNTIL ANOTHER TECHNOLOGY REPLACES IT.
Even if that turns out to be true, it is hardly a good reason to abandon the fight to educate the general population on the inherent flaws that exist in polygraph testing.
Posted by Civl Servant
- Dec 15, 2003, 02:50 AMTo those with relevant issues in your background I CAN UNDERSTAND someone trying to manipulate their results on the poly. I mean they obviously WANT something that dept policy (whether right or wrong) says they are not entitled to.
HOWEVER, WHAT I HAVE A HARD TIME DIGESTING IS SOMEONE WITH NO RELEVANT ISSUES WHO IS BULLIED INTO BELIEVING THEY HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO PERFORM COUNTERMEASURES TO 'BEAT' A POLY.
REGARDLESS OF THE 'MIS-INFORMATION', COUNTERMEASURES ARE DETECTED. NEW TRAINING AND INTEGRATED MOVEMENT SENSORS ARE A BLESSING TO THE POLYGRAPH COMMUNITY.
UNFORTUNATELY FOR SOMEONE WITH NO RELEVANT ISSUES THE FACT THE EMPLOYED COUNTERMEASURES WILL ALMOST ALWAYS RESULT IN A DISQUALIFICATION. THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT GOING TO BELIEVE THE PERSON PERFORMED COUNTERMEASURES BECAUSE THEY WERE AFRAID. THEY WILL ASSUME THEY HAVE A DEEP, DARK SECRET.
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE HAVE SUCCESSFULLY 'PASSED' THIS TEST WITHOUT TRYING TO 'BEAT' IT.
I WILL NEVER BE SO ARROGANT TO SUGGEST THEIR ARE NOT 'FALSE POSITIVES.' HOWEVER, ALL DEPARTMENTS GIVE THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT TO THE EXAMINEE. THEY HAVE TOO MUCH TIME AND RESOURCES INVESTED IN THE EXAMINEE TO NOT GIVE THEM THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.
UNFORTUNATELY, A SITE DEVELOPED BY A SELF-PURPORTED 'FALSE POSITIVE' IS ALSO GIVING INFORMATION TO CHILD MOLESTORS ON HOW TO ACTIVELY 'BEAT' THEIR POLYGRAPHS.
TO THOSE WHO HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE I WOULD SUGGEST YOU FOLLOW THE LEAD OF THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS BEFORE YOU AND AND 'PLAY ALONG' AND 'PLAY BY THE RULES.'
REGARDLESS OF SOMEONE'S FEELINGS PRO OR CON POLYGRAPH WILL NOT GO AWAY UNTIL ANOTHER TECHNOLOGY REPLACES IT.
GEORGE, YOU ARE AN INTELLIGENT AND DRIVEN INDIVIDUAL. I WISH YOU WOULD TAKE THIS DRIVE AND INSTEAD OF FOCUSING ON A CRUSADE TO END POLYGRAPH YOU SHOULD FOCUS ON A WAY TO IMPROVE IT WITH NEW TECHNOLOGY.
HOWEVER, WHAT I HAVE A HARD TIME DIGESTING IS SOMEONE WITH NO RELEVANT ISSUES WHO IS BULLIED INTO BELIEVING THEY HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO PERFORM COUNTERMEASURES TO 'BEAT' A POLY.
REGARDLESS OF THE 'MIS-INFORMATION', COUNTERMEASURES ARE DETECTED. NEW TRAINING AND INTEGRATED MOVEMENT SENSORS ARE A BLESSING TO THE POLYGRAPH COMMUNITY.
UNFORTUNATELY FOR SOMEONE WITH NO RELEVANT ISSUES THE FACT THE EMPLOYED COUNTERMEASURES WILL ALMOST ALWAYS RESULT IN A DISQUALIFICATION. THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT GOING TO BELIEVE THE PERSON PERFORMED COUNTERMEASURES BECAUSE THEY WERE AFRAID. THEY WILL ASSUME THEY HAVE A DEEP, DARK SECRET.
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE HAVE SUCCESSFULLY 'PASSED' THIS TEST WITHOUT TRYING TO 'BEAT' IT.
I WILL NEVER BE SO ARROGANT TO SUGGEST THEIR ARE NOT 'FALSE POSITIVES.' HOWEVER, ALL DEPARTMENTS GIVE THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT TO THE EXAMINEE. THEY HAVE TOO MUCH TIME AND RESOURCES INVESTED IN THE EXAMINEE TO NOT GIVE THEM THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.
UNFORTUNATELY, A SITE DEVELOPED BY A SELF-PURPORTED 'FALSE POSITIVE' IS ALSO GIVING INFORMATION TO CHILD MOLESTORS ON HOW TO ACTIVELY 'BEAT' THEIR POLYGRAPHS.
TO THOSE WHO HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE I WOULD SUGGEST YOU FOLLOW THE LEAD OF THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS BEFORE YOU AND AND 'PLAY ALONG' AND 'PLAY BY THE RULES.'
REGARDLESS OF SOMEONE'S FEELINGS PRO OR CON POLYGRAPH WILL NOT GO AWAY UNTIL ANOTHER TECHNOLOGY REPLACES IT.
GEORGE, YOU ARE AN INTELLIGENT AND DRIVEN INDIVIDUAL. I WISH YOU WOULD TAKE THIS DRIVE AND INSTEAD OF FOCUSING ON A CRUSADE TO END POLYGRAPH YOU SHOULD FOCUS ON A WAY TO IMPROVE IT WITH NEW TECHNOLOGY.
Posted by n0mad
- Nov 28, 2003, 03:28 PMWell, you're right, only you can know. You must look within yourself and be honest with yourself. I don't want scumbags or dishonest people on the force any more than anyone else.
So if you feel you will continue your behavior, then drop out, or you may end up with more problems then its worth (getting fired, end up in civil lawsuit, being criminally prosecuted for negligent behavior, etc...)
So if you feel you will continue your behavior, then drop out, or you may end up with more problems then its worth (getting fired, end up in civil lawsuit, being criminally prosecuted for negligent behavior, etc...)
Posted by Marty
- Nov 28, 2003, 03:12 PMQuote from: n0mad on Nov 28, 2003, 02:47 PMI'm referring to when you actually are an honest person but have some indiscretions in the past that are IN THE PAST. If the applicant still exhibits the same behaviors, then yes, move on, LE is not for you.Behaviors are always in the past. No one can tell what you will do in the future but actual past behavior is perhaps the best indicator extant. I'm glad you are intent on being honest but exactly how is someone else supposed to know for sure your good intentions?
-Marty
Posted by n0mad
- Nov 28, 2003, 02:47 PMI'm referring to when you actually are an honest person but have some indiscretions in the past that are IN THE PAST. If the applicant still exhibits the same behaviors, then yes, move on, LE is not for you.
Posted by Marty
- Nov 28, 2003, 02:44 PMQuote from: n0mad on Nov 28, 2003, 02:15 PMMove on to something else? You act like people want to be cops on a whim. When its your dream and all you want to do, you don't just "move on to something else". You do what it takes to get the job and then prove yourself once your hired.I must agree with torpedo on this point. Most everyone who applies to a LE position feels they are a "good" person - regardless of what they have done. That's psych 101. If one doesn't meet the drug standards, and they typically allow for some past "experimentation", then why on earth would one apply for a LE position? Why do people feel it is OK to lie about things that LE is expected to impose on others? LE doesn't make these rules, society does. If a person joins LE by lying about activities society deems appropriate to criminalize, then exactly how honest can we expect such a cop to be when faced with putting away a "bad guy" where perhaps the evidence is thin but the opportunity to "enhance" it without getting caught exists?
I want cops to be honest and ethical when confronted with hard choices. I think this is more likely if they start out that way.
That said, one of the reasons I most dislike the polygraph is the bias it has against people that DON'T lie on the controls - and they exist. I suspect "bubba's" thread some time back demonstrates this.
-Marty
Posted by n0mad
- Nov 28, 2003, 02:15 PMMove on to something else? You act like people want to be cops on a whim. When its your dream and all you want to do, you don't just "move on to something else". You do what it takes to get the job and then prove yourself once your hired.
Posted by Torpedo
- Nov 28, 2003, 12:43 PMThank you for the providing that clarification Skeptic....indeed I am NOT a liberal...and I was merely stating MY opinion, just like others are allowed to do on this site....trouble is if the anti-polyhgraph folks disagree with it, you are scum, sack, smart ass, etc....I will continue nonetheless to state my opinion....I believe that when you apply for a job that is built around the concept of honesty, that when you apply for a position, you have an obligation to tell the truth. If your transgressions exceed what the standard is,...so be it...move on to something else.....you can't help but wonder if a person would lie about his own behavior....would he or she not lie about the behavior of someone else. Keep in mind, all have the right to state their own opinion...as a long time member of the thin blue line, that is all I was doing. Have a nice day!
Posted by Carmen Jones
- Nov 27, 2003, 01:09 AMTorpedo is just upset because his voodoo machine (as well as the operator) is easily fooled.
The polygraph will soon be in a museum along-side Eli's cotton gin.....oh, excuse me.....the cotton gin was USEFUL
You have a fine Airborne day
The polygraph will soon be in a museum along-side Eli's cotton gin.....oh, excuse me.....the cotton gin was USEFUL
You have a fine Airborne day
Posted by Skeptic
- Nov 26, 2003, 09:37 PMQuote from: this way on Nov 26, 2003, 08:54 PMTorpedo,
No one is perfectly honest. Everyone is dishonest. You, me, them, all of us. Are you telling me that because she smoked pot more than she confessed to or did a few other drugs as a kid that she will not make a good law enforcement person? Pull your head out of your ass, Dude! Save your judgement for yourself you liberal punk. I hate people like you casting your smart ass judgement on good people. If you think all the cops out there are "honest" people that told the entire truth with reguard to their background, then you are living in a fantasy world. I know for a fact that most of the police officers out there covered something up in their background. You are a sorry Sack, Torpedo.
I agree with all of that except the "liberal" part. One thing 'pedo ain't is a liberal. Liberals don't usually damn someone for having done drugs a few times
Skeptic
Posted by this way
- Nov 26, 2003, 08:54 PMTorpedo,
No one is perfectly honest. Everyone is dishonest. You, me, them, all of us. Are you telling me that because she smoked pot more than she confessed to or did a few other drugs as a kid that she will not make a good law enforcement person? Pull your head out of your ass, Dude! Save your judgement for yourself you liberal punk. I hate people like you casting your smart ass judgement on good people. If you think all the cops out there are "honest" people that told the entire truth with reguard to their background, then you are living in a fantasy world. I know for a fact that most of the police officers out there covered something up in their background. You are a sorry Sack, Torpedo.
No one is perfectly honest. Everyone is dishonest. You, me, them, all of us. Are you telling me that because she smoked pot more than she confessed to or did a few other drugs as a kid that she will not make a good law enforcement person? Pull your head out of your ass, Dude! Save your judgement for yourself you liberal punk. I hate people like you casting your smart ass judgement on good people. If you think all the cops out there are "honest" people that told the entire truth with reguard to their background, then you are living in a fantasy world. I know for a fact that most of the police officers out there covered something up in their background. You are a sorry Sack, Torpedo.
Posted by n0mad
- Nov 26, 2003, 08:33 PMIf you are a good person and know that you can do that job honestly with integrity and honor, you do whatever it takes to get the job; that's no.1! The past is the past, and is noone's business and while it MAY be an indication of future behavior, it is not even close to being an absolute.
Posted by Torpedo
- Nov 26, 2003, 04:29 PMI stand corrected....somehow I thougt you were seeking employment with the FBI....whew!...now some police agency will have to know that somewhere in a class beginning in December there is a dishonest person about to wear the badge and join the thin blue line...a comforting thought
Posted by Torpedo
- Nov 26, 2003, 04:24 PMNow what are you going to do about the periodic examinations that you no doubt will be required to take...especially if you enter any foreign counterintelligence work......your deceptive world will soon close around you