Biometric Fingerprinting For Domestic Flights

[Dodger]

All,

 

Have a look at this article, soon we won't be able to get on or off the island without giving up our fingerprints! Anyone who routinely flies IOM - MAN - LHR will already know about this. It is also mandatory!

 

http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnew...kes_outrage.php

[ai_Droid]

Nice balanced view:

 

Hosein, who compared the scheme to those run by the Nazis as part of the Jewish persecution, said....

 

This is just an emotional reaction because fingerprinting is associated with criminality. You've been far more invasively biometricly id in airports for years, but nobodys batted an eyelid. The second fingerprints are involved, the clueless start to freak.

 

The article is full of ill-informed bollocks, such as:

 

"Geraint Bevan, spokesman for No2ID Scotland, said the technology highlighted the vulnerability of people's privacy because it could be open to abuse by staff or passengers who could easily forge fingerprint details to avoid immigration checks."

 

I'd love to see him explain how.

 

The article aslo omits to say:

 

The information is only required for domestic passengers at the terminal who want to visit the larger international lounge before boarding their flights, or passengers who arrive on an international flight and transfer to a domestic one, said a spokeswoman for Heathrow Airport owner BAA PLC.

 

..so it's not compulsary for internal flights at all.

 

And:

 

The biometric data are destroyed within 24 hours, she said.

[Cronky]

It's a shame you did not go to the PAG meeting to argue your point, politely, in public.

[ai_Droid]

It's a shame you did not go to the PAG meeting to argue your point, politely, in public.

 

Can you show me some of what the meeting achieved?

[ans]

It's a shame you did not go to the PAG meeting to argue your point, politely, in public.

 

That would be like going to the WI and arguing that knitting and coffee mornings are crap.

[Dodger]

Nice balanced view:

 

Hosein, who compared the scheme to those run by the Nazis as part of the Jewish persecution, said....

 

This is just an emotional reaction because fingerprinting is associated with criminality. You've been far more invasively biometricly id in airports for years, but nobodys batted an eyelid. The second fingerprints are involved, the clueless start to freak.

 

The article is full of ill-informed bollocks, such as:

 

"Geraint Bevan, spokesman for No2ID Scotland, said the technology highlighted the vulnerability of people's privacy because it could be open to abuse by staff or passengers who could easily forge fingerprint details to avoid immigration checks."

 

I'd love to see him explain how.

 

The article aslo omits to say:

 

The information is only required for domestic passengers at the terminal who want to visit the larger international lounge before boarding their flights, or passengers who arrive on an international flight and transfer to a domestic one, said a spokeswoman for Heathrow Airport owner BAA PLC.

 

..so it's not compulsary for internal flights at all.

 

And:

 

The biometric data are destroyed within 24 hours, she said.

 

"The British Airports Authority (BAA), which operates Heathrow, claims the profiling is needed because the new terminal will have a single departure lounge for domestic and international travellers." "A BAA spokesman said: "We have been trialling the scheme for three or four months, but we have started to carry it out on a mandatory basis ahead of the opening of Terminal Five."

therefore it is mandatory on internal flights at terminal 5

 

Manchester airport, where we fly to and from is a joint lounge, therefore we would need to follow suit! If BAA roll this out across their terminals!

 

Also why would someone on an international flight and therefore carrying their passport have to give their fingerprints to be able to transfer to a domestic flight?

 

The fact that they have also advised that the police don't have access to the data seems strange, it is only to recognise the person from passing through security to access to the departure gate. At present a photograph is taken, why is there a need to take it further?

[Dodger]

It's a shame you did not go to the PAG meeting to argue your point, politely, in public.

 

That would be like going to the WI and arguing that knitting and coffee mornings are crap.

 

There were those in favour and those against at the meeting, it was a good debate! I would have liked to have seen more pro fingerprinting/id card people there. I was one of the speakers covering biometric fingerprinting surprisingly enough!

[Cronky]

A good description of the meeting is in the Manx Herald!

 

I like the idea of a £25,000 fine on the Government for the loss or misuse of any citizens data.

[Albert Tatlock]

therefore it is mandatory on internal flights at terminal 5

Biometrics requirement for passengers travelling on domestic flights from Terminal 5:

 

From the 'BA speedbird club'.

What happens if a passenger refuses to have their biometric captured?

 

If a pasenger refuses to have their biometric captured, they will be required to land themselves through the international channel, proceed through Terminal 1 up to the departures level where they will rejoin the departures process as a direct departing customer. From here they will proceed to the domestic departure lounge.

Is this still possible with BA? Is this all airlines or just BA flights that are affected?

 

It will be interesting to hear of peoples experiences over the coming months.

[Albert Tatlock]

A good description of the meeting is in the Manx Herald!

 

I like the idea of a £25,000 fine on the Government for the loss or misuse of any citizens data.

Fines are just a placative smokescreen, as Government bodies get fined all the time for cock-ups, - and can afford to - as Joe Taxpayer pays all the fines and associated court costs. If anything, £25,000 should go to any individual who's data is mishandled/lost etc. - a level of fine which would be more likely to ensure that governments and commercial organisations consider carefully what information is required to be collected and how it is stored before they go ahead simply collecting it.

[ai_Droid]

There were those in favour and those against at the meeting, it was a good debate! I would have liked to have seen more pro fingerprinting/id card people there. I was one of the speakers covering biometric fingerprinting surprisingly enough!

 

That doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

 

As for fines, the private sector can already be fined. Why fine the government? They'll pay fines with public money, who loses out there?

 

That article linked shows the quality of the attendees with all the 'conditioning' bollocks too, I'm sure there were plenty of experts to counter that view, eh?

[Albert Tatlock]

That article linked shows the quality of the attendees with all the 'conditioning' bollocks too, I'm sure there were plenty of experts to counter that view, eh?

You're the one demonstrating the 'conditioning bollocks' - those against have 700 years of history and a Magna Carta behind them, which you seem to want to ignore and tear up.

[Cronky]

Why fine the government? They'll pay fines with public money, who loses out there?

 

The threat of a heavy fine would be a deterrent to being sloppy with our personal data in the first place

 

That article linked shows the quality of the attendees with all the 'conditioning' bollocks too, I'm sure there were plenty of experts to counter that view, eh?

 

But you weren't there were you? Why can't you stand up in public and argue your case???

[ai_Droid]

The threat of a heavy fine would be a deterrent to being sloppy with our personal data in the first place

 

You think paying out our cash as a fine is going to be a deterrant?

 

 

But you weren't there were you? Why can't you stand up in public and argue your case???

 

Nope, and I think ans outlined my position pretty well.

[3v0]

Call me naive...or something else if you want! But what exactly is the problem? I understand the gov are crap at handling personal information, but surely wanting to make sure passengers are who they say they are and go where they say they are going isn't a bad thing? Ok it would be nice if we could all trust each other and get along "excuse me sir, are you a terrorist?" not sure that would work, there are people out there that want to blow other people up for no apparent reason, seemingly the only way to attempt to catch them out is to increase security, which means inconvenience for everyone.

 

Obviously i've never read 1984 (although it is on my list) so maybe i'll think differently after that.

 

Just my opinion anyway, i've been fingerprinted entering the US and it didn't affect me in anyway, i'm not suffering any side effects anyway....well I put on about 2 stone but I think that was the food