Net Llama! wrote:
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Matthew Carpenter wrote:
On Tuesday 27 September 2005 09:54, Roger Oberholtzer wrote:
Why the fuss over this and not over fingerprints? Once a record of a
physical trait to be used in tracking was allowed, is there any surprise
that as the traits to record get more accurate they too would be
recorded?
<rant>
I would like to hear more complaints about the nifty little fingerprint
scanners at U.S. immigrations that scan/compare/record fingerprints for
all non-U.S. passengers entering the U.S. Oh, that's right. I forgot.
Civil rights in the U.S. only applies to some portion of the U.S.
population, and no one else.
</rant>
Oh, I don't know. I don't see a problem with that. Civil liberties and
"Inalienable Human Rights" are significantly different. Those checks are to
protect the citizens of this country. If you don't like it:
a) don't visit the US
b) become a citizen of the US
It's not like it's a huge imposition. And the cost/benefit ratio is good.
Based on what data? We weren't imposing those requirements for over 200
years prior to 9/11/01, and there were no attacks.
Correct. Any time the government begins these kind of "preemptive"
actions, it can only go down hill. It may all be benign for now, but the
time will come when the power will be abused. It is one-hundred-percent
guaranteed.
I'm all for controlling our borders, but harassing visitors who have a
legal right to come here accomplishes nothing.
No offense intended. This is a touchy subject. With few easy answers.
Michael
_______________________________________________
[email protected]
Unsub/Pause/Etc : http://mail.linux-sxs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
