Will you have to take off your mask to get your picture taken for your cruise card?

[ilikeanswers]

2 minutes ago, wowzz said:

Seriously?  You've been watching too many films! 

Are you really saying that in the 60 seconds I stand in front of the Border Control podium, my fingerprints are matched to any of the millions in the central Interpol file to see if I am a person of interest? 

Complete hogwash.

 

This is the official line:

NEW BIOMETRIC TECHNOLOGY IMPROVES SECURITY AND FACILITATES U.S. ENTRY PROCESS FOR INTERNATIONAL TRAVELERS

[wowzz]

14 minutes ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

This is the official line:

NEW BIOMETRIC TECHNOLOGY IMPROVES SECURITY AND FACILITATES U.S. ENTRY PROCESS FOR INTERNATIONAL TRAVELERS

Which may well be the case, but that has nothing to do with the fingerprinting malarky that has been going on for over 30 years.

[Flatbush Flyer]

10 minutes ago, wowzz said:

Seriously?  You've been watching too many films! 

Are you really saying that in the 60 seconds I stand in front of the Border Control podium, my fingerprints are matched to any of the millions in the central Interpol file to see if I am a person of interest? 

Complete hogwash.

Of course not.... (perhaps it's YOU who has been watching too many films). 

 

Your "live scan" prints taken at an airport or at CBP or pretty much any police department in the US does immediately search the US NCIC record. If a record doesn't exist, that live scan adds you to the database. If the search returns reason for concern.....

 

A U.S. NCIC fingerprint data search may be requested by bona fire police agencies worldwide. That search would normally only be requested if there was reason to believe that you needed to be investigated. Interpol provides reciprocal services where they exist and when they are appropriate.

[Flatbush Flyer]

Just now, wowzz said:

Which may well be the case, but that has nothing to do with the fingerprinting malarky that has been going on for over 30 years.

Since you're starting to sound like a conspiracy theorist, let me add to your angst:

Not only do your prints probably already exist in NCIC, there's a possibility that (like more than 25% of the records therein) some of the info is erroneous (usually missing disposition of very old court cases which were dismissed thus showing an uncertainty beyond an arrest).

[ilikeanswers]

1 minute ago, wowzz said:

Which may well be the case, but that has nothing to do with the fingerprinting malarky that has been going on for over 30 years.

 

You asked why they fingerprint you? According to the Homeland Security response:

 

"The United States collects biometrics because unlike names and dates of birth, which can be changed, biometrics are unique and almost impossible to forge. By using biometrics to establish and verify travelers’ identities, we are making international travel more convenient, predictable and secure for legitimate visitors, but difficult, unpredictable and intimidating for criminals, immigration violators and those who want to do harm to the United States. Collecting biometrics also helps protect travelers against identity theft if their travel documents are lost or stolen. Document fraud and identity theft continue to be a worldwide problem. Since 2001, Interpol has amassed a database of 6.7 million lost or stolen passports, including 2.8 million from Visa Waiver Program countries alone. Using biometrics helps the United States stop criminals and immigration violators, including those using fraudulent identification, from entering the country. "

 

And it has not been going for 30 years just some time after 9/11 which year US started I do not know.

[wowzz]

3 minutes ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

You asked why they fingerprint you? According to the Homeland Security response:

 

"The United States collects biometrics because unlike names and dates of birth, which can be changed, biometrics are unique and almost impossible to forge. By using biometrics to establish and verify travelers’ identities, we are making international travel more convenient, predictable and secure for legitimate visitors, but difficult, unpredictable and intimidating for criminals, immigration violators and those who want to do harm to the United States. Collecting biometrics also helps protect travelers against identity theft if their travel documents are lost or stolen. Document fraud and identity theft continue to be a worldwide problem. Since 2001, Interpol has amassed a database of 6.7 million lost or stolen passports, including 2.8 million from Visa Waiver Program countries alone. Using biometrics helps the United States stop criminals and immigration violators, including those using fraudulent identification, from entering the country. "

 

And it has not been going for 30 years just some time after 9/11 which year US started I do not know.

I started visiting the US on business in the early 90s, and my fingerprints were certainly taken then.

Biometrics are completely different to fingerprints  - I'm amazed that the US are so far behind other countries in their usage. 

Now that the US is using Biometrics, why continue using fingerprints? 

Edited May 15, 2020 by wowzz

[ilikeanswers]

11 minutes ago, wowzz said:

I started visiting the US on business in the early 90s, and my fingerprints were certainly taken then.

Biometrics are completely different to fingerprints  - I'm amazed that the US are so far behind other countries in their usage. 

Now that the US is using Biometrics, why continue using fingerprints? 

 

Biometrics do include fingerprinting. The first two lines from the Homeland Security statement are:

"The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is upgrading its biometric collection technology to more quickly and accurately identify international travelers. This upgrade includes using new, faster fingerprint scanners to collect additional fingerprints from international travelers when they enter the United States."

 

Wikipedia seems to agree:

Biometrics

[Flatbush Flyer]

11 minutes ago, wowzz said:

I started visiting the US on business in the early 90s, and my fingerprints were certainly taken then.

Biometrics are completely different to fingerprints  - I'm amazed that the US are so far behind other countries in their usage. 

Now that the US is using Biometrics, why continue using fingerprints? 

Well - now it looks like you may also need a dictionary. 

Live scan (inkless) instantaneous fingerprinting is a "biometric" just like a retina scan or facial recognition. 

What purpose would be served by introducing a costly duplicative database?

 

 

[wowzz]

11 minutes ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Well - now it looks like you may also need a dictionary. 

Live scan (inkless) instantaneous fingerprinting is a "biometric" just like a retina scan or facial recognition. 

What purpose would be served by introducing a costly duplicative database?

 

 

OK,  but why not just do a retinal scan, as does the rest of the world, and not bother with the fingerprints? 

[ilikeanswers]

13 minutes ago, wowzz said:

OK,  but why not just do a retinal scan, as does the rest of the world, and not bother with the fingerprints? 

 

Near the bottom it discusses the disadvantages of retinal scanning:

 

Retinal Recognition

 

Though I'm not sure any airport is using retinal scanning. Are you sure you are not mixing it up with iris scanning? I think there are two airports I read about using that technology. 

Edited May 15, 2020 by ilikeanswers

[Aquahound]

1 hour ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Of course not.... (perhaps it's YOU who has been watching too many films). 

 

Your "live scan" prints taken at an airport or at CBP or pretty much any police department in the US does immediately search the US NCIC record. If a record doesn't exist, that live scan adds you to the database. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Since you're starting to sound like a conspiracy theorist, let me add to your angst:

Not only do your prints probably already exist in NCIC, there's a possibility that (like more than 25% of the records therein) some of the info is erroneous (usually missing disposition of very old court cases which were dismissed thus showing an uncertainty beyond an arrest).

 

You are only half correct.  When a person submits biometrics at a port of entry or through job applications, they are only checked through NCIC, not added to it.   NCIC checks are for criminal and missing persons records.

 

The database for storing prints from all venues, not just criminal, is IAFIS.  

Edited May 15, 2020 by Aquahound

[Flatbush Flyer]

22 minutes ago, wowzz said:

OK,  but why not just do a retinal scan, as does the rest of the world, and not bother with the fingerprints? 

What part of this are you not understanding?

The US has an existing widespread mechanism for collecting the biometric called "live scan fingerprinting" and a database of millions of existing live scanned and digitally reproduced old "inked" fingerprints.

In the same time it takes you to look at a camera for eye scan, you can have a fingerprint scan. Are you not considering the cost of adding a second nationwide scanning/record system in a country with more than 300 million people? 

Yes, it would be a redundant system because you'd still need the live scan fingerprint readers to search the existing data base of millions of records.

Not rocket science to understand this reality.

[Flatbush Flyer]

11 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

 

You are only half correct.  When a person submits biometrics at a port of entry or through job applications, they are only checked through NCIC, not added to it.   NCIC checks are for criminal and missing persons records.

 

The database for storing prints from all venues, not just criminal, is IAFIS.  

Yes -true. I was trying to keep it as simple as possible for wowzz.

[Aquahound]

1 hour ago, wowzz said:

Seriously?  You've been watching too many films! 

Are you really saying that in the 60 seconds I stand in front of the Border Control podium, my fingerprints are matched to any of the millions in the central Interpol file to see if I am a person of interest? 

Complete hogwash.

 

Actually yes, well, sorta.  Criminal and missing persons hits through NCIC are almost instantaneous.  For a government system, it actually works quite well.  However, NCIC is only shared with Canada so Interpol records aren't obtained quite so easily.  Those would only be found if the entering country submitted a notice to Interpol nations and the want/warrant info was added to our wants database.  

[clo]

4 hours ago, wowzz said:

Exactly, some people here seem to be in denial about the continued danger of CV19 for at least the next 12 months, if not longer.

I think "denial" has to be it. Some time back a poster wrote "I must cruise." I figuratively shook my head in amazement. But perhaps those are the people the cruise lines are aiming for. On a separate topic I've encountered people who are ignorant of the facts and are close minded. Not a great combo for good decision making IMO.

[wowzz]

26 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

Actually yes, well, sorta.  Criminal and missing persons hits through NCIC are almost instantaneous.  For a government system, it actually works quite well.  However, NCIC is only shared with Canada so Interpol records aren't obtained quite so easily.  Those would only be found if the entering country submitted a notice to Interpol nations and the want/warrant info was added to our wants database.  

Thank you. So, unless you are American or Canadian, there is no point taking fingerprints.

[Aquahound]

4 minutes ago, wowzz said:

Thank you. So, unless you are American or Canadian, there is no point taking fingerprints.

 

No, there's value in collecting biometrics from everyone because foreign visitors may still have a criminal record in the US.  We're one of the highest visited countries in the world with over 80 million visitors a year, and over 2 million people have been deported.  Because those criminal records were created in the US, they are stored in our database the way any developed nation would. 

[navybankerteacher]

1 hour ago, wowzz said:

..

Biometrics are completely different to fingerprints  - I'm amazed that the US are so far behind other countries in their usage. 

Now that the US is using Biometrics, why continue using fingerprints? 

You really should try to understand what you are talking about.  Fingerprints are still the most frequently used (at least in the US - and certainly a part of any nation’s biometric arsenal) biometric. worldwide.

 

 

 

[sail7seas]

OP:

 

In response to your question, I expect that a  simple 'yes' is likely the answer.

 

If one is wearing their mask covering nose and mouth,  the mask must be removed for the photo or it  would have little  value or use

Edited May 15, 2020 by sail7seas

[jocap]

We had our fingerprints taken at Fort Lauderdale airport in March 2006, plus some sort of eye scan. It was a first for us, which is why we remember it.

Around that time we read about the British Airways captain who flew regular flights into Miami. Unfortunately he had cut his finger before departing the UK, so he had to sit in the small room for 6 hours in Miami, as his prints didn't match, before being allowed to fly back to the UK.

[wowzz]

Let's get back to basics.  

Virtually every country in the world now uses biometric technology, with no need for finger printing.  Why doesn't the US  ? 

[chipmaster]

In the day and age of terrorism and now where anyone can be a carrier of the next pandemic outbreak identity verification, tracking and validation of health is more important.

 

1) Facial recognition by a machine is not perfect, a human is still better.   Mask off for the cruisecard, ID picture

2) Fingerprints, biometrics like faceID, or even more sophisticated are there, sadly most require you to remove your mask or enough time / contact proximity that would put you or the inspector at risk for getting or transmitting.

 

Thus all this talk / debate there is NO way that there isn't some small risk of transmission.   

 

TSA wear masks now, sit behind screens, wear gloves, but remember they handle how many thousands of IDs and thus the larger risks is they re-transmit BACK to you someone else, then you get on a ship and spread it to everyone!

 

If the TSA agent is very disciplined with his hands/face and mask protocol he is far safer than you are as you probably will be far more lazy once you leave and put your contaminated ID back in your carrier and touch some other part of your body/luggage and then even after washing your hands viola you are infected!

 

 

Every action you do outside is a risk, till we have vaccine there is finite risk and all about your risk aversion and whether when you get sick are you stranded or is the healthcare overwhelmed to treat you leaving you in the hallway gasping for your last breath.

 

[ilikeanswers]

1 hour ago, wowzz said:

Let's get back to basics.  

Virtually every country in the world now uses biometric technology, with no need for finger printing.  Why doesn't the US  ? 

 

You realise your question was answered the first time you asked it? Why do you like all other biometrics but fingerprinting? When it comes to airports the number biometric is still fingerprinting. Iris scanning is still limited and AFAIK only two countries use it for the general public. So really the USA is standard to the rest of the world not an exception. 

[ldubs]

14 hours ago, ontheweb said:

Yes DW and I are native born citizens and have not been fingerprinted at any airport. We have not been to Asia, so have not experienced what might happen at those airport locations.

 

I never said I doubted that non-residents were fingerprinted when entering the USA. I am a bit surprised that other countries have not retaliated by demanding the same of US residents entering their countries.

 

Actually,  we have not had fingerprinting at airports in Asia.  Where it has happened was at ports, as in cruise ports.   I actually think it is a good idea, but that might be a whole different topic.   

[ldubs]

11 hours ago, wowzz said:

OK,  but why not just do a retinal scan, as does the rest of the world, and not bother with the fingerprints? 

 

I just know I'm gong to be sorry to ask this.  Where/when does this happen?  I've never had a retinal scan at any airport or anywhere else in the world, at least that I knew about.