1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

who might it be that will educate the children?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by alan, Aug 1, 2005.

  1. alan

    alan New Member

    Poster's Note:

    The article appearing in the August 10 issue of Gun Week is entitled Why Scan the Hands that Feed you, and is authored by former Congressman Bob Barr. Why indeed, and even more interesting, why will the sheeple put up with such foolishness, as most of them undoubetdly will? Why indeed? My Letter To The Editor at Gun Week follows. Some might find it interesting.

    Let your mind wander a bit, while the following image solidifies. A young child, having been told by it's parents that they will NOT be going to Disney Land, Busch Gardens or possibly any number of other "theme parks" that have become relatively common. The child sniffles a bit, but calms down, to listen to the serious voice of it's parents, who take the time and effort to carefully explain, so that the child will understand exactly why they will NOT be visiting one theme park or another during their summer vacation.

    The reasons for not visiting are all to clear, or should be, to anyone who read the above mentioned piece, and one might be truly surprised at the depth of understanding children are capable of, when matters are properly explained to them, by adults who themselves understand and care about the issues involved. Unfortunately, it might well be that altogether to many "adults", neither understand nor care overly much about the issues that are so obviously involved, so their children will likely never learn the important lessons that the above mentioned careful explanations could have provided.

    Speaking personally, and I have fortunately for myself and any children who might have been involved, never entered into the child raising business, I find myself a bit curious as to which aspect of the thing is sadder. That so called adults fail to understand what is ultimately involved in this business, or that children, the future of the nation, we are told, will likely not learn lessons that they should have learned, at the knees of their parents.

    One other point of curiosity is reference in the current Hindsight section to the frivolous law suits brought against gun makers, distributors and retail dealers, many of these suits being tossed out of court. How come we have yet to see the first counter suit, or have I missed something interesting.
  2. Don Gwinn

    Don Gwinn Moderator Emeritus

    Uhh . . . . yeah.

    You're kind of all over the place there. Maybe you should tell people what Bob Barr said about Disney and start from there.
  3. KriegHund

    KriegHund New Member

    From what i gather the Adults are the govt the child the people of the USA.

    When both partys understand eachother and each side is explained with the best option reached, then all is well.

    But sheeple are not necessarly sheeple by choice, merely becuase the decisions are not explained and frankly govt doesnt inform them, not only that but they dont want to inform them and dont want them informed.

    Its important that the future citizens who will become the govt understand decisions made and why they are made.

    Is that sorta close?
  4. gc70

    gc70 Active Member

    A link to Barr's editorial.
  5. beerslurpy

    beerslurpy member

    I thought I had suffered brain damage because I couldnt understand his post. Thanks for the link.
  6. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Interesting article; unfortunately, the web site was too horribly ugly for me. Whoever "designed" that site should be demoted back to the kitchen at McDonald's.
  7. Nehemiah Scudder

    Nehemiah Scudder New Member

    As far as things for the government to regulate, this isn't bad. It's not that great though either.

    How would you go about telling private enterprises like Disney and Busch Gardens how much security they're entitled to have?

    Apart from being a stockholder and yelling at em.
  8. molonlabe

    molonlabe New Member

    The same way I tell the airlines. If I can't drive there, I don't go.
  9. Nehemiah Scudder

    Nehemiah Scudder New Member

    Yeah, but you miss out on Pirates of the Carribean then.
  10. gc70

    gc70 Active Member

    Interesting question, given the context.

    How much security do private enterprises running public facilities gain from palm scans of kids? Or adults, for that matter? Barr alludes to the idea that "security" is the pretext, while profit is the actual motive.

    Shortly after 9/11, security was greatly enhanced in the building in which I work. Every worker has an electronic access card. First, you use the card to move from the building lobby into the ground-floor elevator lobby. Then you use the card again to get out of the elevator lobby on the floor on which you work and into your work area.

    The access controls in the building lobby are for security; unauthorized persons (including unsatisfied customers who want to address a problem on a face-to-face basis) are simply not permitted to get on the elevators. The access controls on each floor are for profitability; workers can only get out of the elevator lobby on their designated floor, which greatly reduces time "wasted" by stopping to visit workers on other floors. This second "benefit" was discussed in detail during the briefing about the security system.

    In short, frightened people are more willing to swallow corporate coersion and control in the guise of "security" enhancements.
  11. Nehemiah Scudder

    Nehemiah Scudder New Member

    Profit is a factor. The idea that someone will figure out a way to make a buck off of this type of security is pretty plausible. I wouldn't be surprised if you appeared on a mailing list short after being scanned.

    There is a privacy issue here I believe. Especially, if any kind of identifiying information is supplied along with the biometric data.

    But, here's the flip side. Knowing that your environment knows exactly who you are (in this case an amusement park), is a helluva deterrent. I'd imagine that this would actually cut down crime a bit.
  12. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    That's the top line marketing message, anyway.

    The average criminal is probably too dumb and/or unsophisticated to realize he might be trackable. Islamic terrorist savages aren't likely to care whether people know who they were or not.

    I believe all this high ticket "security" stuff is feel good stuff to encourage people to believe they're suddenly much more secure.
  13. gc70

    gc70 Active Member

    I'm not sure I see the anti-crime benefit.

    I saw no reference in the article to the amusement parks collecting identifying information other than the biometric data. The biometric data might be of value in solving crimes after the fact, but I can't see how it would be of value in preventing crimes unless the database was connected to law enforcement databases. Or maybe highly paranoid criminals might be dissuaded from visiting the parks.

    OTOH, I can see the value to the company of identifying ticket #149264 with a specific individual. :)
  14. Nehemiah Scudder

    Nehemiah Scudder New Member

    I'd imagine that a lot of the crime at an amusement park is of the pickpocket type variety, coupled with drunk and surly individuals. (In parks where you can drink and/or you're able to sneak something in.)

    Actually, I can imagine some surly individuals running around after having to wait in line all day in the hot sun.

    Having said all this. I've been to my fair share of amusement parks and haven't seen anything in the way of crime.
  15. gc70

    gc70 Active Member

    Hmmm, I hadn't thought of the petty miscreant type of activity. I can see a value of identifying such folks, although I'm not sure I would want to surrender my privacy to a company for their added convenience in dealing with such folks.
  16. alan

    alan New Member


    It took a while for the link to work, however when it did, the texts appear to be the same.

    Don Gwinn:

    See below for article's text. This might answer your question. The things that altogether to many people appear willing to put up with, things being spelled RUBBISH, in the name of feeling safe are something that I find strange, and troubling too, but then possibly I'm nuts.

    A Newsbull Contributing Leader

    Why scan the hands that feed you?
    by Bob Barr Special to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution

    Wednesday, July 20, 2005 at 9:00 AM

    If Mickey Mouse tried to visit Walt Disney World today, even if he purchased a full-price ticket, he'd almost certainly be refused entry. You see, in order to gain access into the Magic Kingdom, everyone has to submit to a high-tech, digitized laser scan of their finger tips; and Mickey, bless his heart, always wears gloves. He never takes them off — not to sleep, not to eat, not to bathe, and certainly not to go through a turnstile. This example is one in a lengthening list of instances in which the United States and many of its allies are using modern technology in ridiculous ways just because it's there.

    Pretty soon, you won't be able to go to a public lavatory without submitting to a finger or retinal scan. Rats! The government hadn't thought of that one yet, and now they almost certainly will.

    Of course, consistent with modern man's constant search for benign words to describe invasive procedures, Disney does not call the system of checking fingerprints "finger scans"; that would not appear Disney-like. Instead, company wordsmiths describe the process to which all visitors to the amusement park must now submit as "Ticket Tag," as if the customers were being invited to play some childlike game. Other amusement parks are getting in on the ground floor of this brave, new world of biometric data collection as a prerequisite to a day of fun. Some exhibit an even keener sense of disguising what they're doing than Disney.

    Busch Gardens near Williamsburg, Va., for example, has developed quite an explanation for its high-tech, anti-fraud system. Recognizing that most 21st century consumers value convenience above all else, including privacy, Busch's vice president of operations, Doug Stagner, explains that his company, in requiring visitors to submit to a scan of their entire hand, not just the fingertips, is simply helping the visitor. It's to "streamline" the process, he says. There's no pesky "privacy issue," he added in a reported interview, because "it's not fingerprinting."

    There you have it — the consummate bureaucrat's perfect explanation for taking private information to provide a service for which there is no real, justifiable reason for collecting such data. The name of this process? Why, "HandEScan," of course. What could be more user-friendly and non-threatening than a grammatically tortured, made-up word emphasizing the "handiness" of it all. This also helps deflect concern over what Busch Gardens' visitors seeking season passes are put through — a device that measures "the top of a person's hand, takes in finger height, knuckle shape and distance between the hand's joint," in "two separate images and then combines the photos to create a 3-D image." Whew, all that to have some fun at an amusement park.

    But hey, how can you put a price on having fun? And just think how your fun would be ruined if Johnny's sister were to try and use his ticket to Disney World because he was sick that day. Ticket Tag puts an end to such sneaky and perverted endeavors, thank goodness. Thanks, Disney, for protecting us — and you — against such a calamity.

    What's wrong with a company collecting all that identifying data anyway? They promise not to do anything with it. And you've done nothing wrong, so you have nothing to hide, right?

    Yeah, right. And the fact that big businesses and government data accumulators both have rotten track records for the accuracy of the data they collect and use won't apply, will it?

    Amusement parks are not the only institutions finding it appropriate to spend millions for the latest in identification technology in order to protect against a host of undesirable events — ticket thieves, terrorists and, of course, waiting in line. (But what about the lines inside the park? Oh well, the amusement park brainiacs will think of a way to tackle that problem soon enough.)

    Even grade schools are climbing on the biometric bandwagon. Places of learning such as Beatrice Gilmore School in West Patterson, N.J., are requiring students and teachers alike to wear badges impregnated with biometric information, so they can be tracked, monitored and, oh yes, protected.

    Where is this absurd obsession with biometric identification leading us? The future's a bit murky on that score, but a refresher read of George Orwell's "1984," or the latest listing of law-abiding citizens erroneously placed on some "no fly list" might shed some light.

    —Former congressman and U.S. attorney Bob Barr practices law in Atlanta.


    For Added Information Visit :


    ORIGINAL ARTICLE - read full text at this story link!

    COMMENT – your thoughts on this article or poll!

    Vote Here> The TOPIC of this story or poll is;
  17. cracked butt

    cracked butt New Member

    I'm a bit torn on this one. I certainly don't want my kids to be scanned or fingerprinted to go to an amusement park. On the other hand, my kid would probably much rather go fishing with his dad than go to one of those parks anyhow.

    At work, I'm required to carry a RFID card to open doors and access different areas for security purposes. The system tracks where I am at any time while at work. With the line of work I do, I certainly don't want any interlopers on site and have no problem with this security system whatsoever.
  18. Carlos

    Carlos New Member

    Same here. Security cares about us too, and there's 3,000 in our building.

    Government already has enough fingerprint specimens to last a lifetime on me, and I just don't care. I got my (current) right to carry concealed, and a 03.

    Look, the new invasive measures are here to stay. I refuse to say the terrorists won because of that.

    I'll be pissed when I'm routinely hassled by Da HomeLand Security Police routinely on my travels to work when the dog detects ... right by me, and I'm dragged off the bus or train... ;)

    We'll come to an agreement.
  19. DRZinn

    DRZinn New Member

    So in what way will this make anyone safer?


    Is this thing on?
  20. alan

    alan New Member

    Carlos and Cracked butt in particular:

    The article in Gun Week caught my attention, leading me to write the post, which I thought might interest some.

    As to whatever you gentlemen are willing to accept or put up with, that is up to you. Everyone is different.

    On the subject of "security", many years ago, in the course of my employment, I had to obtain a security clearance. The one I got was a "Q" clearance. Re that situation, I do not recall ever runnikn g into such a Dog and Pony Show as was carried on at my location, with commercial hardware catalogues being stamped confdentios and restreicted security information. At that time, if one wanted any of these catalogues, all one had to do was pick up a telephone, call the local office of TubeTurn or The Crane Company for instance, and ask for a copy. Same would be forthcoming within a couple of days, and it was such as this that was marked, as above stated, "confidential" and "restricted security information".

    At an earlier date, while working at another engineering company, I did not have a security clearance of any kind, yet I worked on the design of parts of The Savanah River Plant. I believe they made atomic bombs, or major parts thereof there. Talk about a Chinese Firedrill.

    I learned more about atomic weapons from OPEN SOURCES later on than I ever learned about them, while working on the design of the facilities where they were made. Possibly this is the reason that I do not hold this current flim flam about "security" in high regard, while with regard to fingerprinting little kids, oops I should have refered to what was called HandEScan as I recall, purely an example of corporate baloney.

Share This Page