According to the AP, as of Jan 1 2004, visitors with visas will be fingerprinted on entry and exit. I'm conflicted. I don't like being treated like a criminal, but it is only sensible for a country to keep track of who is in their borders and who isn't. Perhaps they should use retinal scans, which don't smack so much of criminality.
--Nat
Yet.
All of the EU countries must start complying with the US demand that all EU passports must contain biometric data by late next year. Any citizens of a country who doesn't comply has to appy for a visa for a trip of any length. You have to wonder what the US intends to do with this data. GATTACA may have been prescient rather than an entertaining futuristic fiction.
Fingerprinting takes too long but the retinal scanners are still very expensive. Who knows if they'll even have the smartchip infrastructure available in the next few years in order to use what they're demanding. Of course, the easy solution for everyone outside the US is to not enter the US, especially after Dubya gets 4 more followed by 4-8 of Jeb.
Re:only fingerprinting?
wickline on 2003-05-20T10:01:17
maybe that's bush's plan: make it too inconvenient for terrorists to enter the country.
"I can't afford a retinal scan, so I guess I'll blow something up in some other country"
-matt
(tounge in cheek)Re:only fingerprinting?
hfb on 2003-05-20T10:32:40
unlikely.
:) It'll just up the stakes for identity forgers around the world. Just wait until the biometrics database gets hacked. It'll have an even further negative effect on the travel industry, too. I'm sure yankees will see biometric data on their passports as soon as the external proof of concept works out. As a passport toting yankee I'm afraid to enter US airspace, especially with Jarkko, because police, irrational fear and guns generally make for a volatile and extremely uncomfortable environment...not to mention the ability to detain someone indefinitely without warrant. Why bother with the risk of going to the US if you don't absolutely have to? Terrorists, on the other hand, will find a way in if they are determined enough...and the war just gave them new religion.
Re:only fingerprinting?
clintp on 2003-05-20T16:55:43
GATTACA may have been prescient rather than an entertaining futuristic fictionYou give Andrew Niccol's writing far too much credit for being either precient or entertaining. Fiction I'd agree with.
The things that help are targetting organised crime, corrupt intelligence / police services, decent airport and other key security.
Currently the 'solutions' are worse than the problem - racism and bigotry, big brother states, loss of civil liberties, etc.
Re:Weird
rafael on 2003-05-21T06:49:36
The problem is not in fingerprinting per se, it's in what various public or private agencies are allowed to do with the fingerprint (or biometric / DNA) databases.Re:Weird
pudge on 2003-05-21T11:28:10
Well yes, but gnat's apparent complaint (and the complaint of others) was that being fingerprinted it being "treated like a criminal," and I was addressing only that.Re:Weird
chaoticset on 2003-05-24T17:07:11
Well, yeah -- but that depends on the circumstances. I am a law-abiding citizen -- to the degree that probably 95% of U.S. citizens are, anyway -- but when I got fingerprinted, I was nervous. Why?I was completely surrounded by police officers.
I don't necessarily have a problem with cops. I've read/watched/intuited abuses of the power a police officer has, though, and I quite frankly feared for my life a tiny little bit.
I can't help it. I get that all the time now. I got it yesterday, when I was setting up a checking account. The bank checked me on some sort of profiling system they have, and my roommate joked, "They're going to find out you're a terrorist now!"
And, immediately, the thought came: Well, now I'm dead.
Of course, I wasn't. And, of course, rational thought bears out that the odds that I would have been attacked/imprisoned are almost nil.
Of course, the chances that I would have been attacked by, say, a werewolf are nil, too. But that's what cops are fast becoming, along with the Government -- boogeymen. (Or is that boogeypeople?)
I prefer to focus on information, instead of context, frankly. If the police have my fingerprints, and decide to do something unjust with that information, will the fact that I was fingerprinted for an educational position prevent them from using that?
