This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Fingerprinting policy- don't let the issue die

Status
Not open for further replies.
I hear what you are all saying, and there are alot of valid points.

I do believe, however, that there is a significant difference between continually monitoring people VS. having them pass security and identity clearances.

Of course American security has just become outright stupid. If somebody figured out a way to swap out a fingernail with some sortof clear plastic weapon the next thing you would know is that everybody would have to have each of their finger and toe nails individually checked...just so ridiculous how we are approaching the situation. I also suspect that America may have influenced Japan into the finger print approach.

Perhaps I am more lenient because around here there are already a lot of such applications. Heck, just to get into the gym at my school we have to do a hand scan and type in our social security numbers....lol...so giving a fingerprint with my passport to get into a country seems pretty minimal to me, and basically makes logical sense to me as a simple non overly intrusive precaution and intelligence force when talking about non-citizens of your own country.

For instance, at work (I work at a child development center) I don't pay attention to the teachers that come in and out my classrooms--they are employees just like me--but if a parent comes in, even if he or she has come in 10 times before and stayed for a couple of whole days, you can bet I am still going to be watching when he/she is playing with my kids.

But when it is just some guest who isn't a mom/dad in my classroom I stop them at the door and I get permission from the Director before I let them come in and start playing, and you can bet I keep my eye on them even more closely than I do a normal mom or dad in the class.

From my experience it seems like that type of prejudice is not truly prejudice at all, but a simple reaction to loving and caring about one's citizens.

I say take it case by case and evaluate the situation: this one just doesn't seem too wrong to me.

Recording my phone @#% with my fiance and my conversations with my bank for six months...that does seem terribly inappropriate and is something we should stand up against.
 

I think you are right .It's much easy to see a relevance in such a measure if you already live it somewhere else. when I was in school it was just a guy at the entry who's main purpose was to keep kids playing ball too close of the windows. The students were guarding the doors by rotation each day during classes breaks. My university has no cameras no fingerprinting. Basically you can enter whenever you fill like based on the good memory of the guardian siting there. I entered many times in universities different then mine just because I have the face of a good nice student.

Then again I doubt the terrorist know where my country is on the map so it will be a waist of money to take strong security mesures.

I do believe that sometimes this measures are made more to control normal people than criminals.
 
happilyengaged said:
I hear what you are all saying, and there are alot of valid points.
Click to expand...
Good, then why do you write the following?
giving a fingerprint with my passport to get into a country seems pretty inimal to me, and basically makes logical sense to me as a simple non overly intrusive precaution and intelligence force when talking about non-citizens of your own country.
Click to expand...
I ask because you don't seem to be aware of the 2-faced reasoning in Japan. Please reread everything on this thread so I don't have to repeat it again.

Besides, getting in to your silly sports facility as a member is so far off from entering a country where one is a PERMANENT RESIDENT (like me), that it is ridiculous to even try comparing. I LIVE here. I pay taxes, support a family, etc. Yet, EVERY time I have to come and go.... aw, forget it. Read the thread in its entirety.
 
maybe I am confused about something.

Are you a Japanese citizen? Do you have citizenship in Japan?
 
Don't want them to take your fingerprints?
Solution! Burn the top of your fingers with chemical stuff.
 
happilyengaged said:
maybe I am confused about something.
Are you a Japanese citizen? Do you have citizenship in Japan?
Click to expand...
No, I am an American. I live here. I have a Japanese family (wife and child). I have lived here long enough that I don't need a visa to stay longer than a tourist. My status is the next level up called Permanent Resident. The next step beyond that is acquiring naturalized citizenship (which I'm not interested in). So, I retain my American citizenship, but I do practically everything that Japanese citizens do (pay taxes, work, own property, etc.), yet this fingerprinting policy says I am a suspected criminal/terrorist or contagion hazard to the country!

People on military bases (including civilian contractors and the spouses/children of military) are exempt from this policy, as are the Special Permanent Residents (Koreans and Chinese who were born here yet who have not taken citizenship).

The policy is discriminatory.
The policy has no rational basis for being in place.
The policy allows personal, private information to be spread to sources involved in checking for criminal/terrorist status when it has no right to do so, and there is a potential for leaking this info.

Get it, now?

As a tourist, you might not think this is a big deal, but for anyone living here (and that includes people with work visas, student visas, dependent visas, spouse visas, and cultural visas, not just people with PR like me), it is a practice that slaps human rights in the face.
 
(pay taxes, work, own property, etc.

I think to pay Tax have a nothing to do with that
 
Glenski"s opinion is not representative for the foreign community
in J-land !
 
Last edited:
I am inclined to view it in much simplier terms:

People who are born in the country do not have to undergo these procedures.

Military personel do not have to undergo these procedures.

All other foreigners do.


Not nearly as complicated as it sounded...and again, I still say it seems pretty reasonable for a country to ask that of its visitors...which you are...being an American. Of course, i don't really care at all myself, its just kind of fun for me so don't get to serious in your response to me.

On a sidenote...if the law actually said "korean and chinese born" exclusively in addressing the issue of special permanent residence then that would be a bit of an issue to tackle in and of itself. But I got the distinct feeling that was something you tagged on yourself to emphasize what you are observing as racial profiling due to a matter of commonality of occurences rather than actual legal definitions.

If you can provide this thread with that law that specifies korean and chinese I am sure we would all be very interested in reading it. Otherwise it would be best if you didn't shove racist comments into the mouths of others to make a point about something you dislike.
 
Last edited:
happilyengaged said:
I am inclined to view it in much simplier terms:
People who are born in the country do not have to undergo these procedures.
Military personel do not have to undergo these procedures.
All other foreigners do.
Click to expand...
So, do you call a carpenter hired under SOFA status a "military" person? Or an X-ray technician? How about the teenage son of a soldier? If they are on SOFA status, they are exempt, and this sucks, IMO.


Not nearly as complicated as it sounded...and again, I still say it seems pretty reasonable for a country to ask that of its visitors...which you are...being an American.
Click to expand...
No, you obviously don't get it. I don't visit Japan. I live here!

On a sidenote...if the law actually said "korean and chinese born" exclusively in addressing the issue of special permanent residence then that would be a bit of an issue to tackle in and of itself.
Click to expand...
Guess what? That's exactly what it says. Again, you show supreme ignorance of various visa statuses here. "Special Permanent Resident" is one of them and fits the Koreans and Chinese born here. No racial profiling by me.

Shove this!
出入国在留管理庁ホームページ
http://nettv.gov-online.go.jp/prg/prg1431.html
http://www.immigrationhereandthere.org/2006/12/koreans_make_up_about_half_of.php
 
"Guests" don't pay taxes and pay into the pension plan.
 

I think you also use ignorance of others who don't know the SOFA status.
It is true that both of you and they are Americans living in Japan. And they do have privileges, but they come here with their official visa status.
And they don't have freedom to work as a carpenter or an X-ray technician outside base, no matter how long they have stay here. But you can get any jobs if an employer hires you here (of course you need a designated license get the medical related job like other Japanese here). What a discrimination!
 
pipokun,
My status of residence differs from people under SOFA, yes. But those people can get work off the base if they are perceived as qualified. They just have to change their visa status. Not hard to do. You think the status of PR holds some discriminatory image? Your prerogative, but to get the same job as carpenter or X-ray tech or whatever, the employer still has to see me as qualified.

Now as for the main issue here (fingerprinting policy), do you feel someone who is a carpenter under SOFA should be exempt from being fingerprinted every time he enters Japan? Mind you, that is exempt without any time living here. How about someone who has lived here 10, 20, maybe 30 years or more and holds a work visa or spouse visa or PR status? Seems just a tad unfair, doesn't it?
 
It is fair that they do have different visa status from yours.
And it is fair that the government does not force you to be naturalized here. It is all up to your choice.

I totally agree that the special PR status is unfair, but those countries, North/South Korea and China/Taiwan, have been still divided.
If they will have been loud even after the unification (I bet it will be highly likely), I am glad to be louder against the discrimination between non-Japanese residents.

*snip
They just have to change their visa status. Not hard to do.
Click to expand...
Not hard? Is it really easy to find sponsors to work off-base? I am always to glad to know new knowledge. Thanks, anyways.
 
orochi said:
"Guests" don't pay taxes and pay into the pension plan.
Click to expand...

Actually...they do. I know several illegal immigrants in America that pay taxes, pay social security, and get tax refunds all while the government is fully aware that they are here illegally.


also, as we know in this case Glenski has proclaimed that he himself is an American, not a Japanese citizen, who travels and stays in Japan. Making him a guest and visitor. Yet, he pays taxes etc Meaning again...yes...they do.
 


Thanks for providing this information, I haven't spent too terribly much time looking into special residents status and such

Now, the issue of whether or not special status is unjustly discriminatory is a separate thread, but lets take a quick look based on the little I know:


"many of them descended from the 2 million Koreans brought to Japan as forced labor during Tokyo's 1910-1945 colonization of the peninsula....who came to reside in Japan for various reasons during 36 years (1910-1945) of Japan's so-called rule over Korea and continued to reside in Japan after having lost Japanese nationality, which they held during the time of Japan's rule, with the enforcement of the San Francisco Peace Treaty (April 28, 1952)."


What we see here is that Japan is NOT simply being racist.

They are not simply, 'we are going to let the Koreans have special status because they are Asian' or something similar to that, as you have implied.


In fact, Japan is clearly attempting to amend a wrong that it has done to a certain group of people, namely the Koreans in this instance. Which is in fact very similar to certain policies we have in America related to African American's and other minorities. It is recognizing racism and wrongs done to particular countries in the past and making steps to rectify those wrongs. Nothing at all wrong with that.


So is the status given to these individuals based on race? Yes.

Does Japan have very reasonable, understandable, and just justification for doing so? Yes.


But back on topic:

Japan has clearly expressed their desire to amend the wrongs done to those Korean individuals in the past by giving them special, more closely related to Japanese, status. IF Japan did not allow them to pass through as a Japanese citizen would then it would be seen as a violation of the very principles under which they have created the special status in the first place--making it essentially a slap in the face and demeaning of the actions they have taken to amend their past wrongs. It is certainly understandable that they would not want to do that while still wanting to increase their security measures a bit.


So, recognizing the true difference in special status and those such as yours, and recognizing the need for it and how it relates to the finger printing policy we should, as mature adults, be capable of understanding a abiding by such policies.

Assuming similar rationale for the Chinese that leaves only those working for the governments.

You may have a valid curiosity on this issue.


My initial thoughts, formed within the boundaries of my supreme ignorance, is that it is possible that:


1) because they are coming here for governmental purposes it is possible that some individuals on those visa's are not truly coming of there own volition which could possibly have factored into their decision.

2) They may have worried about insulting or foreign governments by forcing the individuals that they have hired and brought to their bases, etc for employment to undergo these additional procedures.

3) It may simply be that they are trying to make a show of good faith to those governments in order to help with international relations.


There may be some other more substantial reason, and I would like to know it for curiosities sake.

Either way I still feel that your indignation is out of place, though the military rationale is not nearly as clear to me at the moment as the Korean issue is.
 
TBH, in the coming years I can see this fingerprinting policy spreading to lots of other countries. As far as I can tell, America already have it in place (along with some other stupid measures, including the nipple-ring fiasco) and the UK will be implementing it in the near future (from what I have heard, it was supposed to come into practice at Heathrow soon but has been pushed back because of the disaster zone that is Terminal 5), and that apparantly includes domestic flights, too. And from what I've read, it includes British citizens, too. My family is entirely British (apart from a tiny bit of Italian from generations back) and I will still be required to provide fingerprints and biometric information if I want to travel through Heathrow (it will more than likely spread to smaller airports with time).

I don't know, I guess this whole situation doesn't bother me as much as it should. And I think it would be kind of hypocritical of me to be critical of Japan's fingerprinting policy when Heathrow will be doing it to British citizens. And I'm just glad that Heathrow is taking security seriously for once. It can be a joke sometimes.
It's a small price to pay if it helps prevent attacks. I never want to turn on the TV to hear about a bombing and panic, wondering if my father was caught up in it, again. If giving fingerprints and a photograph helps prevent that then I'm all for it.
But Japan isn't at risk so it does baffle me that they're using terrorists as an excuse. And most of Britain's terrorists seem to be either homegrown or living here legally. On top of that, I don't really have faith in Heathrow, lol. They'll only screw things up, as usual.

But from what people say about how foreigners are treated in Japan, I can see why it pisses some people off.
 
You raise a smokescreen here. I am not an illegal immigrant like those you wrote about. I live and work here legally. The Japanese government has no qualms about me living here, as opposed to the USA and its truly illegal immigrants that it lets slip under its own radar. I'm in plain view.

Oh, and the term immigrant does not denote the same meaning as guest. Immigrants live in countries where they migrate. Tourists like you don't and are considered guests. Don't get things tangled up in semantics. If you do, I'll throw this at you:
people on SOFA are here for a fixed term, just like a tourist, yet they are exempt from the fingerprinting policy. How's that for unfair?

As for your other post, you still don't get it about the Zainichi.
They are not "coming" for governmental purposes. Those people you read about came here (past tense) and the governmental purpose was often insidious (comfort women, e.g.). Their descendents were actually born here.
I really can't understand your other points, so I'll let them go.

As for you not understanding my "indignation" over the unfairness and discriminatory nature of the whole issue, that is plainly evident.
 
bruno said:
Glenski"s opinion is not representative for the foreign community
in J-land !
Click to expand...
Sorry to say I am with Glenski. I have served my time to be eligable for permanet residency. Therefore in my eyes the government has recognised that fact, so why should I when entering back to my "HOME" have to provide fingerprints everytime?

@ pipokun,But going off the original intent of the new law, what is to stop those people being involved in terroist activity? So what does the fact that they can't get a job outside of base have to do with things?
 
Therefore in my eyes the government has recognised that fact, so why should I when entering back to my "HOME" have to provide fingerprints everytime?
Click to expand...

I think because you dont have a Japanese passport.

BTW
Glensky;
why dont you get a Japanese nationality?
 

Illegal immigration has nothing to do with this argument. You're just making stuff up now.

And Glenski's views have nothing to do with mine.
 
as for this matter ,The illegal immigration, the traveler, and the permanent resident are the same when seeing from the Japanese because they dont have a Jaspanese passport
 
caster51 said:
as for this matter ,The illegal immigration, the traveler, and the permanent resident are the same when seeing from the Japanese because they dont have a Jaspanese passport
Click to expand...

That's your opinion. I certainly hope the population isn't that ignorant.

And they certainly aren't viewed the same legally.
 
That's your opinion. I certainly hope the population isn't that ignorant.
And they certainly aren't viewed the same legally.
Click to expand...


that is why they should gat the Japanese passport,
Do they have anything inconvenience?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Japan plans foreign fingerprinting
4 5 6
Replies
126
Views
24K
Ewok85
L
Is the immigration policy strict in Japan
Replies
24
Views
11K
Glenski
COVID-19 Japan's Covid-19 border policy
2 3
Replies
54
Views
9K
salyavin
News The Senkaku issue
2
Replies
44
Views
7K
thomas
Dolphin hunting and general issues of humaness
Replies
24
Views
8K
Tokis-Phoenix
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…