Online poll: Fingerprinting all most popular


Less than 6 per cent of the respondents to last week’s online poll think only work permit holders should be fingerprinted under the government’s new policy. 

Of the 702 total respondents, only 38 of them – 5.4 per cent – thought only work permit holders should be fingerprinted. None of those respondents left a comment about their reasons for choosing that answer. 

There was a little more support for fingerprinting only work permit holders and non-Caymanian permanent residents with 87 people – 12.4 per cent – choosing that option. None of these people left a publishable comment either. 

The largest segment of respondents – 254 people or 36.2 per cent – said anyone who lives in the Cayman Islands, including Caymanians, should be fingerprinted.  

“If anyone, then everyone,” said one person.  

“If you have nothing to hide, I don’t see a problem with it,” said someone else. “I am Caymanian, albeit a paper one, and have no problem with it.” 

“I think that we could do like the US,” said another person. “I think that they use to take footprints at birth for the birth certificates. We could do the same except fingerprints.” 

Another large segment of respondents – 190 people or 27.1 per cent – said everyone, including tourists should be fingerprinted.  

“Anyone entering the Cayman Islands should be fingerprinted,” said one person. “I’m sure by now we are accustomed to this when entering the US.” 

“This is the only way to ensure a comprehensive system capable of accessing maximum amounts of information where a serious crime has been committed,” said someone else. 

“If everyone is fingerprinted, this system may also be a crime deterrent,” said another person. “We may also be able to find suspects in many of the unsolved cases that we have.” 

One respondent also suggested that DNA samples also be taken from everyone living in or visiting the Cayman Islands. 

Some respondents – 116 people or 16.5 per cent – thought no one should be fingerprinted. 

“I would doubt the integrity of the storage and use of the biometric information,” said one person. “It wouldn’t surprise me if we abandon the programme in a few years due to inaccurate data and abuse of process in accessing the subject data.” 

“This is a total sham,” said someone else. “Against what database will we run these prints? Using what supercomputers? Who will we share these prints with?” 

“This, in the hands of Cayman’s inept civil servants and police officers, is a slippery slope to all sorts of racial profiling,” said another respondent. “You watch: all of a sudden, the only ones charged with any crimes will be Jamaicans and other expatriate minorities.” 

“Prints are extremely hard to match and the RCIPS clearly does not have the resources to match prints with any accuracy,” commented someone else. “Innocent people will be accused based on ‘near matches’ and lives will be ruined. Just because Americans are paranoid beyond reason and are afraid of their own shadows, does not make it sound policy for others to act as indifferent to human rights as they do. The funds wasted on this exercise should have been spent on proper training for the RCIPS to do their jobs better.” 

Seventeen people – 2.4 per cent – responded ‘other’ to the question. 

Several of these people thought only criminals or convicted criminals should be fingerprinted. 

One person thought only work permit holders and tourists should be fingerprinted. 

“Everyone except work permit holders as they have a police clearance already,” said one person. 

“Two choices: everyone, including tourists, or nobody,” said another respondent. “As the former will not happen, we are left with the latter. Anything else is just a waste of time.” 

“Anyone who isn’t Caymanian by birth should be fingerprinted,” said someone else. 

“I think they should start with the politicians,” commented another person. 


Next week’s poll question 

How much faith do you have in your Cayman Islands pension plan? 

Very much 


Not too much 

None at all 

I don’t have a Cayman Islands pension account 



To participate in this poll, please visit 


  1. The census has made it quite easy for the fingerprinting process to commence.Kids in school would be easily accessed as well in great numbers, for their protection and security.
    The process should also have an organizational base to footprint newborns and fingerprint them at birth.
    The reason we can’t get any crimes solved is because we have not secured the fingerprints of the perpetrators.
    If its a homegrown criminal committing these heinous crimes then we should have had his or her footprints from birth as a newborn.

    Comm.David Baines the governor and the premier need to get on the ball and keep themselves safe as well as the community.

  2. You have a bunch of murderers and armed robbers at large. Do you really have nothing better to do than collecting fingerprints of everybody visiting your island and what should it REALLY be good for ? And what about data protection ? Is it so that at the end your completely independent government sends all data directly to the US authorities ? – And IF fingerprinting – please also take fingerprints of ALL cruise passengers !

    It’s really a mad situation – care finally about your murderers and robbers instead of just producing bubbles and copying everything the holy US Department of Homeland Security orders.

  3. So waive the fingerprinting of airline and cruise passengers, the tourists. But fingerprint all locals and working expats. There, satisfies crime and safety concerns.

  4. @big berd: Which problem does fingerprinting really solve ? Are you looking for thieves and burglars …or the really big cases ? What does fingerprinting help to solve the cases of the three persons who in the last months have disappeared ? Isn’t fingerprinting just like making soap bubbles…?

Comments are closed.