U.S. government plans to fingerprint foreign cruisers at terminals

[wayne_trisha]

Hell, why not fingerprint everybody. Lets also give everyone a retina scan and while we are at it, issue identity papers to all. It won't do a damn thing to stop a terrorist (foreign or domestic) but, dammit, at least we will know who the hell did it, assuming he/she hasn't blown up to smithereens :D

 

wayne_trisha, your "liberties" will be affected if other countries retaliate (which they have and will) by fingerprinting Americans entering their countries. Your prints will ultimately end up on a U.S. data base somewhere but not to worry, you've done nothing wrong and aren't planning to. If the government wants your prints, there should be no problem with that...right?

 

This all comes down to what you think is invasion of privacy and liberties. A fingerprint is a reliabel source of ID because they aren't easily faked. Having someone scan my fingerprint or scan my passport as I enter a foreign country confirms my ID. I'm uncertain what liberty I've given up by confirming my ID. I don't feel like I lost any privacy. I chose to enter a foreign country. It's not like I'm sitting in my home and the DHS break the door down and demand to scan my fingerprints.

 

I think this fingerprinting program may catch criminals but I don't know if it will catch terrorists.

[BobBeaSea]

My confusion is this. When travelling you have to prove who you are. This can be done with different forms of identification. If you are in a database that says you don't fly, cruise, or whatever based on your ID tehn why does it really matter that you had your fingerprint scanned? It is a pretty effective means of identifying who you are just like a passprt but not likely to be faked. Why the concern about getting your fingerprint scanned?

 

My one big concern (of many) is mistakes, attachments to your fingerprint file which are wrong. Take the no fly list for example; any idea of how many completely innocent people are on this list? Thousands, if not more; hell if Sen. Ted Kennedy is on it (as he was, he had to through hoops to get off it...and he is a U.S. Senator. Some would suggest he should still be on it :D)), anyone can be on it. It gets worse though, if, for example, there is a mistake in your fingerprint file and fingerprints are the "norm of the day" for domestic ID purposes, you will be detained and it will be up to you to get yourself off the hook.

 

Nope, I need some justification that makes a lot of sense before I'd willingly submit my fingerprints, especially when a lack of oversight, misuse and abuse is all but assured of occuring.

[cruisemamma99]

Fingerprints and Dna are no longer private, so I'm surprised that some still think that is. I worked in family court and now you can basically dna anyone you want (not court admissible), but people are doing it left and right. A parent wanting to know if their stepchild is their spouses, or a spouse checking on the other, or even other family members that suspect something. So they get dna from both parties and easily send them to independent labs, and find out the truth. Often this leads back to court, SO my point is once your born, blood is taken and your issued a SS# ......a fingerprint is nothing to fret about- at least at that point.

[cruisemamma99]

You're not giving up any civil liberties by having your finger scanned at Disney. That private company can set rules you must abide by if you want to enter their private park. Don't want to get scanned, don't go.

 

I'm not sure why they are fingerprinting people but I don't mind being fingerprinted. Why not write DHS and ask them why they are fingerprinting visitors to the USA instead of getting advice from "security experts" posting on a message board dedicated to cruise travel.

 

 

When we were at Seaworld we left for lunch and came back, only had to put our index finger in and it was very quick and didn't have to get out my tickets for all of us. I doubt it has much to do with security as more for convenience, but we were surprised and actually I didn't know Disney was even doing that until this board. I think its just the wave of the future, and we'll see it done everywhere.

[celle]

When we were at Seaworld we left for lunch and came back, only had to put our index finger in and it was very quick and didn't have to get out my tickets for all of us. I doubt it has much to do with security as more for convenience, but we were surprised and actually I didn't know Disney was even doing that until this board. I think its just the wave of the future, and we'll see it done everywhere.

 

You're probably right in saying that it is the wave of the future, the fashion of the moment. But where will this lead? Do you know what use is made of your fingerprints once they are taken? Is there any guarantee that they will not be used for nefarious purposes?

 

IMHO quietly accepting mass fingerprinting is the first step on a slippery slope. Accepting this as a matter of course now could eventually lead to a mind set that will accept micro-chipping individuals at birth. There needs to be opposition and enquiry before any mass method of identification is implemented, so that accountability and protocols can be determined.

 

Mass micro-chipping will probably happen in the future too, but I hope not in my lifetime. I have no desire to live in the X-Files and wander around like Scully with a tracking chip in my neck ;).

[wayne_trisha]

You're probably right in saying that it is the wave of the future, the fashion of the moment. But where will this lead? Do you know what use is made of your fingerprints once they are taken? Is there any guarantee that they will not be used for nefarious purposes?

 

IMHO quietly accepting mass fingerprinting is the first step on a slippery slope. Accepting this as a matter of course now could eventually lead to a mind set that will accept micro-chipping individuals at birth. There needs to be opposition and enquiry before any mass method of identification is implemented, so that accountability and protocols can be determined.

 

Mass micro-chipping will probably happen in the future too, but I hope not in my lifetime. I have no desire to live in the X-Files and wander around like Scully with a tracking chip in my neck ;).

 

 

As I see it right now a fingerprint is no different than a passport. My passport has a unique number, my fingers have unique prints. I'm not a criminal and I was fingerpritned for my job. I'm also retired Air Force and they took my DNA (that is a whole different issue that I see 180 from fingerprinting.) a fingerprint is nothing more than a means to identify you. Do you have a driver's license? WOW, you are in a database.

[wayne_trisha]

My one big concern (of many) is mistakes, attachments to your fingerprint file which are wrong. Take the no fly list for example; any idea of how many completely innocent people are on this list? Thousands, if not more; hell if Sen. Ted Kennedy is on it (as he was, he had to through hoops to get off it...and he is a U.S. Senator. Some would suggest he should still be on it :D)), anyone can be on it. It gets worse though, if, for example, there is a mistake in your fingerprint file and fingerprints are the "norm of the day" for domestic ID purposes, you will be detained and it will be up to you to get yourself off the hook.

 

Nope, I need some justification that makes a lot of sense before I'd willingly submit my fingerprints, especially when a lack of oversight, misuse and abuse is all but assured of occuring.

 

My counterpoint is that any form of ID used can have mistakes in the database. My 17 year old daughter with a very American name is on the "you better check them closely" list. We are a 5th generation military family. It doesn't take fingerprints to get on the wrong side of the database be it via drivers license, passport, or fingerprint. if the DB is wrong you are in for a very long day.

[celle]

As I see it right now a fingerprint is no different than a passport. My passport has a unique number, my fingers have unique prints. I'm not a criminal and I was fingerpritned for my job. I'm also retired Air Force and they took my DNA (that is a whole different issue that I see 180 from fingerprinting.) a fingerprint is nothing more than a means to identify you. Do you have a driver's license? WOW, you are in a database.

 

The difference is that my passport remains in my possession. My fingerprint data does not. Do you know where your fingerprint data is held, or who has access to it?

 

Yes, I have a driver's licence, but no, my fingerprint is not necessary to obtain that licence. My country does not do it that way.

 

And that is what may be at the crux of this whole question - US citizens are used to being fingerprinted for purposes such as drivers' licences and see nothing wrong with it. Foreign nationals from countries where fingerprinting is only done if you are suspected to be a criminal do not like fingerprinting and perceive it negatively.

[wayne_trisha]

The difference is that my passport remains in my possession. My fingerprint data does not. Do you know where your fingerprint data is held, or who has access to it?

 

Your passport and fingerprint remain with you but your passport data and fingerprint data may not. Scan a passport or scan a fingerprint, both can connect to a database. I'm still not seeing a difference between the two as far as identification goes. Once you start to go beyond simple fingerprint scans We might end up completely agreeing on this issue.

[celle]

Your passport and fingerprint remain with you but your passport data and fingerprint data may not. Scan a passport or scan a fingerprint, both can connect to a database. I'm still not seeing a difference between the two as far as identification goes. Once you start to go beyond simple fingerprint scans We might end up completely agreeing on this issue.

 

I already agree with you up to a point. Where we differ is that I have no expectation of my passport data being used to falsely incriminate me, whereas I have no confidence that my fingerprint data could not be used, say, at the scene of a crime.

 

I guess my main concern is the lack of information about how these databases are used, who has access to them (just immigration, or could it be FBI, CIA etc), how long the data remains on file, where it is held. In a free society, this information should be available.

 

I've already experienced a discrepancy between what is said officially (what type of scanner is used - said to be quick and electronic, with a panel that looked like glass) and what actually happened (not quick, fingerprinting done by pressing finger into a little tin box of pinkish stuff, that felt like soft rubber).

 

Actually, if protocols were assured, I am all for a national database of both fingerprints and DNA. It would help immensely with crime solving and victim identification. As a foreign national visiting the US, I would have no problem with being entered into such a database, provided it included all US citizens too.

 

What I do object to is being singled out as a foreign national and having my data entered into some database about which I know nothing, under the pretext of protecting US national security, when it does nothing of the sort.

[Globaliser]

This all comes down to what you think is invasion of privacy and liberties.

And that is what may be at the crux of this whole question - US citizens are used to being fingerprinted for purposes such as drivers' licences and see nothing wrong with it. Foreign nationals from countries where fingerprinting is only done if you are suspected to be a criminal do not like fingerprinting and perceive it negatively.

Certainly, as between the US and Europeans, this is a big part of the difference.

 

The collection and storage of any personal information about you is an encroachment onto your privacy rights. That has long been established. So any collection and storage of such information must be justified and reasonable.

 

Therefore, the UK information/privacy regulator thinks that it's illegal for fingerprinting to be used as a means of maintaining the immigration border inside Heathrow Terminal 5, where people who are "inside" the country for immigration purposes mix with people who are "outside" the country. There is therefore a need to ensure that everyone boarding a domestic flight is properly "inside" the country and not trying to smuggle their way across the immigration border.

 

So if fingerprinting is not acceptable in the UK in this context, it seems unlikely that it will readily be acceptable for any other part of the job of maintaining the immigration border.

 

Similarly, I think that it would almost certainly be illegal here for fingerprints to be taken for employment purposes. And I believe that it's now been made illegal in the US, too.

 

But the main issue for present purposes is: Even if the US can in theory impose a fingerprinting requirement, is it a good idea when so many visitors and potential visitors are turned off by it? Is it a good idea when US inbound tourism is already suffering so badly? Is it a good idea to hurt your friends' feelings, even if you personally wouldn't be offended by the same thing?

[momofcandj]

I voted US citizen, even if it applies to US citizens.

 

I have been printed for my kids school so I can be in the classroom as a volunteer and go on the field trips, so I can work as a sub aide in the classes, by our church for the kids' programs. I was not printed but the Scouting program did run a background check as well.

 

Its all about keeping everyone safe and knowing the criminal history of those in your area. The kids programs and schools are doing it because there is so much child endangerment, kidnapping, abuse, molestation, etc nowadays. They need to know who should be denied due to their personal history and bad choices.

[celle]

I voted US citizen, even if it applies to US citizens.

 

I have been printed for my kids school so I can be in the classroom as a volunteer and go on the field trips, so I can work as a sub aide in the classes, by our church for the kids' programs. I was not printed but the Scouting program did run a background check as well.

 

Its all about keeping everyone safe and knowing the criminal history of those in your area. The kids programs and schools are doing it because there is so much child endangerment, kidnapping, abuse, molestation, etc nowadays. They need to know who should be denied due to their personal history and bad choices.

 

Sure, all this is true and I can see that it is necessary, but it applies to the US domestic situation. Personally, I don't think there are any more "bad" people around than there ever were, but I think the current fear about child safety is due to a media beat-up.

 

Fingerprinting foreign nationals as they enter the US (and not fingerprinting US citizens) is a totally different matter.

 

Unless and until all US citizens and visiting foreign nationals are entered into the same database, the exercise is pointless. For example, say foreign national "Mr X" has a minor criminal record (petty theft, for example) in his home country. His fingerprints will be on record in his own country, but not on any database used by US immigration. It's only known terrorists that will raise a "red alert" at immigration and they would most likely find other ways of entering the US.

[hvm57]

I am from the netherlands and i visite the usa frequently. so yes, they take fingerprints and a photo EACH time me and my wife enter the usa. the thing i don't like is the time we lose. it takes an half to an hour extra to pass thru customs. next year the passports in the netherlands will have fingerprints and a scan of the eye on it (digitally). in november i said this to an douanier and he said that this means nothing in the usa, we still have to do the same drill when entering: fingerprint and photo.....

[BobBeaSea]

I am from the netherlands and i visite the usa frequently. so yes, they take fingerprints and a photo EACH time me and my wife enter the usa. the thing i don't like is the time we lose. it takes an half to an hour extra to pass thru customs. next year the passports in the netherlands will have fingerprints and a scan of the eye on it (digitally). in november i said this to an douanier and he said that this means nothing in the usa, we still have to do the same drill when entering: fingerprint and photo.....

 

The Netherlands is a hotbed for activists and malcontents and other evil doers, clearly a threat :D :D Just kidding of course. If I may for those who might not understand the term, a douanier is a customs official/inspector. :)

[dforeigner]

My counterpoint is that any form of ID used can have mistakes in the database. My 17 year old daughter with a very American name is on the "you better check them closely" list. We are a 5th generation military family. It doesn't take fingerprints to get on the wrong side of the database be it via drivers license, passport, or fingerprint. if the DB is wrong you are in for a very long day.

 

Well, in this case, taking her fingerprints would make things run faster and smoother. The data base is just based on names. It is not the Government's or, in this case, your daughter's fault that someone has a generic last name.

[KC_fn]

 

I've already experienced a discrepancy between what is said officially (what type of scanner is used - said to be quick and electronic, with a panel that looked like glass) and what actually happened (not quick, fingerprinting done by pressing finger into a little tin box of pinkish stuff, that felt like soft rubber).

 

 

We Yanks have, over the last 7 years, become so accustomed to these discrepancies that apparently we just accept them. We were told that warrantless wire-tapping was not occurring -- it is. We were told that our internet activity and e-mails were not being surveilled -- they are. We were told that the US does not engage in data mining -- it does. We will swallow anything if the govt invokes the terrorist bogeyman as justification.

[vjmatty]

We Yanks have, over the last 7 years, become so accustomed to these discrepancies that apparently we just accept them. We were told that warrantless wire-tapping was not occurring -- it is. We were told that our internet activity and e-mails were not being surveilled -- they are. We were told that the US does not engage in data mining -- it does. We will swallow anything if the govt invokes the terrorist bogeyman as justification.

 

It is alarming what Americans will accept when the magic words such as "national security" or "anti-terrorist" are thrown around as justification.... wire-tapping, torture, denial of counsel... all supposedly in the name of freedom, which makes it a bitter irony. :(

 

Last month we were on the QE2 and I had the opportunity to speak with many UK citizens who are getting very tired and offended of the treatment they get, as ALLIES, when traveling to the US. Foreign travelers will start saying "enough" and it will have an even harder impact on the US economy. Cruise ships are already starting to embark at home ports outside the US... in the past year two RC ships have relocated, Enchantment moving to Panama and for a while the Legend of the Seas was leaving out of the Dominican Republic. I have come to the point where I will sail out of NY only, because I don't want the added aggravation of flying, even domestically.

 

What I find most interesting is that when you travel in Europe, even places that have had terrorist attacks, you don't find the level of scrutiny we have here nor the tightened regulations. I did not have to give my fingerprints in England, France, Greece, Switzerland.... of course I also didn't go to Eurodisney so who knows what they are doing there :rolleyes:

[wayne_trisha]

We lived in Germany for 8 years and travelled all over and I don't ever remember being fingerprinted. We travelled with our passports and I only remember having to show them entering France and England. It was funny in ngland because we got off the ferry late around 1:00 Am and I drove into the wrong line. I handed our passports over and the agent said he didn't realize the USA had become part of the EU. We had a laugh and were on our way. I wouldn't have minded being fingerprinted. I can see why people are concerned about government databases but in my thinking a passport and a fingerprint are justs means of identification. Who maintains the databases, what are they used for, and who can access them are concerns people should have. I know one of the things I'll have to do to travel is prove who I am. I have no problem with providing either a drivers license, passport or fingerprint. I'm a US government employee with a security clearance and my wife works for a US governemnt contractor with a security clearance. I know the government already knows plenty about us, much more than the average citizen. Maybe that is why we're not concerned about providing finger scans or passports.

[G'ma]

I don't think this is any sort of inconvenience at all. It might help keep the weirdos, perverts and cons off the ship.

 

By the time a person reaches adulthood, chances are the fingerprints are on file somewhere anyway...so what's the difference.

 

Things change - times change. When I first started cruising back in the mid-1970's....all you needed was a voter's registration card to prove you were a U.S. citizen.

 

We live in a different world today.

[celle]

I don't think this is any sort of inconvenience at all. It might help keep the weirdos' date=' perverts and cons off the ship.[/color']

 

By the time a person reaches adulthood, chances are the fingerprints are on file somewhere anyway...so what's the difference.

 

Things change - times change. When I first started cruising back in the mid-1970's....all you needed was a voter's registration card to prove you were a U.S. citizen.

 

We live in a different world today.

 

The topic of this thread is the fingerprinting of foreign nationals. Even if these people have been fingerprinted in their home countries, their fingerprints are not going to show up on the database used by US immigration, unless they are wanted as terrorists or similar.

 

There is no way that fingerprinting is going to keep "weirdos, perverts or cons" off the ships. In any case, is it a crime to be weird? Do you get fingerprinted for being weird? If "perverts or cons" have done their prison time, aren't they allowed to travel too? Or would you like to condemn them for all time?

 

The answer to dealing with people such as you mention is to teach yourself and your children how to protect yourselves. Be aware that you will encounter people like this in all walks of life, not just on cruise ships.

 

As has been stated many times, people from other countries do not get fingerprinted with anything like the frequency that US citizens do. They do not perceive it as a harmless routine, but rather as an invasion of privacy.

 

US citizens have been conned into thinking that fingerprinting of foreign visitors increases US national security. It does not.

 

Visitors from other countries see the irony in the US insisting on fingerprinting them, while still not insisting that US citizens even hold a passport for travel to certain countries. Yes, times have changed, and in this respect, the US has not yet caught up.

[AllieInMD]

Your physical passport may remain in your possession - but the number, image, and backing documents (or a copy of them) do not. And no doubt your travels on said passports are logged into a database somewhere too.

 

It's the information age - tons of info on all of us is kept all over - stuff we'd never think about - from what movies we rent, to what brands we buy at the store, to where we travel, to what we surf on the net, to our medical care and finances.

 

Yes, American's may be more used to the idea that fingerprinting is not only for negative reasons - but if you want to come to America, you have to follow our rules - not the ones of your country. Just like if I visit a middle eastern country, I have to follow their rules - not ones of America.

 

I just don't get it - if a country's entrance requirements are ones that you are not happy with or make you uncomfortable - then just don't go there - don't expect that country to bend to your will. I make that decision every time a good friend of mine travels to KSA, Kuwait, Oman, etc etc and invites me.

 

The difference is that my passport remains in my possession. My fingerprint data does not. Do you know where your fingerprint data is held, or who has access to it?

 

Yes, I have a driver's licence, but no, my fingerprint is not necessary to obtain that licence. My country does not do it that way.

 

And that is what may be at the crux of this whole question - US citizens are used to being fingerprinted for purposes such as drivers' licences and see nothing wrong with it. Foreign nationals from countries where fingerprinting is only done if you are suspected to be a criminal do not like fingerprinting and perceive it negatively.

[AllieInMD]

-I already agree with you up to a point. Where we differ is that I have no expectation of my passport data being used to falsely incriminate me, whereas I have no confidence that my fingerprint data could not be used, say, at the scene of a crime.-

 

Then you are woefully naive. Is it likely to happen with passport data - no. Is it possible - yes.

 

-I guess my main concern is the lack of information about how these databases are used, who has access to them (just immigration, or could it be FBI, CIA etc), how long the data remains on file, where it is held. In a free society, this information should be available.-

 

Immigration, FBI, and CIA all have good reason to know who is coming into this country - and who's leaving it.

 

-Actually, if protocols were assured, I am all for a national database of both fingerprints and DNA. -

 

But see - our gov't doesn't owe any foreigner any explanation. That seems such a inconceivable concept for some people. The British gov't owes me no explanation for demanding anything from me if I wish to set foot on their soil - nor does the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia - or any other country on this earth. If I don't like their demands, I don't have to visit their country - pretty simple.

 

-What I do object to is being singled out as a foreign national and having my data entered into some database about which I know nothing, under the pretext of protecting US national security, when it does nothing of the sort.-

 

Other than Oklahoma City, all real terrorism against the United States has been committed by foreigners who either shouldn't have been here in the first place, or who were here illegally by the time they acted. And, you don't have a right to know how the US protects itself or it's national security.

[AllieInMD]

Evidently the thread is still here :p

 

No, I think the Moderator will pull the thread because Allieinmd is so long-winded.

Steve

[AllieInMD]

You give up your view of 'privacy' the day you start living 'on the grid' - from birth on. From your newborn medical records to birth certificate - school records - drivers licenses - medical records - criminal and civil cases online - insurances - credit records - taxes - SSN etc.

 

I have no doubt that generations ago people had the same complaints about the issuance of birth certificates. Then driver's licenses. Did any of the early immigrants passing through Ellis Island have passports? Heck, I'm only 46 and I once worked for a company where people had a fit when the company went to direct deposit! And these were same people that had a major fit over using paychecks instead of the PayMaster coming with cash every Friday years before. Times change - technology marches forward. Not one of us today would bat an eye at birth certificates, licenses, passports, direct deposit. In another generation people won't think twice about fingers being connected to passports. Heck, millions give them up to go to Disney parks!

 

 

In the last few days, I have spent considerable time researching official statements put out by various US government agencies and the DHS. They are all very large on rhetoric, but vague on details.

 

I am not getting advice from a message board devoted to cruise travel. I am expressing my view (which was asked for by the OP in the poll at the start of this thread.)

 

Th OP asked for opinions on the proposed fingerprinting of non US citizens when they are embarking on cruise travel.

 

I have read some of the so-called information put out by the DHS concerning fingerprinting visitors to the US. Not one press release has given specifics, just vague "feel-good " references. I think it is part of the paranoia that is encouraged in the name of homeland security and is designed to made US citizens believe that "something is being done" to combat terrorism.

 

This argument raises a few questions that those who "don't mind' having their fingerprints taken Disney and Sea World may not have considered. It is posted at: at:http://laslo-blog.blogspot.com/2008/03/who-owns-your-fingerprint.html

 

I have copied part of it below.

Who owns your fingerprint:?

SeaWorld and other theme parks (mostly Disney's) ostensibly introduced the fingerprinting as a way of preventing people from selling their multi-day passes. Which I guess makes a good business sense. However, two very important issues need to be raised.

 

First: How are these corporations going to use the data they collect? Right now they claim it is exclusively to match the pass with the person, but how long will it take before the government realizes the value of such database? Especially since many former Disney's employees are now working for US intelligence and security organizations (e.g., Eric Haseltine, Bran Ferren). Soon enough there will be a request from DHS, FBI, or some other three-letter agency to make this database available. iFrst they will claim it will help them catch terrorists. Then it will be child molesters, drug dealers; then other criminals. Next the turn will come for deadbeat parents, anarchists, anti-globalists, Muslims, militia members, and those punks with pants hanging below waists. The agencies will ask, the corporations will deliver (remember the retroactive immunity for AT&T?),"Life Above All" the members of our society are scared to death. Scared that a big bad terrorist will come and kill them in the night. and the general population will acquiesce. Not a murmur will be raised, not a word of protest, since, as I wrote in And to protect themselves they will gladly give up the remaining shreds of their liberty and privacy.

 

If we comply to fingerprinting and biometric scans in daily life, where will it end? In a police state where citizens have no right to privacy.