From: "John Beamish" 

Worse, actually.  You wrote:  "This is no different than the police
stopping you on the street and demanding to see your papers because you
might be a bad person."  They aren't doing it because you *might* be a
bad person.  They're doing it because you took part in a normal, every day,
transaction.

Considering the anthrax mail event about 2 years ago, the next logical step
would be to take the fingerprints of everyone who buys a stamp.

On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 20:32:12 -0500, Geo.  wrote:

> "Mark"  wrote in message
> news:45a1d7d8$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>
>> My comment/derision was addressing the editorial comment inserted into
>> the "news" story via the "alongside criminals"
commentary.
>
> I think that's a fair statement since obviously the people being
> fingerprinted are NOT criminals. I didn't take it as commentary, I took
> it as a distinguishing fact that makes this an invasion of privacy.
>
> I understand where your comment came from, but I think you missed the
> point of the comment, I mean it is a fact that they are not taking
> fingerprints because these people broke some law, they are just taking
> fingerprints of innocent visitors.
>
> This is no different than the police stopping you on the street and
> demanding to see your papers because you might be a bad person. It's
> wrong to do this and US citizens should be pissed that this
> administration would even considered doing it.
>
> Geo.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5