Fingerprinting at Airports - any objections?

Z

z103

Guest
I'm wondering what people's feeling are about fingerprinting at airports? I recently read a newspaper article that stated that the UK were going to introduce fingerprinting at its airports. As far as I'm aware the USA already do this (and I refuse to travel there because of it).

It seems that people don't seem to be too bothered. Maybe ten or twenty years ago there would have been uproar and protests.

Incidentally, fingerprints are surprisingly easy to forge.
 
I don't understand why people would be bothered? Isn't the point of fingerprinting an attempt to keep people safer.

What am I missing?
 
Isn't the point of fingerprinting an attempt to keep people safer.

What am I missing?
Click to expand...
How does fingerprinting keep people safer?
 
I suspect it's not really about safety. Mixing arriving and departing passengers allows BAA to double their retail 'footfall' within the new T5 terminal building.

According to a report in The Times,
The fingerprint plan will affect all domestic passengers using Terminal 5 as well as international travellers who are transferring to an internal flight. It will enable domestic and international passengers to mingle in the shops, restaurants, cafés and bars of the terminal’s departure lounge.
Click to expand...

[broken link removed] provides some interesting comments and links.
 
Would'nt bother me either. It said on some American programme other night about some scanner that when you pass through it the people operating it can actually see you as though you were not wearing any clothes on. What would you think of that?
 
Ash 22 said:
Would'nt bother me either. It said on some American programme other night about some scanner that when you pass through it the people operating it can actually see you as though you were not wearing any clothes on. What would you think of that?
Click to expand...

How do you get jobs there ?;)

At this point if you want to travel you have to accept the procedures that the relevant authorities think are appropriate for the purpose. We have gone so far with storage of identity & personal information that at this point I don't see fingerprinting much of a further intrusion on what's there. Now retina scanning is another thing. Always remember the scene in Demolition Man where Stallone's nemesis gets out of jail by scanning the guard's eyeball which he had nicely impaled on a biro. :eek:
 
Graham_07 said:
We have gone so far with storage of identity & personal information that at this point I don't see fingerprinting much of a further intrusion on what's there.
Click to expand...
And we are paying for it with Identity Theft. Add in getting your fingerprints stolen and see how easy it is to change them!
 
leghorn said:
I'm wondering what people's feeling are about fingerprinting at airports? .
Click to expand...

If it serves as a further deterrent against acts of terrorism etc then how can anybody have a problem with it? Sorry, anybody except the potential terrorist of course!
 
diarmuidc said:
And we are paying for it with Identity Theft. Add in getting your fingerprints stolen and see how easy it is to change them!
Click to expand...

And with a little photoshopping we could make Michael O'Leary Taoiseach. ( now there's not a bad idea :rolleyes: )
 
leghorn said:
I'm wondering what people's feeling are about fingerprinting at airports? I recently read a newspaper article that stated that the UK were going to introduce fingerprinting at its airports. As far as I'm aware the USA already do this (and I refuse to travel there because of it).quote]

I'm curious, why won't you travel.

Incidentally when I travelled last year, they only scanned one finger,
Click to expand...
 
leghorn said:
As far as I'm aware the USA already do this (and I refuse to travel there because of it).
Click to expand...

It seems a bit of an overreaction alright.

If ever there was a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face (or whatever that phrase is) then this is it.
 
gebbel said:
If it serves as a further deterrent against acts of terrorism etc then how can anybody have a problem with it? Sorry, anybody except the potential terrorist of course!
Click to expand...
Fingerprinting deters terrorism? Do you think terrorists arrive through airports and ports? All these security measures are simply means of control over the majority of sheep who will follow any plan no matter how ill conceived until they realise, all too late, that they no longer live in a free state. It is a means of getting the sheep to live in fear so they are more pliable. It is a means of keeping the sheep asleep, of distracting them with nonsense, so they miss all that is really going on around them. It's like slowly boiling a frog.
Fingerprinting is only the beginning.
 
gebbel said:
If it serves as a further deterrent against acts of terrorism etc then how can anybody have a problem with it? Sorry, anybody except the potential terrorist of course!
Click to expand...


How does it deter terrorists?

Most of the terrorists doing the serious damage these days are "one time only" terrorists (ie suicide bombers). Piece of cake to get them through a fingerprint security check. First you send them through with no bombs. If they get through then you know they are not flagged on the database. The second time you strap the bombs on and send them back. Their fingerprints aren't too useful the third time.

And good to see you using the "if you have nothing to hide argument". I assume you won't mind posting your name, address and bank account details here then. After all, you have nothing to hide (unless you are a terrorist)

Edit: I would also suggest reading Bruce Schneier's thoughts on biometrics. He has forgotten more about security than most of us will ever know
And I especially liked this one. A German computer club, copied and published the German Interior minter's fingerprint to show how easily they can be forged.
 
Last edited:
shnaek said:
Fingerprinting deters terrorism? Do you think terrorists arrive through airports and ports? All these security measures are simply means of control over the majority of sheep who will follow any plan no matter how ill conceived until they realise, all too late, that they no longer live in a free state. It is a means of getting the sheep to live in fear so they are more pliable. It is a means of keeping the sheep asleep, of distracting them with nonsense, so they miss all that is really going on around them. It's like slowly boiling a frog.
Fingerprinting is only the beginning.
Click to expand...

I don't regard having my fingerprints taken as a reason for national security and I don't let it happen because I am afraid. I just get on with things that I have to get on with if I want to travel to certain places because what exactly will my not allowing fingerprints to be scanned add to my life? Surely if national security wanted to monitor my movements they can do so without my permission as it stands so why get all paranoid about it. Some times taking a stand is an act of principle but this just seems an act of needless stubborness that will not impact on anyone but the person themselves.
 
leghorn said:
I'm wondering what people's feeling are about fingerprinting at airports? I recently read a newspaper article that stated that the UK were going to introduce fingerprinting at its airports. As far as I'm aware the USA already do this (and I refuse to travel there because of it).

It seems that people don't seem to be too bothered. Maybe ten or twenty years ago there would have been uproar and protests.

Incidentally, fingerprints are surprisingly easy to forge.
Click to expand...


Sounds like you have something to hide....

Note to self : Organise abduction and rendition flight for the man known as Mr Leghorn.
 
Sounds like you have something to hide....
Click to expand...
Yes, I do. My fingerprints, DNA, bank details, nudity, innermost thoughts etc, etc... I suppose you have no problems divulging all of this to (anonymous) others?

It's good to see that I am not alone in my feelings.
 
shnaek said:
Fingerprinting deters terrorism? Do you think terrorists arrive through airports and ports? All these security measures are simply means of control over the majority of sheep who will follow any plan no matter how ill conceived until they realise, all too late, that they no longer live in a free state. It is a means of getting the sheep to live in fear so they are more pliable. It is a means of keeping the sheep asleep, of distracting them with nonsense, so they miss all that is really going on around them. It's like slowly boiling a frog.
Fingerprinting is only the beginning.
Click to expand...

Right. This is getting interesting.
There's a definite feel of conspiracy about your post just there.

Out of curiosity, what is your view on 9/11 ?

A lot of people who believe 9/11 was an inside job believe it was orchestrated to instill fear in people with teh result the people pretty much allow teh givernmenst to do anything (such as declare wars, have a new big brother regime where fingerprinting is only teh start).

Are you one of those people with that view on 9/11 ?

(just trying to get an idea here of how extreme your views are in relation to big brother)
 
leghorn said:
Yes, I do. My fingerprints, DNA, bank details, nudity, innermost thoughts etc, etc... I suppose you have no problems divulging all of this to (anonymous) others?

It's good to see that I am not alone in my feelings.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Big Brother has an insidious way of creeping into our lives (the real BB not C4's effort!).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top