Dick Locke writes
The AP story on this says:

" Foreigners also will be checked as they leave the country as an
extra security measure and to ensure they complied with visa
limitations."

There could actually be an advantage here for law abiding visitors who
want to return to the US. If the new system accurately records the
departure time, it would provide confirmation that visitors had not
overstayed their visa.

I'm shocked to find myself in general agreement with the program
provided they can meet their claims for speed and that they treat
false failures as a learning tool rather than shrugging shoulders and
saying, "Oh well, we're at war."

IMHO the system needs to be 'sold' to visitors. In many countries, one's
fingerprints are only taken when one has dealings with the police. There
are assumptions of criminality. (I gather from posts here that this
isn't always the case in the US.) Immigration procedures are often the
first impression a visitor has of a country, and it makes no sense at
all to **** people off for no good reason.

As a system which "keeps honest people honest" it probably has its
merits. But will it have any value beyond that? Some reservations which
come to my mind:

1/ Fingerprints are quite easily changed. Retina scanning equipment is
coming rapidly down in price and would be much harder to fool.

2/ Are fingerprints of all that many serious undesirables on record?

3/ Who will be able to access the data? If I were visiting the US to go
backpacking in Yosemite, I wouldn't be all that bothered about this. But
what about a highly sensitive business trip where I could be covered in
embarrassment (or worse) if anyone found out?

4/ Will the land borders be covered?
--
Simon Elliott
http://www.ctsn.co.uk/