Fingerprinting people entering and leaving the country?

old hippy · 03-12-2012 09:43PM

Wabbit Ears wrote: »

I wonder just how many of the NO camp are currently Gmail and Google chrome or apple Ipad/Iphone users who are blissfully unaware of their naivety!!

Pesky wabbit

ResearchWill · 03-12-2012 09:45PM

Wabbit Ears wrote: »

I wonder just how many of the NO camp are currently Gmail and Google chrome or apple Ipad/Iphone users who are blissfully unaware of their naivety!!

So you are saying gmail takes my DNA while my iPad steals my fingerprints.

tayto lover · 03-12-2012 09:45PM

No

Kevin Irving wrote: »

If you have nothing to hide.... is the worst argument ever.

I'm not a criminal, but no way in hell will I carry ID everywhere I go just for the sake of it.

Honestly, I don't really care about the odd criminal or two crossing our borders. Catching them is not worth the inconvenience for everyone else.

As of now, most of the most dangerous criminals aren't even on the run because there's no arrest warrant. So you wouldn't catch them anyway. If the crime was serious enough to be arrested at tge airport, the Gardai should alread have caught them.

Do you carry a Driving Licence?
Do you carry a Dole Card?
Don't you carry a passport when you travel?
A fingerprint does not weigh anything. It can prove your innocence and speed your travel just as it can curtail the movements of the guilty or wanted.

kirving · 03-12-2012 09:54PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Do you carry a Driving Licence?
Do you carry a Dole Card?
Don't you carry a passport when you travel?
A fingerprint does not weigh anything. It can prove your innocence and speed your travel just as it can curtail the movements of the guilty or wanted.

I carry a passport when I travel because I have to and I agree that a fingerprint would be more convenient in cases. A fingerprint wouldn't replace a passport though, it would be an additional inconvenience.

I'm not one of these civil liberties types either. I think dole recipients should need a passport as ID, and spending should be monitored.

A fingerprint can just as easily implicate you in a crime too.

tayto lover · 03-12-2012 10:01PM

No

ResearchWill wrote: »

Can you give figures of the number of criminal doing what you say. So when we invest millions or from past tract record billions in this scheme we know it is actually solving a problem.

We can't stop cocaine comming into the country through our huge coast line how is finger printing and DNA from everyone going to stop people who don't want to be detected coming in by boat. Also the scheme will destroy our all ready fragile tourist economy. I know people who refuse to travel to the USA because of the security they employ, not criminals just people who would rather spend their money in a country that welcomes them as a honest person not a potentional criminal.

I don't know how many criminals are doing that and neither does anyone else BUT if it stopped only a few and spared the pain of the victims, which can last a lifetime, then it would be worth it to me. Having it in force might prevent very many from attempting to get in here so that they can continue their law-breaking unimpeded. I really don't see that it can do any damage at all.

kirving · 03-12-2012 10:05PM

If a single victim feels better because of a costly, intrusive and inconvenient system, is it worth it?

ResearchWill · 03-12-2012 10:06PM

tayto lover wrote: »

I don't know how many criminals are doing that and neither does anyone else BUT if stopped only a few and spared the pain of the victims, which can last a lifetime, then it would be worth it to me. Having it in force might prevent very many from attempting to get in here so that they can continue their law-breaking unimpeded. I really don't see that it can do any damage at all.

So to be clear, we don't know if we have a problem, if we do have a problem we don't know the size of it, we don't know how much it will cost and we don't know how effective it will be. We don't know how many tourists it will put off or the cost to the economy, we don't know will it be illegal under EU law.

Does the person who came up with this idea work for the HSE sounds just like what our health ministry would think up.

So you don't mind spending say a billion a year to stop one old lady been mugged. With out knowing the size of the problem or the cost of the fix how can anyone say it's a good idea.

Wompa1 · 03-12-2012 10:16PM

ResearchWill wrote: »

So to be clear, we don't know if we have a problem, if we do have a problem we don't know the size of it, we don't know how much it will cost and we don't know how effective it will be. We don't know how many tourists it will put off or the cost to the economy, we don't know will it be illegal under EU law.

Does the person who came up with this idea work for the HSE sounds just like what our health ministry would think up.

So you don't mind spending say a billion a year to stop one old lady been mugged. With out knowing the size of the problem or the cost of the fix how can anyone say it's a good idea.

I've known a couple of people who said they would not go to the US because of the invasion of their privacy when entering. Those two people went to Australia....

I've travelled to both. Australias border patrol was much stricter in my eyes. Don't tend to hear much complaints about that.

mr kr0nik · 03-12-2012 10:19PM

bbam wrote: »

An ID card is useful in the street where DNA is more of an investigatory tool..

I see the usual "i wouldn't trust them with my DNA" and "I don't want to feel like a criminal" stuff...
Giving fingerprints or DNA samples doesn't mean your a criminal, so why should you feel like one, unless you actually have something to hide..

This would make huge in-roads into solving crime..

Someone shakes your hand then you probably have some of their DNA on it. Or else drying your hands on a towel in a public restroom or putting your hand on a door knob somewhere.

Unless you wear gloves, you'll always have someones elses DNA on you somewhere, and someone else probably has yours as well.

Try explaining to the guards why your DNA appeared at a crime scene when all you want to do is go on your holidays.

ResearchWill · 03-12-2012 10:21PM

Wompa1 wrote: »

I've known a couple of people who said they would not go to the US because of the invasion of their privacy when entering. Those two people went to Australia....

I've travelled to both. Australias border patrol was much stricter in my eyes. Don't tend to hear much complaints about that.

I have travelled to both, no problem in either, but perception is the issue, (but did feel more welcome in Australia) if people traveling to spend their money for a weekend or a week or two feel it's just not worth the trouble they may go to another place.

Death and Taxes · 03-12-2012 10:22PM

Neewbie_noob wrote: »

As the thread title says, should people be fingerprinted upon entering and leaving the country, regardless of citizenship?

Here are my reasons.

Criminals who (are presumably fingerprinted by police by electronic means) will be seen leaving the country if they are remanded on bail, although their passport is often seized during this, they could easily flee to the UK with a driving license, other ID, or if they are citizens of other countries, they can use another passport.

If a person is wanted in Ireland (for, just say, child maintenance reasons), when they re-enter Ireland they will be apprehended when their fingerprints "set off alarm bells".

If someone is suspicially entering and leaving the country they can easily be tracked.

This can also be used to prevent identity theft, illegal immigration and welfare fraud (say, people wh might be claiming welfare in Timbuktu and back in Ireland).

In case someone loses or "loses" their passport or ID in transit, they can merely scan their fingerprint and their photo will come up on screen.

If a dossier is kept of every Irish citzen's fingerprints of foreigners' fingerprints (inlcuding British) in Ireland, if a crime is commited, then the perpetrator can quickly, efficiently and easily be tracked.

I am aware that the open border with NI will pose a problem, if the UK don't impose such border restrictions on people then they can easily fly to Belfast and then get the train / bus / car to the Republic, unless we keep a dossier with the UK.

So what do y'all think.

An in before someone just responds with "NO" or the PC brigade and Liberals responding with "it's an invasion of our privacy".

So, Discuss.

Or they could just drive to Newry!

UCDVet · 03-12-2012 10:26PM

1.) Fingerprint tests are not reliable. It sounds great, but they don't work.

Judge Pollak, who is a former dean of the law schools at Yale and the University of Pennsylvania, also noted ''alarmingly high'' error rates when fingerprint examiners took proficiency tests; in 1995 only 44 percent of 156 law enforcement examiners could correctly identify all five prints in the test, and in a 1998 study the number improved to only 58 percent.

2.) Even if the tests were - it's trivial to fake your finger prints. The scanning would have to be done by a machine and the processing rate would have to be high enough to handle large volumes. There is no way people wouldn't easily cheat the system.

More than that - it's trivial to STEAL other people's fingerprints. They aren't secure - everything you touch has them!

3.) The borders in Ireland are *not* secure. Not even close. If you fly in to Ireland, sure, you'll need to show a Passport. The people working at the airport either don't know or don't care about actual immigration laws - and I'm saying that from actual experience. I was allowed to leave and then re-enter the country, at the airport, while in-violation of the law. They were happy enough to open to a new page, and stamp my passport, they couldn't be arsed to do the math and see that I'd over-stayed my visa.

And that's at the airport. That's the height of our security. You can take a ferry in from the UK or France with nothing and nobody will ask. Others advertise that they'll accept a 'utility bill' as evidence.

4.) Even if you could get every entrance to the country secured - you'd huge network of everyone's finger-prints and whether or not they were criminals or not. I mean, assuming we magically improved the detection rates to 100% and stopped people from modify their actual fingerprints and using prosthetic ones. That means every port needs always-on network connection. If the network goes down - you can't allow people into the country.

How reliable a system do you think the government is going to create? Keep in mind the as reliability approaches 100%, the cost of the system grows exponentially. Fault-tolerant, high-reliability, low-latency, distributed systems are not cheap.

Last I checked, Ireland doesn't have a lot of extra cash to spare. Surely, we could spend the money more effectively....especially considering....

5.) And I can't reiterate this enough.....it just won't work. It really won't. Criminals aren't stupid and they rarely follow the rules. While you inconvenience millions of honest travelers and cost taxpayers millions of euros, the real bad-guys are just going to get a connecting flight somewhere else and switch to a ferry. Or someone's going to have a friend who is happy enough to look the other way for 50 euro. Or will know a guy who can print incredibly realistic, undetectable to the naked eye, fake finger prints out of a latex-like material.

And all of that doesn't even touch on the moral implications or privacy concerns. But that'd only make sense to debate if the system could work....but it can't. Not fingerprints anyway.

twinQuins · 03-12-2012 10:26PM

bbam wrote: »

Definitely..
Fingerprints and DNA samples.
As should every citizen in the state be compelled to supply the same. I also feel that ID cards should be compulsory to carry at all times.

If you have nothing to hide then what's the problem...

If I've done nothing wrong then I should be left alone. Our legal system operates on the presumption of innocence and it's a good principle.

Tell you what, since you obviously have nothing to hide why not post up your name, address, PPS number and bank details?

Wompa1 · 03-12-2012 10:27PM

ResearchWill wrote: »

I have travelled to both, no problem in either, but perception is the issue, (but did feel more welcome in Australia) if people traveling to spend their money for a weekend or a week or two feel it's just not worth the trouble they may go to another place.

What was said to you in America to make you feel unwelcome? Was one of the Border Patrol people a pr1ck to you?

Where else would they go? The UK scans your eye, Australia do both, US does both.

I'm not entirely sure about the rest of Europe. I know when I went to Greece I felt really unwelcome and that was from one European country to another one.

ResearchWill · 03-12-2012 10:32PM

Wompa1 wrote: »

What was said to you in America to make you feel unwelcome? Was one of the Border Patrol people a pr1ck to you?

Where else would they go? The UK scans your eye, Australia do both, US does both.

I'm not entirely sure about the rest of Europe. I know when I went to Greece I felt really unwelcome and that was from one European country to another one.

I did not say I was made to feel unwelcome, I said I was made to feel more welcome in Australia.

Wompa1 · 03-12-2012 10:36PM

ResearchWill wrote: »

I did not say I was made to feel unwelcome, I said I was made to feel more welcome in Australia.

ok. I was made to feel more welcome by my dog when I got home in the evenings than in either Australia or the US.

ResearchWill · 03-12-2012 10:43PM

Wompa1 wrote: »

ok. I was made to feel more welcome by my dog when I got home in the evenings than in either Australia or the US.

But we are not talking about your dog. I clearly said I had no problems in either country, but felt more welcome in Australia, because a border potoral agent opened a line for me as he saw my mother who I was travelling with was elderly.

I just pointed out exactly what I said as you some how read more welcome as implying that the USA was unwelcoming. As they say should have gone to spec savers.

V_Moth · 03-12-2012 10:56PM

A couple of (common) misconceptions mentioned in this thread:

-You have show your Passport when picking up Social Welfare payments at the Post Office. Also, there is a new card with photo ID being rolled out.
-Foot and car passengers on ferries into/out of Britain are checked for ID. Same goes for France.

Also, a database of DNA and fingerprints would be too costly and complex to be feasible.

tayto lover · 03-12-2012 10:58PM

No

ResearchWill wrote: »

So to be clear, we don't know if we have a problem, if we do have a problem we don't know the size of it, we don't know how much it will cost and we don't know how effective it will be. We don't know how many tourists it will put off or the cost to the economy, we don't know will it be illegal under EU law.

Does the person who came up with this idea work for the HSE sounds just like what our health ministry would think up.

So you don't mind spending say a billion a year to stop one old lady been mugged. With out knowing the size of the problem or the cost of the fix how can anyone say it's a good idea.

No. I said "I" didn't know.
Maybe tourists would feel a lot safer if such requirement were in force.
Neither do I know who came up with the idea, I just gave my opinions on it.
We also don't know how much it would cost so your rant of a billion might be far too high or even too low.
Without knowing the cost how can anyone say it's a bad idea, it could be well worth it. It could save many a persons life and we don't know how much a life is worth either.

strobe · 03-12-2012 11:00PM

minidazzler wrote: »

That is the dumbest argument that your camp make. It's absolutely retarded. Of course you have something to fear from the government having DNA and fingerprints on file for everyone. What if they take a dislike to someone and need him out of the way? Do you think governments aren't above using what they have to plant evidence? .

But if someone was willing and able to access the DNA database, remove your sample to plant, get your fingerprints and forge them at the crime scene, and do this and what else they'd have to do, well enough to ensure you were convicted of the rape or murder or whatever... well, what's stopping these guys from just using your finger prints and DNA that could be taken on arrest and doing the same? Or just having you stabbed in the throat by some €1000 smack head hitman?
If the government are willing to and capable of using a DNA or finger print database to frame you for some crime and get away with it, then they don't need a DNA or fingerprint database to get you out of the way at all.

ResearchWill · 03-12-2012 11:05PM

V_Moth wrote: »

A couple of (common) misconceptions mentioned in this thread:

-You have show your Passport when picking up Social Welfare payments at the Post Office. Also, there is a new card with photo ID being rolled out.
-Foot and car passengers on ferries into/out of Britain are checked for ID. Same goes for France.

Also, a database of DNA and fingerprints would be too costly and complex to be feasible.

You do not have to show passport to collect social welfare, you can be asked to produce photo ID, http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Press/PressReleases/2009/Pages/pr060409.aspx

I assume the reason for the photo ID for social welfare is that many collecting same did not have passport or driving licence.

Yes foot passengers on ferry can be checked for ID but they do not need a passport or even photo ID if coming from the UK.

tayto lover · 03-12-2012 11:06PM

No

ResearchWill wrote: »

You do not have to show passport to collect social welfare, you can be asked to produce photo ID, http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Press/PressReleases/2009/Pages/pr060409.aspx

I assume the reason for the photo ID for social welfare is that many collecting same did not have passport or driving licence.

Yes foot passengers on ferry can be checked for ID but they do not need a passport or even photo ID if coming from the UK.

Photo I.D. is probably required to prevent dole fraud.
I wonder how much that costs?

Wabbit Ears · 03-12-2012 11:07PM

No

ResearchWill wrote: »

So you are saying gmail takes my DNA while my iPad steals my fingerprints.

No, but what they are doing is mapping out everything to do with your habits and life from your e-mails, purchases, browsing history etc. Makes simply having a fingerprint or DNA sample to be a completely benign and almost trivial nothing.

Micky Dolenz · 03-12-2012 11:08PM

We should be made jizz in a jar at the airport.

ResearchWill · 03-12-2012 11:08PM

tayto lover wrote: »

No. I said "I" didn't know.
Maybe tourists would feel a lot safer if such requirement were in force.
Neither do I know who came up with the idea, I just gave my opinions on it.
We also don't know how much it would cost so your rant of a billion might be far too high or even too low.
Without knowing the cost how can anyone say it's a bad idea, it could be well worth it. It could save many a persons life and we don't know how much a life is worth either.

That's my exact point, with out information how can I or any one else know this is a good idea, before I give up more of my freedoms I would like to know why. If someone comes up with solid information then I will think about it. But at the moment I can not say its a good idea because I don't even think there is a problem and no one has shown that there is.

ResearchWill · 03-12-2012 11:11PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Photo I.D. is probably required to prevent dole fraud.
I wonder how much that costs?

In the link I posted

Minister Hanafin also outlined preliminary results of particular fraud investigations in eight areas of the country which have been ongoing since the start of March. Over 2,200 claimants were investigated, through house visits or mailshot - of these some 275 have had their claims suspended and are no longer entitled to claim a benefit from the state or are under continuing investigation.

The potential savings from stopping these claims alone would be in region of €2million - €3million.

There have been studies done on social welfare fraud, so we can decide if a measure is worth it.

ResearchWill · 03-12-2012 11:14PM

Wabbit Ears wrote: »

No, but what they are doing is mapping out everything to do with your habits and life from your e-mails, purchases, browsing history etc. Makes simply having a fingerprint or DNA sample to be a completely benign and almost trivial nothing.

So Google knowing I like to read boards.ie and buy gadgets, is more of a worry to me than a State having my finger prints and DNA when both can be incorrectly anaylised to convict me of a crime.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1302156/DNA-fingerprinting-wrong-results.html

V_Moth · 03-12-2012 11:16PM

ResearchWill wrote: »

You do not have to show passport to collect social welfare, you can be asked to produce photo ID, http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Press/PressReleases/2009/Pages/pr060409.aspx

I assume the reason for the photo ID for social welfare is that many collecting same did not have passport or driving licence.

Yes foot passengers on ferry can be checked for ID but they do not need a passport or even photo ID if coming from the UK.

You are right on the photo ID.

The UK Border Police are very strict regarding ID - checks on the Irish side are very perfunctory.

TheFisherKing · 04-12-2012 12:55AM

Uh huh huh huh, heh heh, uh huh huh huh I thought the thread said finger people.

Remmy · 04-12-2012 12:58AM

TheFisherKing wrote: »

Uh huh huh huh, heh heh, uh huh huh huh I thought the thread said finger people.

Same here, that would put a new slant on encouraging tourists into our lovely island.

Fingerprinting people entering and leaving the country?

Comments