I just got fingerprinted for a trade in at gamestop?!?!

CaoPi

CaoPi

CAGiversary!
Feedback
144 (100%)
My store said this just started today, and it was going to apply at other gamestops. They asked for my thumb print and made me fill out some paper work (had to input my address), they looked at my ID and everything! This was in sacramento if anyone was wondering
 
Last edited by a moderator:
gtfo gamestop will never ever get my prints. only people that will ever get my prints will get them against my wishes (and hopefully they never will:p)
 
[quote name='CaoPi']my store said this just started today, and it was going to apply at other gamestops. They asked for my thumb print and made me fill out some paper work they looked at my ID and everything! This was in sacramento if anyone wa wondering[/QUOTE]

may i ask what you traded in just for curiosity sake?
 
[quote name='crzyjoeguy']may i ask what you traded in just for curiosity sake?[/QUOTE]

some ps3 and 360 games from my personal collection this was for the fight night deal!
 
[quote name='CaoPi']some ps3 and 360 games from my personal collection this was for the fight night deal![/QUOTE]


thats crazy, i expected you to say i traded in a ps3 or something like that, but just a few games, yeah gamestop can rot in hell
 
[quote name='mortalfloater']We used to do that for hardware trade-ins at the Gamestop I used to work at.[/QUOTE]


now thats a sig hahahaha
 
@smarkbran: is it legal? It's probably required by law in his area. I guarantee you those employees don't want to. And if his GS has to, any other stores in the same area will as well.
 
...some of you are seriously beyond help. As Ziv pointed out, it is required by law in that area. The same would hold true at any store where you are trading in or selling goods. That way, local law enforcement can have a better chance at catching people who are dealing in stolen goods.
 
I've been mulling this over for a couple minutes, and I don't see what the anger is about. Isn't a fingerprint just a more secure signature? I can't really think of how gamestop could use it for any sort of evil intent... the only thing I think it will do is prevent shady people from signing their names under "Rusty Shackleford". I'll admit I don't know much about these things so please enlighten me if I'm missing something but right now this just seems like an excuse to bitch about gamestop some more.
 
It's undoubtedly a new law in California. There's a law in Akron, OH that requires a card filled out with all kinds of details from my driver's license. If I go to a gamestop/fye/whatever outside of Akron I don't have to fill it out.

Thankfully I had the foresight to leave my SSN off my driver's license when they asked me if I wanted it on there.
 
You don't see a law REQUIRING (i.e. forcing) private businesses to collect finger prints for trade ins as a problem? I'm wondering how you feel about Chicago businesses forced to make their smoking patrons smoke outside against their (owners') wills.

If it indeed is not the law (that hasn't really been established as truth yet in this thread), and is an independent action that Gamestop is taking, that is fine. You don't have to trade with them, and the agreement to give your fingerprint ends there.
 
[quote name='eastshore4']I've been mulling this over for a couple minutes, and I don't see what the anger is about. Isn't a fingerprint just a more secure signature? I can't really think of how gamestop could use it for any sort of evil intent... the only thing I think it will do is prevent shady people from signing their names under "Rusty Shackleford". I'll admit I don't know much about these things so please enlighten me if I'm missing something but right now this just seems like an excuse to bitch about gamestop some more.[/QUOTE]

DUDE!! do you not watch movies? Gamestop can take our fingerprints and open doors and shyt man!
 
You don't see a law REQUIRING (i.e. forcing) private businesses to collect finger prints for trade ins as a problem?
Click to expand...

I don't yet know if it's a problem. I first want to know what makes it so different from a pen and ink signature? They require us to sign for our trade ins here amongst all other sorts of purchases, and I just want to know what makes this so different from that?
 
[quote name='Poor2More']DUDE!! do you not watch movies? Gamestop can take our fingerprints and open doors and shyt man![/QUOTE]

That made me LOL. Thank you.
 
[quote name='letsgetacid']You don't see a law REQUIRING (i.e. forcing) private businesses to collect finger prints for trade ins as a problem? I'm wondering how you feel about Chicago businesses forced to make their smoking patrons smoke outside against their (owners') wills.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, but those are totally unrelated. Smoking is a legal activity. So, telling businesses that people are not allowed to smoke in their establishments, even if the owner doesn't care, is wrong. I have seen this take over in New Jersey and New York, and it annoys me.

This, on the other hand, is an effort by law enforcement to crack down on theft, which last time I checked was still illegal. I would much rather see a business like GS cooperate with law enforcement than have them do what eBay does and hide behind the "privacy" of their users. There was a news story I saw once about how much stolen property is sold on eBay, and they generally refuse to help law enforcement in any way.

[quote name='Poor2More']DUDE!! do you not watch movies? Gamestop can take our fingerprints and open doors and shyt man![/QUOTE]

LOL! Yes, that was definitely worth a laugh. Thank you.
 
Smoking is illegal in businesses like diners and other indoor places in Ohio, and it has been that way for a while now. It's nothing new in most places in the USA.
 
[quote name='letsgetacid']You don't see a law REQUIRING (i.e. forcing) private businesses to collect finger prints for trade ins as a problem? I'm wondering how you feel about Chicago businesses forced to make their smoking patrons smoke outside against their (owners') wills.

If it indeed is not the law (that hasn't really been established as truth yet in this thread), and is an independent action that Gamestop is taking, that is fine. You don't have to trade with them, and the agreement to give your fingerprint ends there.[/QUOTE]

Trade ins in many cities/states are considered the same as pawning off merchandise in a pawn shop, and depending on city or state law can require a fingerprint to be taken just as if you went to a pawn shop.

I had to do it before when trading in stuff to an EB/Gamestop years ago, but I can't remember if it was in IL, KY, or MO. I haven't had to do it in MO for a few years now.

Smoking in public places can also be considered a health risk, which is why so many cities are banning it. I'm not normally for excessive government regulation, but I enjoy not having to worry about smoking/non-smoking sections and am glad it's going out of style.
 
[quote name='Scorch']I know it's law in Florida.. haven't heard about it yet in California.[/QUOTE]

I won't ever know...
 
Fingerprints are pretty personal information thats why you are the only one with them. So game traders are treated like criminals except criminals are printed after they are caught. Yep that sounds like the new America were living in.
 
Heh, they're not doing it here yet, but the day they do is the day I stop going there. Giving my prints for shitty trade-in values is way too invasive for me. :roll:
 
I know this is the case in Florida, as they have to follow the same laws as a pawn shop. Not only do you have to give your finger print, the Gamestops aren't allowed to sell games that are traded in until 15 days have passed. As someone said before, it's to crack down on people who might be trying to trade in stolen games.
 
*insert usual comment about people complaining about policies and doing business with the company anyway*

The rules are there to try and crack down on theft, like other CAGs have said. If you'd prefer not to get fingerprinted to do business with Gamestop, and that's their policy now, I think you might have a bit of an issue.

Since they accept games for credit or cash, they can be under pawn shop laws, and most of them these days are requiring fingerprints for selling items. Some banks require a thumbprint for cashing a check when you don't have an account there.

Again, if this is an issue for you, don't solicit the business.
 
It actualy sucks more for GS than it does for the customer, I was talking to a store manager around here this week that had a similar rule passed down to him. He said that the police come in often and will go through his records and many times grab games as evidence, he then has to get the money for the games from the person that traded them in by taking them to court, he said it's a terrible waste of time and money. I guess the police dont care as much about the crime against the business as much as the crime against the original owner.
 
This isn't a Gamestop policy. This depends on your municipalities laws. Back when Rhino existed, I would travel down to FL every now and then to trade in games. Certain counties required fingerprints on any trade ins, and they couldn't put those games out for sale for n number of days. In that county, these items were treated as being no different than that of a pawn shop.
 
Really glad someone gets it. Don't agree with Gamestop? You have other places to shop.



[quote name='shrike4242']*insert usual comment about people complaining about policies and doing business with the company anyway*

The rules are there to try and crack down on theft, like other CAGs have said. If you'd prefer not to get fingerprinted to do business with Gamestop, and that's their policy now, I think you might have a bit of an issue.

Since they accept games for credit or cash, they can be under pawn shop laws, and most of them these days are requiring fingerprints for selling items. Some banks require a thumbprint for cashing a check when you don't have an account there.

Again, if this is an issue for you, don't solicit the business.[/QUOTE]
 
@howlinmad: Its not a Gamestop policy. Every store has to do this in areas where required by law. Going somewhere else to trade won't help. And if other stores aren't doing yet, they will be shut down until they comply. Stores where I live only have to fingerprint for cash trades and all system trades. I don't trade in systems or to get cash so I don't have to be printed.

Also, if you have nothing to hide, it's no big deal.
 
I really don't like being fingerprinted, but sometimes it's inevitable. I agree with shrike4242, you've got other places to shop and you don't have to deal with gamestop if you don't want to. But I have to give an electronic fingerprint every time I punch in for work. They say it's for keeping people from punching in others, and it's effective to that end, but I don't like to be fingerprinted. There's nothing I can do about it, as there's no law that says they specifically can't take a fingerprint.
 
Yeah it's annoying and invades your privacy but it makes sense to me at least. If you take into account how many people use gamestop and other related stores as a means to get rid of stolen items it seems perfectly reasonable for them to want to have a record of people selling items to them in case they turn out to be stolen.

I mean if your game collection gets stolen wouldn't you want these places that buy used goods to have a better way of helping the police identify who stole it if it shows up there?
 
Yeah its a local thing. Here in Miami fingerprints aren't required for trade in's. So its not a Florida law either. Honestly a fingerprint is harmless. You leave about 200 of em when you walk in the store. It's in no way a security risk.
 
[quote name='bigdaddybruce44']Sorry, but those are totally unrelated. Smoking is a legal activity. So, telling businesses that people are not allowed to smoke in their establishments, even if the owner doesn't care, is wrong. I have seen this take over in New Jersey and New York, and it annoys me.[/QUOTE]

Are you kidding? It is the greatest thing ever.
 
[quote name='javeryh']Are you kidding? It is the greatest thing ever.[/QUOTE]

What's the greatest thing ever? Telling the owner of private property that people are not allowed to do a LEGAL activity on their property? Do you not understand the legal precedent that sets?

If the government wants to eventually ban smoking, that's fine with me. Until then, they shouldn't be able to tell a bar owner, for instance, that they can't have people smoke...INSIDE THEIR BAR. It's their property. It's not public property. It's not a government building. If the owner wants to prohibit smoking in their bar, that's fine, too. Again, it's their property. They can require you wear panties on your head to gain admittance, if they so desire. If you don't want to inhale smoke or wear panties on your head, don't go to that bar.
 
1st - I'd like to ask exactly how does a store, or the police for that matter, prove that any merchandise traded in is stolen? Unless the case or box has initials or something, how do they determine that this copy of "X" is different than this copy of "X"? Do they just go around and confiscate every traded-in copy of that game from a certain radius and then do fingerprint analysis? That seems like a lot of taxpayer money for a game.

2nd - Smoking kills everyone and should only be done in your private residence. You wanna kill yourself, do it at home.
 
[quote name='macjz212']1st - I'd like to ask exactly how does a store, or the police for that matter, prove that any merchandise traded in is stolen? Unless the case or box has initials or something, how do they determine that this copy of "X" is different than this copy of "X"? Do they just go around and confiscate every traded-in copy of that game from a certain radius and then do fingerprint analysis? That seems like a lot of taxpayer money for a game.[/QUOTE]

It's not like if you call the police and tell them that someone stole your copy of Call of Duty 4, they are gonna throw up a city-wide dragnet. But this helps them to track down large cache of stolen goods and hopefully catch the criminal. It also serves as a deterrent and cuts down the avenues that criminals have to quickly dump stolen goods for money.

2nd - Smoking kills everyone and should only be done in your private residence. You wanna kill yourself, do it at home.
Click to expand...
And loud music can make you go deaf. Should clubs not be allowed to play loud music? If you don't like smoking, don't go to privates businesses that allow it. That's how things worked for a very long time in America.
 
Wow... this is sure gonna crack down on game thefts. I'd sorta imagine the vast majority of these games get sold to friends or friends of friends. Heck, most people would gladly pay whatever gamestop wanted to give for trade in on most new titles. Plus, even with a "digital paper trail", I can't see them doing anything over a game on ebay that has left the state.

This is just "big brother" bs, and if this it ever hit this area, I'd be damned if I gave them my fingerprint. I have a clean criminal record and meither the hospital nor the police have my finger print registered.
 
Just like a drug test, if you don't feel comfortable with it, you can usually opt out with the company.
 
[quote name='bigdaddybruce44']What's the greatest thing ever? Telling the owner of private property that people are not allowed to do a LEGAL activity on their property? Do you not understand the legal precedent that sets?

If the government wants to eventually ban smoking, that's fine with me. Until then, they shouldn't be able to tell a bar owner, for instance, that they can't have people smoke...INSIDE THEIR BAR. It's their property. It's not public property. It's not a government building. If the owner wants to prohibit smoking in their bar, that's fine, too. Again, it's their property. They can require you wear panties on your head to gain admittance, if they so desire. If you don't want to inhale smoke or wear panties on your head, don't go to that bar.[/QUOTE]

I think I know a thing or two about legal precedents. I also know that private property is not actually private property in most instances when it comes to public policy. These laws will easily withstand the rational basis test under the constitution (the law is rationally related to serving a legitimate state interest).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top