A National ID Card

[wwarner11]

I see where the airlines want voluntary citizen and mandatory identification cards for use to fly. This scares me for a number of reasons, the first being that the government will mandate mandatory ID cards for every one.Recent polls show that 70% of the people favor some kind of national ID. I do not see how a program like this would have stopped the Sept 11th. catastrophe. I heard Allen Dersawitz (the spelling may be wrong) say that he is in favor of a limited form of national Id. His suggestion would involve a photo a finger print a retinal print social security number. All this would do, is cause us to give up our privacy and in all probability they (the government) would have the ability to know exactly where you are at any time through a global positing system. It would at that point I think separate us from the government, we would no longer be the government, "they would be the government" and the they would be the invisible bureaucratic empire at that time in complete control of the people. You just have to look at some of these agency's and how the answer to know one once legislation is enacted. The IRS The EPA to name a few. This is something we should proceed with the utmost caution

[jaguar]

The thing about implimenting GPS into mobiles was bad enough
(before anyone says it i'm well aware of traigulation which is my my modded siemens S35 only connects to two towers at a time(which narrows it down to 2 locations but heck - i do want to have a frigging signal you know)) Retina scan wouldn't be too bad, fingerprint ok but DNA? Piss off!

Its the locaiton tracking that really, really rubs me up the wrong way.

[tw]

The question (not being publically discussed and having been previously discussed in The Cellar Mark IV - is this Mark IV?) is how do YOU prove who you are. The National ID (and GPS in phones) should be about providing YOU with services - not to provide the Ashcrofts with more power. Hell, he can almost claim any civilian felony as a terroist act and suspend your civil rights now - because he thinks we are in a war which was never declared. Ashcroft does not need any more power.

With more electronics, with better home publishing on ink jet printer, etc, personal identity protection is and will become even moreso - essential. A national ID system must be established so that you can prove who you are - and so that others cannot prove they are you.

Take for example, the Madri Gras riot on South Street. Most criminals cannot be prosecuted because most claimed they were someone else using counterfeit ID. Imagine a bench warrant for your name - because someone else had counterfeited an ID using your identity. Quite easy and occuring more often every year - again because you have no way to prove you are you. It would destroy your credit ratings, force you to hire a lawyer (big bucks), and maybe even some jail time while they sort your out.

Must you carry a license to leave home? Of course. It is illegal to drive without a license. You don't have to carry a National ID card. If you don't want to prove who you are, then carry nothing. You should have that choice. However if the right wing, 'everyone is evil except us' have their way, then the National ID will be required by the "Office of Homeland Security" (is that expression from the book 1984?).

National ID is not something that all are required to 'wear'. It should be something that you can have for your own protection. BTW, same with GPS in cell phones. You want to turn it off? Fine. That would be your priviledge since it is only provided to serve you. If you dial 911, then it automatically turns GPS on - because 911 and GPS is there to serve you. You don't want the GPS on - then don't dial 911.

[jaguar]

"office of homeland security" sounds exactly the same as "Ministary of Love"
Equally acurate too.

[Scopulus Argentarius]

A National ID card will be the proverbial 'straw that breaks the camel's back' concerning our retention of the little freedom we have left. I am not to mistaking Privacy for Freedom; it is just one of the pillars of freedom.

As it is, we're been pretty close (via state's ID) to having a de-facto NID Card for a while. Disparate bits of personal information from government departments (DMV etc) and some private companies that process that information (and own it by that fact) are being concatinated and controlled by entities such as governments and big businesses.

You've all probably witnessed a small part of this by noticing the amount of highly targeted junk phone calls and mail you get. You haven't seen the info that someone else has on you due to credit reports, medical exams, employment drug screenings etc.

Frankly, I'm frightened of this (and too tired to be perfectly coherent... if you haven't already noticed- please forgive me).

Will type later must sleep now.


Cheerzzzzzzzz

SA



I could go on but I'm too sleepy to rant.

[tw]

Originally posted by Scopulus Argentarius
...I am not to mistaking Privacy for Freedom; it is just one of the pillars of freedom.

As it is, we're been pretty close (via state's ID) to having a de-facto NID Card for a while. Disparate bits of personal information from government departments (DMV etc) and some private companies that process that information (and own it by that fact) are being concatinated and controlled by entities such as governments and big businesses.

... You haven't seen the info that someone else has on you due to credit reports, medical exams, employment drug screenings etc.

Point 1: Those big institutions don't need a National ID to collect all that information. A National ID system would not help them collect information. They already have everything necessary. It's called a Social Security Number. However since we don't have a National ID system, then anyone can claim to be you and access your private information. IOW without a National ID system, then all that institutional information is available to anyone else.

Point 2: Our individual freedoms and liberties are being violated without protection daily. Those violations will only increase if we do nothing - because you and I have no way to protect our identities. A greatest and growing threat to all individual liberties is the ease of stealing an identity. Even a Bush daughter stole the identity of a MD girl just to buy liquor. The greatest protection from that threat is a system where the individual can prove, when he choses to do so, his identity.

Tell me. Are you wanted for any crimes in any American states? A bench warrant for your arrest in Alaska could exist even though you did nothing. Take a vacation to Alaska and, instead, spend those two week in an Alaska jail. Whose freedoms and liberties were violated simply because no National ID existed?

That identify theft is a direct violation of your liberties, by another in collusion with a goverment that does not let you protect your liberties. Any government that does not provide tools to protect your identity is guilty, by association, of violating your Constitutional and human rights.

You don't want a National ID? Then don't apply for one. But why would you violate my freedoms and liberties by denying me access to identity protection? Why do you use your fears and emotions to violate my freedoms? Do I have no rights simply because of your fears?

Currently there is no system - a National ID system - to protect my rights - my identity. A National ID system does not make it easy for others to collect information on me. Social Security numbers already provides that ability. A National ID is something completely different - if implemented to a proper purpose.

Notice I say "implemented"? Because I have defined a specific purpose and hear no one - critic or advocate - defining the strategic objective of a National ID system. Shame on all of us for having such strong opinions on a system that no one is willing to define.

IOW another's criticism of a National ID system is criticism of a system that only exists in that author's fantasies.

How can one criticize a National ID when one does not even define what that system is? At least I define its strategic objective. At least I also define a serious and growing problem. Others instead would violate my right to protect my privacy because they fear something that they cannot even define?

Phooey. Those same opinions are what we criticized OJ Simpson jurors of using. The only way to fear something not even defined is to be emotional - like an OJ Simpson juror.

[Scopulus Argentarius]

Originally posted by tw


Point 1: Those big institutions don't need a National ID to collect all that information. A National ID system would not help them collect information. They already have everything necessary. It's called a Social Security Number. However since we don't have a National ID system, then anyone can claim to be you and access your private information. IOW without a National ID system, then all that institutional information is available to anyone else.

Point 2: Our individual freedoms and liberties are being violated without protection daily. Those violations will only increase if we do nothing - because you and I have no way to protect our identities. A greatest and growing threat to all individual liberties is the ease of stealing an identity. Even a Bush daughter stole the identity of a MD girl just to buy liquor. The greatest protection from that threat is a system where the individual can prove, when he choses to do so, his identity.

Tell me. Are you wanted for any crimes in any American states? A bench warrant for your arrest in Alaska could exist even though you did nothing. Take a vacation to Alaska and, instead, spend those two week in an Alaska jail. Whose freedoms and liberties were violated simply because no National ID existed?

That identify theft is a direct violation of your liberties, by another in collusion with a goverment that does not let you protect your liberties. Any government that does not provide tools to protect your identity is guilty, by association, of violating your Constitutional and human rights.

You don't want a National ID? Then don't apply for one. But why would you violate my freedoms and liberties by denying me access to identity protection? Why do you use your fears and emotions to violate my freedoms? Do I have no rights simply because of your fears?

Currently there is no system - a National ID system - to protect my rights - my identity. A National ID system does not make it easy for others to collect information on me. Social Security numbers already provides that ability. A National ID is something completely different - if implemented to a proper purpose.

Notice I say "implemented"? Because I have defined a specific purpose and hear no one - critic or advocate - defining the strategic objective of a National ID system. Shame on all of us for having such strong opinions on a system that no one is willing to define.

IOW another's criticism of a National ID system is criticism of a system that only exists in that author's fantasies.

How can one criticize a National ID when one does not even define what that system is? At least I define its strategic objective. At least I also define a serious and growing problem. Others instead would violate my right to protect my privacy because they fear something that they cannot even define?

Phooey. Those same opinions are what we criticized OJ Simpson jurors of using. The only way to fear something not even defined is to be emotional - like an OJ Simpson juror.

Long rant..where do I start...

Point1... Yes there already is a unique identifier (sort of) - usually a SSN. Sometimes they use a UID of their own making. A SSN is unique to every living 'registered' American Citizen; it is supposedly recycled to the living from the dead. It is 'voluntary'. It should not be used to concatinate information, but was a convenient choice for many of these companies (and government organizations) that collect the information. And Yes, people have been defrauded because of the commity of the SSN's use. The act of defrauding occured by criminal individuals or groups. There are laws that attempt to prevent large companies from abusing that information. Sometime organizations choose to violate these laws anyway and they do get hammered for it.

Point 2... I do see your point on that. ID theft by petty criminals is becoming a problems. A definative way of saying I am ME would stop this if it were implimented perfectly and instantly and ONLY under those conditions. Time lags in verification allow these injustices to occur.


<< Tell me. Are you wanted for any crimes in any American states? A bench warrant for your arrest in Alaska could exist even though you did nothing. Take a vacation to Alaska and, instead, spend those two week in an Alaska jail. Whose freedoms and liberties were violated simply because no National ID existed?
>>
No. I doubt that would happen. Possible but not probable.

<< That identify theft is a direct violation of your liberties, by another in collusion with a goverment that does not let you protect your liberties. Any government that does not provide tools to protect your identity is guilty, by association, of violating your Constitutional and human rights.
>>
There is no collusion with the government. The lack of action or a system may be dispicable but it is not an evil thing in itself unless the system is abused in a wholesale fashion. We have laws already in place (albeit somewhat weak) to take care of the individuals who try to steal our identities.


<< You don't want a National ID? Then don't apply for one. But why would you violate my freedoms and liberties by denying me access to identity protection? Why do you use your fears and emotions to violate my freedoms? Do I have no rights simply because of your fears?>>
Are you currently being targeted by ID theives? You simply have no rights to be protected from an individual crime targeting you. Try to find that the police have to gaurd you from evil 24/7 in the constitution and I'll change my mind.
Two other points... 1. 'Voluntary' applies equally to a NID as well as a SSN. Have you ever known anybody who didn't have a SSN and tried to get employment. Because a SSN is pervasivly used, it is not really 'voluntary'. 2. A NID would have to be manditory by law to be effective...think about it. (and don't take things I type so personally)

Some other quick points....
...I never gave a damn about OJ or the verdict as it had no bearing on my life other than filling news casts with redundant garbage.

And YES, I agree with you that WE have no COMMON agreement of what exactly a NID system would be. We could be comparing apples to oranges for all we (both) know.

Have a good evening TW...

Cheers SA

[wwarner11]

The one thing people are missing with regards to a national id system is the fact that the government would have complete power over every man, woman and child in this country. Lets take for example affirmative action. With a NID system in place the government will have the power to tell a business that a business is in violation of the law simply because that business did not hire the correct number of people because of their sex or their national origin. With a NID we allow the government to enter our lives, mandate what we may or may not do at any time. We give up our ability to be free, instead we must answer to a central authority and this authority will have the power to determine what we may or may not be allowed to do. If one will do a in depth study with our war with England, many reasons come to the front why we did not want to be ruled by a distant and indifferent government, and that is what is forming today with a very central Federal government, and the engine that will allow this machine to run is a NID system. To use the argument that a NID system would protect me from id thief is I believe short sighted, for who will protect us from the Feds? A NID will never be voluntary rather it will be mandatory. We must not allow this government have control over us, rather we must control the government, for we are the government. People forget that we are the government and it is not us against them because we are them. If we are not careful, we will in the end give up our control and allow the government along with big business .

[tw]

Originally posted by Scopulus Argentarius
<< Tell me. Are you wanted for any crimes in any American states? A bench warrant for your arrest in Alaska could exist even though you did nothing. Take a vacation to Alaska and, instead, spend those two week in an Alaska jail. Whose freedoms and liberties were violated simply because no National ID existed?
>>
No. I doubt that would happen. Possible but not probable.

But this has occurred on mutliple occassions. I no longer have actual details, but this was one of the first events that started me questioning our serious lack of identity protection.

Originally posted by Scopulus Argentarius
We have laws already in place (albeit somewhat weak) to take care of the individuals who try to steal our identities.

Actually we don't. PA only recently enacted some laws to protect from identity theft. I don't know the details.

Even 1 year ago in PA, someone could use your identity, trash your credit ratings, and you could not even sue in civil court. Why? You could prove no loss from a trashed credit rating. That is correct. Nationally, neither goverment (criminal action) nor yourself (civil action) could prosecute someone or recover compensation for your trashed credit ratings.

We have not addressed the crime called identity theft AND we have not created any protection from that crime. This is what a lady who ran the Passport system was saying - what - ten plus years ago. It is just another reason why Passports are so easily sold on the black market. For all you know, a US Passport could be issued in your name to a terrorist. His actions would place you on a most wanted list. You would never know until SWAT busted down your door expecting to confront a fully armed terrorist nest.

Now lets say bin Laden was using you passport to visit the US for medical treatment. He traveled to the US under your name. He chalked up $250,000 in medical bills in Boston and $50,000 in credit card bills. Those bills go to collection agencies who go after you. Your credit rating is trashed. You can never work on another classified government job nor any company who also does that work. You are forced to spend weeks unraveling all those leins on your house and other property. And you cannot even sue bin Laden because you cannot prove financial loss.

Now credit card companies and hospital could sue for their losses. But you have no rights and no protections because you suffered no financial losses and you have no National ID system to even detect that bin Laden was using your identity.

[wwarner11]

We can look at a situation where a person will have their identity stolen from them for whatever reason, and have great sympthy for them. But when you compare the number of people who are legitimist citizens of this country and the number of these same citizens who have had their identity stolen from them do we really need to give up our liberty via a national id program. Once this is put in place you will at all times be under the control of a central authority. When you think about it this was one of the reasons why we broke with England. We as a nation are now and have been for over 200 years a free people. If we continue in the direction we will no longer be a free people, not as we know it today. If this national id idea becomes a congressional bill, hearings will be held, concessions will be made to special interest groups, and in the end what is being portrayed today as a national id system to insure protection from id thief and to render terrorist impotent will in the end give the government very broad powers and restrictions will be placed upon us that we will come regret this law. I believe I have history on my side with regards that 535 members of congress must have their say and in the end we the American people are the losers.Never trust big government or big business, in the end you will loose.

[Scopulus Argentarius]

Originally posted by tw

But this has occurred on mutliple occassions. I no longer have actual details, but this was one of the first events that started me questioning our serious lack of identity protection.



Actually we don't. PA only recently enacted some laws to protect from identity theft. I don't know the details.

Even 1 year ago in PA, someone could use your identity, trash your credit ratings, and you could not even sue in civil court. Why? You could prove no loss from a trashed credit rating. That is correct. Nationally, neither goverment (criminal action) nor yourself (civil action) could prosecute someone or recover compensation for your trashed credit ratings.

We have not addressed the crime called identity theft AND we have not created any protection from that crime. This is what a lady who ran the Passport system was saying - what - ten plus years ago. It is just another reason why Passports are so easily sold on the black market. For all you know, a US Passport could be issued in your name to a terrorist. His actions would place you on a most wanted list. You would never know until SWAT busted down your door expecting to confront a fully armed terrorist nest.

Now lets say bin Laden was using you passport to visit the US for medical treatment. He traveled to the US under your name. He chalked up $250,000 in medical bills in Boston and $50,000 in credit card bills. Those bills go to collection agencies who go after you. Your credit rating is trashed. You can never work on another classified government job nor any company who also does that work. You are forced to spend weeks unraveling all those leins on your house and other property. And you cannot even sue bin Laden because you cannot prove financial loss.

Now credit card companies and hospital could sue for their losses. But you have no rights and no protections because you suffered no financial losses and you have no National ID system to even detect that bin Laden was using your identity.

We're talking about two different things....

1. You are wishing for instant verification of who you are. I can sympathise with that need. I would support that if it weren't for the abuses that would creep in with that system. (...''would the real tw please stand up --- {obscure game show reference} )

2. I am talking about preventing the ultimate way for government to control its citizens. (If an organization can, it will...) First ID, then track, then monitor; this erodes privacy, which is fundamental to freedom. (remember, we vote behind curtains to insure the privacy of the vote.. <<we see that you did not vote the pary line, Comrade?>>...and there are other examples)

In the middle is the NID system. We'll have to agree to disagree.... "You say 'to-may-to', I say 'to-mah-to' "

Anyway, have an excellent week and a great holiday. I'm looking forward to preparing ol' Tom Turkey for his date with the oven.

(But is Tom Turkey who he is claimed to be?)

Cheers,


sa

[jaguar]

*sighs*
Donno its whether its coz i've had such a fantastic day or waht but seriously i really am very scared about what kind of society we're gonna live in 50-80 years.....really, really scared.
ARgh the luddite in me comes out but christ, the tech thats supposed to move society forward seems to be used mostly to merely undermine what its founded on..
yes this is an offtopic rambelling rant of no importance, feel free to ignore it.

[lisa]

Originally posted by jaguar
*sighs*
i really am very scared about what kind of society we're gonna live in 50-80 years.....really, really scared.
yes this is an offtopic rambelling rant of no importance, feel free to ignore it.

I don't think it's off-topic at all. Ever since 9/11, I have been terrified -- not of the terrorists, but of all the things being done to erode our freedoms/privacy in the name of "security".

This has been happening more slowly, but this has triggered a speed-up process. 10 years ago, you could get on a plane without showing ID. The only identifying factor on the ticket was your title (Mr., Ms., Mrs., or Dr.). I know because, at least once, I used someone else's ticket. And, as long as security would have been sufficent to ensure that no one has weapons on board, I don't care if anyone knew who REALLY was on the plane -- the small additional risk is worth the privacy.

Now, some would say that what they have done is good. I dunno. I *liked* the fact that I could travel without someone else knowing and, believe it or not, there ARE reasons why someone would not want things known even if they are not criminals -- that's the reason for the 4th ammendment.

It the fourth ammendment's purpose was JUST to protect criminals, it wouldn't be in there. Criminals are allowed to go free sometimes, not becuase THEIR rights have been violated specifically, but because an INDIVIDUAL's rights have been violated by the government. The court system (by virtue of the consitution) has always ruled that that is a GREATER crime that whatever the defendent did -- even murder.

So, you want to take away my right to privacy to reduce the much lesser crime of "identity theft"??? I strongly oppose that.

In much the same way that I am willing to risk being shot rather than ignore the second ammendment (even though I do NOT own a gun), I would rather risk my identity stolen than remove citizens' right to privacy.

I'll end MY rant with one of my favorite quotes:

"People who are willing to sacrifice freedom in exchange for security will receive neither" - B. Franklin

Lisa -

What he actually said is some debate, but I believe that it's closer to "Those that would give up essential liberty for temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security." A couple points on this:

1. Benjamin Franklin was human. Therefore, he is capable of being wrong. He said it, but that doesn't make it right. Just like right now, I can say "Benjamin Franklin was a loony idiot." Does that negate everything he said, because I wrote those words? Who is right? Are either of us? Franklin's statement is also just a matter of opinion. Hitler wanted to exterminate Jews and Gypsies. His opinion was that they were evil. Did that make him right, because he mustered an opinion?

2. The words "temporary" and "essential" are important. What is an essential liberty? This differs from person to person, because one cannot define what is important for others. I think this is partially what tw was arguing - if you don't want a National ID card, don't get one. Just like you can't possibly say that National ID cards are evil - maybe they are to you, but that doesn't mean they're not good for others. The "temporary security" is important as well - obviously, long term measures need to be enacted. Are you furious about not being able to take a razor on an airplane? Or are you understanding that, while the notion is ridiculous, your Lady Schick could possibly be used to hijack an airplane and fly it into a building, so you put up with the grief. If you're not rebelling against these new "restrictions" and standing up for your rights in the face of this tyranny, then you're just blowing hot air.

The fact of the matter is, I love freedom too. I would die to protect it. But then I think of the people I love, and how I don't want them to ride an airplane through a building. Or to have nails implanted in their face and chest because a suicide bomber walked into the Sbarro where they were eating. The idea of freedoms eroding are scary, but are you really willing to trade everyone you love so you can sit smugly in the absence of a National ID card?

So, you want to take away my right to privacy to reduce the much lesser crime of "identity theft"??? I strongly oppose that.

Lesser crime? I wonder if you'd sing the same tune if it happened to you. I know we all like to pretend we would. But can you honestly say that, after having your identity stolen, your credit rating ruined and your ability to get a job almost totally destroyed because of a ruined professional reputation, that you would say "man, sure am glad I stood up to that one, 'cause even though I'm living with my parents and have no money whatsoever, at least I don't have a National ID card"? I don't think you can, because I don't think you know what it's like to go through that. Even so, that's not even really the big deal. Self sacrifice is easy. Could you manage to watch someone you love go through it? A child, perhaps. A spouse. Watching them suffer that torment. Knowing that they're contemplating suicide because life is just getting too difficult. Are you seriously willing to trade some false sense of freedom for that?

I don't mean to sound hard on you, and please don't consider it inflammatory - I just question your reasons. Having seen someone go through minor identity theft (credit cards, which ruined my mother's credit rating), I have an appreciation for some stronger protection on these areas. Not to say that I would support a proposed National ID card - it all depends on the implementation and the proposed setup. But I wouldn't rule it out before even knowing what's going on. Things like this are too important to form an opinion on before you've had time and opportunity to review the proposal.

[lisa]

Originally posted by dhamsaic
Benjamin Franklin was human. Therefore, he is capable of being wrong. He said it, but that doesn't make it right. Just like right now, I can say "Benjamin Franklin was a loony idiot." Does that negate everything he said, because I wrote those words? Who is right? Are either of us? Franklin's statement is also just a matter of opinion.

Just to answer that quickly (and maybe the rest later), I never intended to imply, by quoting him, that it MUST be right because Franklin said it...

I quote people when they are someone that most people have SOME respect for and they made a statement that *I*, as an individual, happen to agree with.

Anything more, you read into it yourself...