Fingerprinting of foreign visitors - necessary?

[RZetlin]

If you haven't heard, America has started fingerprinting and photographing (http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/107339010193520.xml) foreign visitors. Now 27 countries - mostly European nations are exempt from this screening.

Do you think this will be an effective measure against terrorism or a waste of effort?

There are a few things to consider before answering this question:

-The terrorists that attack on 9/11 didn't have a criminal record.
-What will prevent terrorist from entering into America from the exempt countries?

[Pilmedium]

The flaws with this are significant enough that would probably not be an effective action against terrorism, but it might be enough to annoy a few visitors. It is an invasion of privacy for a foreign government (foreign as far as they are concerned) to keep such details about visitors.

[Tienshin]

I think it is an effective starting measure towards keeping track of who enters the country. The old INS was rightfully embarrased and then later subsequently dismantled and reorganized when it came to light that their procedures for identifying and keeping track of visitors who over stay their visas, for example, was woefully antiquated and ineffective.

At least this way agencies have visual and biometric data on those visitors who decide to disappear when their official paperwork expires. But more importantly they can also work more effectively with international officials on tracking down threats who are either attempting to enter the country or have already slipped through the cracks.

[Clayface]

*nods head in agreement with Tienshin's statement*

You took the words right out of my mouth.

[RZetlin]

I think it is an effective starting measure towards keeping track of who enters the country. The old INS was rightfully embarrased and then later subsequently dismantled and reorganized when it came to light that their procedures for identifying and keeping track of visitors who over stay their visas, for example, was woefully antiquated and ineffective.

At least this way agencies have visual and biometric data on those visitors who decide to disappear when their official paperwork expires. But more importantly they can also work more effectively with international officials on tracking down threats who are either attempting to enter the country or have already slipped through the cracks.Then this is a VISA issue not a terrorist issue. The whole point of screening is to prevent terrorist attacks.

If a visitor decides to disappear in America, tracking down that one person out of the millions of people still requires a lot of work and time.

It seems that every visitor is guilty until proven innocent.

Even if the system was in place two years ago, it still wouldn't have prevented the 9/11 hijackers from entering into America because none of them had a criminal record.

All this paperwork means squat if a terrorist enters into America, blows himself up before his VISA expires.



The flaws with this are significant enough that would probably not be an effective action against terrorism, but it might be enough to annoy a few visitors.
It may lead to self-censorship (http://news.pacificnews.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=5256da82a006163b8ae52542112df3c7) as well.



Many media professionals, some foreign journalists note, were fingerprinted in Italy and France during the fascist era. That practice led many to self-censor for fear of retaliation if they wrote anything critical of the regime. Some ended up in jail. Others, in a bid to save themselves, turned into the regime's rubber-stampers, or worse, into spies for the fascists. Today, some journalists fear that the new finger-scanning and photographing could have a similar chilling effect.

[Zach Logan]

Well they have their hearts set in the right place but this could end up to be disastrous. First bad part has already been seen, it makes other nations hate us that much more. Now they may take this as saying "we don't trust the citizens of your country, so we will make them get fingerprinted and retna tested. Not only that but there are probably MUCH better ways to root out terrorists instead of making foreigners take fingerprints and retna scans when they come INTO the nation. Even if I were to take these steps I would want it before a person came into the nation, not once he/she was already here. Many flaws here that could turn out for the worst..

[Tienshin]

Then this is a VISA issue not a terrorist issue. The whole point of screening is to prevent terrorist attacks.

If a visitor decides to disappear in America, tracking down that one person out of the millions of people still requires a lot of work and time.

It seems that every visitor is guilty until proven innocent.

Even if the system was in place two years ago, it still wouldn't have prevented the 9/11 hijackers from entering into America because none of them had a criminal record.

All this paperwork means squat if a terrorist enters into America, blows himself up before his VISA expires.No, its not simply a visa issue. It is an attempt to revamp a failed system that could not properly in its former incarnation keep track of visitors and track them down if the situation requires such action, hell in some cases the old INS couldn't even get to tracking people because it was so backlogged in paperwork.

Also, having a visual reference and fingerprint data helps make the task of tracking down individuals much easier, than simply searching for a name and an old unused address. And to that point none of this has anything to do with presumed guilt. The fact of the matter is millions of illegal aliens are here because they skirted the law and took advantage of an impotent system. Now certainly that does not mean each and every illegal is a terrorist or criminal, but how much can a person contribute to society if they don't have legally binding paperwork to back them up. They can be exploited by seedy employers, they have very limited legal resources available to them, and if they fall through the societal safety net, the american tax payer foots the bill. And none of that includes what happens if they are a criminal or worse. But more importantly all of the above issues clearly suggest that SOMETHING has to be done, to prevent these systemic abuses from being so widespread and rampant.

Though unsavory these new measure will also help alleviate many of the above issues.

But the fact is very little will stop a determined group from executing a plan that includes a terrorist attack when the perpetrator plans on dying, but having safeguards in place means you at least have a chance to. But that is the extraordinary of circumstances. In the more practical realm the government can (hopefully) have some mechanism to keep tabs on who exactly is here, why, and when they are leaving.

Right now, the most immediate threat to US national security some would argue does not exist as a sole country or group of countries. It is the loose elements of fringe groups that cannot be identified, and if those elements are allowed to move freely and unchecked then guess what...the US and many other countries for that matter are gonna be in for a long haul.

[RZetlin]

Also, having a visual reference and fingerprint data helps make the task of tracking down individuals much easier, than simply searching for a name and an old unused address. And to that point none of this has anything to do with presumed guilt. The fact of the matter is millions of illegal aliens are here because they skirted the law and took advantage of an impotent system. Now certainly that does not mean each and every illegal is a terrorist or criminal, but how much can a person contribute to society if they don't have legally binding paperwork to back them up. They can be exploited by seedy employers, they have very limited legal resources available to them, and if they fall through the societal safety net, the american tax payer foots the bill. And none of that includes what happens if they are a criminal or worse. But more importantly all of the above issues clearly suggest that SOMETHING has to be done, to prevent these systemic abuses from being so widespread and rampant.

If you think this new screening process will protect illegal aliens from seedy employers I'm afraid this won't work.

Bush Plan Would Let Illegal Workers Keep Jobs (http://www.lawnandlandscape.com/news/news.asp?ID=1982)

From what I understand illegal workers are given permission to work in America legally.

Of course seedy employers can use plan to hire illegal workers without getting in trouble with the law.

[SSJPabs]

Many media professionals, some foreign journalists note, were fingerprinted in Italy and France during the fascist era. That practice led many to self-censor for fear of retaliation if they wrote anything critical of the regime. Some ended up in jail. Others, in a bid to save themselves, turned into the regime's rubber-stampers, or worse, into spies for the fascists. Today, some journalists fear that the new finger-scanning and photographing could have a similar chilling effect. The problem with this is that the mainstream media ALREADY self-sensor and kiss ass of whoever is in power. It's not a loss of journalistic freedom if its already lost.

I'm not particularly comfortable with this and I'd do it some other way but I think the principle is correct. As long as American citizens don't complain about being fingerprinted or what have you if they go to a foreign nation I'm going to spend my energy fighting other aspects of the current regime.

[Tienshin]

If you think this new screening process will protect illegal aliens from seedy employers I'm afraid this won't work.

Bush Plan Would Let Illegal Workers Keep Jobs (http://www.lawnandlandscape.com/news/news.asp?ID=1982)

From what I understand illegal workers are given permission to work in America legally.

Of course seedy employers can use plan to hire illegal workers without getting in trouble with the law.Upon closer inspection I think the article you linked actually undermines your tangental point with regards to the minor comment I made earlier in the thread. Since, of course, the governement would be aware of these individuals (In many cases, I am sure, soon to be legal workers), employers would have to give them benefits like health care, insurance for workers compensation if need be, and wages that follow the rule of law that exists in the US. But more importantly individuals who fit this mold...would have to be accounted for by SOMEONE.

But thats a separate issue as I am sure you yourself are aware as you did post the original topic.

Let's get off the "Bush is Evil" train...shall we? It's old.

[James]

The problem with this is that the mainstream media ALREADY self-sensor and kiss ass of whoever is in power. It's not a loss of journalistic freedom if its already lost.

I'm not particularly comfortable with this and I'd do it some other way but I think the principle is correct. As long as American citizens don't complain about being fingerprinted or what have you if they go to a foreign nation I'm going to spend my energy fighting other aspects of the current regime.
I think that's a question that has to be asked - would yourselves as an American Citizen be happy with the same treatment in another country?

That is not a loaded question - just the best one to define how you truely feel about the principle. I'm heading off to the States soon and I'll be subject to this. I don't think it's so bad since whenever we go abroad we are subject to scuitiny with documents and signatures which are privy to any countries investigation - I don't think anything is really lost but pride. There maybe an issue of international relations (it's not the most inviting way to welcome people to your nation) but if this is successful, I can see it being picked up by other nations so maybe it is just one step towards what all countries will do. I know we in the UK see the issue of immigration as a hotly debated one. I could see this being employed here in the not so far distant future.

[SSJPabs]

I've read some about that situation in the UK, particularly the granting of asylum. I looked for the number of asylum seekers in both the UK and the US but was unable to find numbers from any reliable sources and I couldn't find them in either nation's census ministry/burreau.

I would not like to be fingerprinted. I remember local police in my area were urging youngsters to be fingerprinted in case they were kidnapped or ran away or what not. However I am HIGHLY distrustful of the police (this is partly due to my being a minority) and would never consent to something like that. That said I think I'd understand if another nation did this. I'm actually more comfortable with a national government doing this than a local government because I feel its less likely to be racist.

The idea of tracking people who apply for visas in case they disappear is a good one but I wish there was another method to do so.

[randomguy]

I think that's a question that has to be asked - would yourselves as an American Citizen be happy with the same treatment in another country?

I believe that's really what this all boils down to. For what's it worth, it wouldn't bother me at all. There's some personal pride that could be lost, but in terms of practicality, I don't think there's that much to be concerned with. Tienshin put it aptly when he called the INS system impotent... for years now, it simply hasn't been equipped to coordinate with other agencies and keep any kind of substantial bead on who's entering this country. It's important to keep our immigration/emmigration system relatively free, but it's also important to realize that this is a big country and we have to be careful in terms of monitoring inbound threats.


Let's get off the "Bush is Evil" train...shall we? It's old.
I agree. I'm not a Bush supporter, and I'm as concerned with civil liberties as anyone else, but I'm not as convinced as many that the Bush administration is determined to wipe away our freedoms.

Honestly, at this point, I'm more worried about the government's capacity to spend my money on stupid stuff than anything else.

[SSJPabs]

Honestly, at this point, I'm more worried about the government's capacity to spend my money on stupid stuff than anything else.

Which is dependant on legislation passed by the Republican Congress and signed into law by the Republican president.

[randomguy]

Which is dependant on legislation passed by the Republican Congress and signed into law by the Republican president.
There's also local taxes, state taxes, and taxes resulting from a hulking bureaucracy largely independent of party lines.

And it's not like I didn't have the same problem in the Clinton adminstration. Party has only so much to do with it... there's a lot of waste in government no matter who's in charge.

[AndreaBeaumont]

Well whether it's effective or not at least they're making a step in the right direction. (FINALLY) It's a big problem in this country with foriegners slipping through the cracks. People living here with expired visas a lot of them exchange students living abroad who just stayed here after their visa expired. Even before 9/11 this needed to be regulated. These are all things that should have been done anyway and now due to the events that have happened are finally being payed attention to. If I went to another country with a visa and they told me they needed a finger print and photo I.D. of me I wouldn't have the slightest bit of resignation about it. WHY? Because I have nothing to hide. If you have nothing to hide then what's the big deal? They're only using this new technology and proceedure with people who are here on visa's. I don't understand why everyone is so up in arms about it. It's a finger print and a picture. And as long as you're not a terrorist who cares? It's not like we're shackling people to walls and beating them silly when they come to our country. We're just finger printing them. I mean some people act like we're asking for their first born child. I think it's fine, while it still has hole's in it eventually we'll either develop a full proof system or we'll have enough checkpoints to where even if one slips through one point another filter will expose would be terrorists before they make it to their "target". I believe that terrorist attacks are no more likely in this country though now then they were a year or two years before 9/11. I overall feel pretty safe and am not worried about someone blowing up my local shopping mall. It's just something that's been brought to the attention of the public and our government(which is unfortunately using it to sneak their own secret agendas under our noses) and will eventually calm down and fade into history. Though I do hope the regulations on visas and foreign visitors stay in place for years though.
~AB

[RZetlin]

Well whether it's effective or not at least they're making a step in the right direction. (FINALLY) It's a big problem in this country with foriegners slipping through the cracks. People living here with expired visas a lot of them exchange students living abroad who just stayed here after their visa expired. Even before 9/11 this needed to be regulated. These are all things that should have been done anyway and now due to the events that have happened are finally being payed attention to. If I went to another country with a visa and they told me they needed a finger print and photo I.D. of me I wouldn't have the slightest bit of resignation about it. WHY? Because I have nothing to hide. If you have nothing to hide then what's the big deal? They're only using this new technology and proceedure with people who are here on visa's. I don't understand why everyone is so up in arms about it. It's a finger print and a picture. And as long as you're not a terrorist who cares? It's not like we're shackling people to walls and beating them silly when they come to our country. We're just finger printing them. I mean some people act like we're asking for their first born child. I think it's fine, while it still has hole's in it eventually we'll either develop a full proof system or we'll have enough checkpoints to where even if one slips through one point another filter will expose would be terrorists before they make it to their "target". I believe that terrorist attacks are no more likely in this country though now then they were a year or two years before 9/11. I overall feel pretty safe and am not worried about someone blowing up my local shopping mall. It's just something that's been brought to the attention of the public and our government(which is unfortunately using it to sneak their own secret agendas under our noses) and will eventually calm down and fade into history. Though I do hope the regulations on visas and foreign visitors stay in place for years though.
~AB
In theory such a plan of fingerprinting and screening should work. But it won't work in real life?

Why?

On one hand the Bush adminstration is making all these security plans, on the other hand Bush just propose a plan amnesty for undocumented aliens (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/07/immigration.congress/index.html).

Now how can you protect America when you are making new holes in security?

Yes, that's one agrument I hear. "I have nothing to hide". It's not what will happen now that concerns me it's what will happen to the information in the future.

This record will probably be on file when President Bush has stepped down from office. Who knows which hands the files will fall under.


I think it's fine, while it still has hole's in it eventually we'll either develop a full proof system or we'll have enough checkpoints to where even if one slips through one point another filter will expose would be terrorists before they make it to their "target".

There has never been a 100% foolproof system in human history.

[AndreaBeaumont]

This is why Bush is so contradicting I don't even know how anyone can even try to get behind him anymore. His own secret agenda with the bs amnesty plan is so he doesn't tick off the rich folks out in the south west who hire these illegal im's to care of their gardens or clean their toilet. Because what should really be done but won't because Bush is well....Bush. Is that we need harder consequences for the employers of the illegal im's. Scare the magnet so to speak into shutting down. Because that's what draws them to us in the first place is jobs. So if employers are scared of getting caught and start turning down their "applications" then that would deter some of it. Whether they employ them "not knowing their illegal or not" they should have huge consequences. But since Bush is busy shaking hands with big business under the table during the day and going home to his lovely wife, the upper class at night this will never happen.



There has never been a 100% foolproof system in human history.Exactly why I said "or we'll have enough checkpoints to where even if one slips through one point another filter will expose would be terrorists before they make it to their "target"." HOPEFULLY^

[zmanjz]

...

wow, no one has mentioned the real reason for Bush's pushing the so called "Amnesty program"


It's like this.

There's an Upcoming election. Bush is on the Right (Conservative) side of the spectrum. His opponents are on the Left (Liberal) Side of the spectrum.

However, the population is like a bellcurve with moderates at the literal center.

Bush is effectively unopposed on the right, and therefore anyone who wants a conservative in office will vote for him.

SO

In introducing this bill (Doomed to fail "as no representative that represents a "Working" district will support it.) Bush attracts people from the center, and loses nothing. (as conservatives will vote for him regardless just to prevent someone like Dean from getting into office.)


Simple.


Lesse here: Biometrics at the Border? my opinion? I don't like it. I know that I'd be far less likely to visit any country that did the same. (A good reason to be on the list of 28 countries.) (That'll be an interesting point of discussion during future treaty negotiations.)

But at the same time, the Country's border is the one area where the courts find that governtmntal intrests nearly always trump personal rights.


Amnesty for Illegals? Hmmm.... nope. too lengthy for me to get into, but primacy of laws comes to mind. (As does a need for better enforcement of existing laws.)

[EinBebop]

::wishing I could defend Bush on the amnesty, but....::

[wrenchien]

well.. it worries me what they're also doing.. looking for dirty bombs..

i think there might be a threat one might be used.. as someone gave me a link i'm not going to share cause i dunno about its sanity... and in the media there's been reports the government has been looking for them, which means they believe one might be used...

[AndreaBeaumont]

AND ANOTHER THING...
Thing is if illegal immigrants are given amnesty they all get registered...TO VOTE! Hah! I love Bush's uncanny way of stacking the decks in his favor by using his power in office for unnecessary bills. I also JUST LOVE how recently his administration passed a bill that cut funding for schools. In ohio it cut our funding by 5 million dollars!! And we're being forced right now to put an emergency levy on the ballet and pray that people of our community pass it otherwise busing and ALL extra curricular activities will be cut including football and marching band and show choir and our band or choir won't do any traveling....all so he can pump more money into Iraq. Ahh...the smell of the republican stench is now choking our youth....NICE.

[James]

Just a quick point. Just been through the systen on my way over to the US on my exchange programme. It was quick fast and painless. Regardless of the ethics which are being debated, it didn`t slow anything down and was handled very effciently. Take it from a Brit who now knows! :)