Biometric I.D.s

WildBlueYonder76 wrote:

I never knew paranoia was as popular as acrophobia amognst pilots.

I used to be exceedingly careful about pre-flight inspections, etc and
appologized for being "paranoid". The instructor remarked, "Paranoid
pilots die in their beds."

"The word 'paranoia' may not be the word you're looking for here,
unless you characterize a citizen's real loss of the right to judicial
due process as a delusion."
No, but I consider a terrorist's loss of due process an obligation.

The instructor remarked, "Paranoid pilots die in their beds."
Almost sounds like a King School seminar. ;-)

On 16 Dec 2004 15:50:15 -0800, "WildBlueYonder76"
wrote in .com::

"The word 'paranoia' may not be the word you're looking for here,
unless you characterize a citizen's real loss of the right to judicial
due process as a delusion."

No, but I consider a terrorist's loss of due process an obligation.

Unfortunately, that's not the way the Patriot Act is written. Once
the government declares (without the necessity of proof) one of it's
citizen's is an Enemy Combatant, the citizen's rights to due process
of law disappear. There is no trial to ascertain if the citizen
actually is or not. The citizen can't call an attorney, and can be
held indefinitely (and secretly) without being charged with a crime.

Welcome to the 21st century. :-(

Larry Dighera writes:

Welcome to the 21st century. :-(

Welcome to Bush-League government. I will not concede that the 21st
century is going to be that way.

"Dave S" wrote in message .net...
I've been fingerprinted 4 or 5 times in my life, voluntarily. Application for cop school long ago, more recently my
concealed handgun license and renewal. It's a non issue to me.

I utilize a computerized pharmaceutical cabinet daily as an ICU/ER nurse, and it uses a biometric scan of my finger in
lieu of a typed password... (and I DO have the option of not using the biometric, but it impedes my job performance).

Positive identification to exercise a PRIVELEDGE (not a right) is not too "big brother" for me.

Dave


I'm glad you like being fingerprinted. Why exactly do they do that? Are you guilty of something because you carry a
handgun?

The Wright Brothers exercised their rights to create and build a flying machine. Only later did folks loose their rights
and have the freedom of flying called a privilege.

....So we are getting to the point that we have no wrights anymore, only privileges, but the privileges never created an
airplane...

"SFM" wrote in message ...
-------------------------------------
"C Kingsbury" wrote in message
.net...


When was the last time you were asked for your pilot's license as a form
of
identification? European driver's licenses look like our pilot
certificates
because they have national ID cards that are more like our passports.


BTW did you notice that in the Intelligence bill there was also a provision
to make the Dept. of Homeland Security responsible for ensuring that all
drivers license conform to national requirement of ID? Basically DHS will be
developing a national ID. Which makes me wonder why we need another
identifier on our certificates.

At least the biometric they are talking about at this point is a photo. I
just hope they let us submit photos and not makes us show up at the FSDO for
a picture to be taken.

Scott

--

It's proposed that it will be like a passport photo...

"Bob Fry" wrote in message
...
Larry Dighera writes:

Welcome to the 21st century. :-(

Welcome to Bush-League government. I will not concede that the 21st
century is going to be that way.


Wake up and smell the coffee. It will be unpopular to NOT keep this level
of "security" in place, with any politician, for many years to come.
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" writes:


Welcome to Bush-League government. I will not concede that the 21st
century is going to be that way.


Wake up and smell the coffee. It will be unpopular to NOT keep this level
of "security" in place, with any politician, for many years to come.

Many years need not equal 100.

I was right with you up until your last statement:

Positive identification to exercise a PRIVELEDGE (not a right) is not
too "big brother" for me

There is the rub. It is a philosophy difference that I doubt that will ever
have univeral alignment. Rather than looking at government as an
institution that grants priveledges to its people; I look at government as
an institution that we grant the authority to limit certain freedoms so that
we can all live together in relative peace. The people should control what
freedoms it allows the government to limit or restrict -- everything else
remains free. [It is my former teenage idealist showing up again.]

I've been fingerprinted 4 or 5 times in my life, voluntarily.
It's a non issue to me.

Ditto. Worked in a bank and I don't remember why I was fingerprinted a
bunch of other times, something to do with the time I...oh never mind.
DNA for ID is no big deal, there is more opportunity for abuse because the
data can be used for more than just ID but that is something I haven't seen
as a real issue yet.

Back to my idealist self. Giving up freedom for security bothers me,
especially when most of the so called security does very little to enahance
security.

Also, security measures should first be implemented that do not effect
individual freedoms. When these fall short, investigate other measures that
limit freedom with high scrutiny. An analogy. I am an engineer [that's not
the analogy]. When I design new equipment and processes the goal is to
design safety into the system. During the whole development process and
safety reviews, we identify potential issues. We then try to implement
engineering controls for the identified hazards. If we cannot reasonably
design out or mitigate the hazard we will consider administrative controls.
Engineering controls are often more expensive but they have high
reliability. Administrative controls are usually cheap but people are not
as reliable; they get distracted, have a false sense of security, etc.

In my weak analogy [engineering controls] = [no restriction to personal
freedom] & [administratve controls] = [restriction to personal freedom]

If we want to enhance safety, there are many many many things that should be
done that would be completely transparent to the public. Yes, they are more
expensive but (1) they will truely enhance security vs window dressing (2)
they are more reliable and (3) they will not restrict individual freedoms.
Once these have been implemented, consider some of the "administrative"
controls we have been subjected to. I have no problem with suffering
through some adimistrative controls when they are a temporary means to allow
time for engineering controls to be implemented. The cost issue doesn't
pass mustard. We seem to have PLENTY of money to thow away on useless
programs and activities.