Heathrow airport first to fingerprint
telegraph.co.uk
telegraph.co.uk
I'd rather be fingerprinted at an airport than have to take off my shoes for example.
For example, you leave your username on every comment you make here, but I will never have a clue who you are unless you say in a comment with your username attached.
And after you do that, you will never be anonymous again.
It may seem reasonable in this airport scenario, but the reason people are resistant is because they fear creep. That by giving up fingerprints in this situation, people will eventually be expected to give up private info in more situations.
It is paranoia, sure – if you're not doing anything wrong, what do you have to worry about? But what happens when the definition of wrong gets changed?
Edit:
And it's not like you say at the end: you will still have to take off your shoes. The fingerprinting isn't for better security in terms of safety: it's to make sure international passengers aren't getting on domestic planes – which is only a problem because of the airport's bad, unconventional layout that doesn't separate domestic and international travelers.
A trade between privacy and convenience is one thing, but this isn't even a trade.
My username is my first initial + my last name. This is also my email address. I link to my blog which has my full name and a link to my resume which includes my address, phone number, education and employment history.
People like me with less common names wouldn't have much luck trying to hide our identity anyway. Google my name and you're likely to find where I went to high school, pictures, posts I've made to various mailing lists and the books I buy on Amazon.
The government already has my finger prints on file (and the finger prints of all legal immigrants to the United States).
I am against invasive procedures at airports (and other places). But given all the other things you must do to board a plane it's not that much work to put your finger on a small reader.