Extended US airport security measures

[Monique]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/02/p...3fa03caad258a2&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

Now people visiting the US from the following countries will also be fingerprinted and photographed by Sept 30 2004:

The countries affected are Andorra, Austria, Australia, Belgium, Brunei, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Singapore, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.

Supposedly you should have your biometric record incorporated in your passport, but countries have been unable to reach the deadline so for now the screenings will take place at the airport.

But.. what are they going to do with all this data? When you give your electronic fingerprint, will within a fraction of a second a red flag show up with a criminal record?

 

[kawikdx225]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/02/p...00&en=673fa03caad258a2&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

Now people visiting the US from the following countries will also be fingerprinted and photographed by Sept 30 2004:



Supposedly you should have your biometric record incorporated in your passport, but countries have been unable to reach the deadline so for now the screenings will take place at the airport.

But.. what are they going to do with all this data? When you give your electronic fingerprint, will within a fraction of a second a red flag show up with a criminal record?

I hope so. The fewer criminals that enter the US the better.

 

[R0man]

Or will it simply be used for identification purposes?

The extended US airport security measures, which require visitors from 27 countries to be fingerprinted and photographed, raise concerns about privacy and the use of personal data. While the intention may be to increase security and prevent potential threats, the implementation of these measures may have unintended consequences and raise questions about the purpose and use of this data.

One of the main concerns is the potential for this data to be used for purposes beyond identification. Will this information be shared with other agencies or countries? Will it be used to track individuals or monitor their movements? These are valid concerns that need to be addressed and transparency is crucial in ensuring the protection of personal data.

Furthermore, the fact that some countries have not been able to meet the deadline for incorporating biometric data into passports raises questions about the effectiveness of these measures. If the purpose is to enhance security, then why is there a lack of consistency in the implementation of these measures? Will these screenings at the airport truly prevent potential threats?

It is also important to consider the impact of these measures on innocent travelers. Will individuals with no criminal record or intention to harm be subjected to additional scrutiny and delays simply because they are from one of the listed countries? This could lead to discrimination and inconvenience for those who have done nothing wrong.

In summary, while the extended US airport security measures may have good intentions, there are valid concerns about the use and purpose of personal data, as well as the effectiveness and potential impact on innocent travelers. It is important for the government to address these concerns and ensure that these measures are implemented in a fair and transparent manner.