An article in Computing tells us that Parliament's security officers have abandoned the idea of using fingerprint technology for fear it might pose a risk of mutilation to MPs, peers or staff (Westminster avoids fingerprints).

The authorities' concern is that potential suicide bombers would have no compunction cutting off politicians' fingers in an attempt to defeat a system that relied on automatic readers to verify passholders' identities.

But aren't we all supposed to have our fingerprints on our ID cards? Fingerprint readers are already used at airports to speed through the lucky (foolish?) few at passport check.

Then the same issue of Computing has an article where banks are asking for more fingerprint readers (Biometrics needs the banks).

Why is it not acceptable for people to cut off the fingers of MPs, peers and Lords but it is OK if they cut off the fingers of ordinary members of the public?

Andy Wood