A National ID Card

[lisa]

Originally posted by dhamsaic
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.

Hey, as you said above, the whole thing is a matter of opinion. In my opinion if national ID cards are enacted they will NOT be voluntary even if they do start out that way. And, for that reason, along with the erosion of privacy that I think it will create, I choose to oppose them.

I don't claim that I am right and others are wrong. I have my opinion and I choose to make it known. I doubt that anyone can ever produce objective "proof" that right (A) is worth giving up for security (B).

I am just amazed how little people value some rights and freedoms compared to "security". I do not claim that they are wrong or are not entitled to their own value systems.

[QUOTE}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.[/quote]

Nope. I just don't feel that my "right" to carry a razor in the passenger compartment, as opposed to my luggage, is worth the loss of safety. It all a question of relative values -- on this one, I choose to go the other way. These things are NOT black and white, you know.

...but are you really willing to trade everyone you love so you can sit smugly in the absence of a National ID card?

No. I am willing to RISK them... the same way that I am willing to risk them being killed by an properly licensed firearm. IOW, I support the second ammendment even though I know it is possible that my daughter may be killed with a gun someday. I feel it is worth the right. Just as I know she may be killed by a car, but I don't oppose the operation of motor vehicles because I feel the benefit is worth the risk.

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"?

Nope. I don't think I would. Just as I am sure that I might oppose the second ammendment if and when a family member of mine was killed by a firearm. Very seldom does ANYONE who was a vicitim of a law (or a lack of one) not have an opinion in the direction that would have protected them after they have been a victim.

That's why I always consider this a poor argument. I'll bet that I might very well favor the outlawing of swimming pools if my brother drowned in one!

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.

Ah, and, as I stated above, that explains somewhat your intensity. I am sincerely sorry for what happened to your mother and, if I were in your position, I would probably feel similarly. But I am not and I therefore feel the way I feel and have my opinions.

That's the beauty of freedom. We can have differing opinions, and state them. Let's just hope that they never take THAT right away in the interest of safety and security!

[Scopulus Argentarius]

Originally posted by lisa


Hey, as you said above, the whole thing is a matter of opinion. In my opinion if national ID cards are enacted they will NOT be voluntary even if they do start out that way. And, for that reason, along with the erosion of privacy that I think it will create, I choose to oppose them.

I agree with you. Have a couple more examples...

A person's legal obligation to participate in Social Security is strictly voluntary ; However, it is a defacto requirement in order to live any sort of 'normal' life in America.

Another example of a voluntary governmental scheme is the Income Tax.

Cheers,

sa

[wwarner11]

dhamsaic

I would like to bring up some additional reasons why a national id would be wrong for this country and it's citizens. I have said in a previous post that once congress becomes involved with a national id you will never know the finished product. We have today through technologies, the ability to set up a national data base where, if we are mandated, to have a government id card where we would loose many of our hard fought freedoms. With the technology that is available today we would have digital fingerprinting, electronic retinal scans and whatever state of the art that would be available thought biometric technologies that today is unknown to us.We are about to enter a frontier that we know nothing about and yet we or some of us will give up our future freedoms based on future technologies that we know nothing about. Before Sept 11th many people where up in arms about TV surveillance, cameras at traffic lights. People raised so much hell that a revolution of sorts was coming to the surface and cities were backing down because we the people said stop it. Then came Sept 11th and this issue took a back seat. Suppose there is another Sept 11th and we have a national id law in place. Do I show my id when I cross the Walt Whitman bridge, or better yet will the government track me through my ez pass. I go from one town to another? Are we then truly free? The answer is a very big no. It is at that time that we the people are no longer in charge. I have one passport to travel from one country to another, I do not need a domestic passport to travel either intra or inter state. This is very important, do not succumb to the easy answers, for once we do not want to give up our liberties and freedom We are still the government and lets keep it that way.

[Dafydd Wynne-Evans]

(a little OT, please forgive me)

I was once the victim of a little "identity theft". My wife lost the checkbook at a local supermarket (in the parking lot); she realized that she had lost it no more than 1/2 hour after it fell out of her pocket in the parking lot.

By the time we had notified our bank, they had already gotten two of our checks -- from two separate branches -- from people who tried to write one out for cash, and cash it at our own bank!

The checks in that book (there were 24 of them) were all distributed about as far as they could go. We eventually received each of the checks back; no two checks have the same writing, or were received from the same people as far as we can tell. One person even tried to pay her telephone bill with one of our checks!

What really pissed me off though is that two of the checks were written out to Pizza Hut, and one to Domino's (the two pizza joints here which will deliver). B/C they had been accepted, and turned away from the bank since they were bad, both Pizza Hut and Domino's refused to deliver pizzas to our home -- for over a year afterwards. Pizza Hut still refuses to accept checks from us to this day -- for a crime that we didn't commit -- in 1993.

Now, if a NID will enable me to get pizza delivered, bring it on.

[wwarner11]

Now forgive me if I sound a little annoyed to you, but let's review your post. You say your wife lost her checkbook on the parking lot of a supermarket. Number one you are the only person responsible for your mistakes and actions, not the government or society in general ,or more important the tax payer. What you are saying whether you realize it or not, is you want the government to rescue you from your problem. . Let us review , and believe me do not take this as personal, but it seems,today many people do not want to take responsible for their mistakes. You lost your checkbook, therefore it is incumbent upon you to correct your mistake, not society at large, i.e.: the government intervening on your behalf for your mistakes.With regards to Pizza Hut and Domino's accepting your stolen checks, you should have gone to the bank, you did not do that that was your first mistake, and I do not see where the general public is responsible for your stupid actions. You should have stopped payment on those stolen checks immediately.With regards to the two pizza stores not accepting your checks or deliver to your home you have a very powerful option and that is you do not spend your money there. That is called participating in a free market system Remember you are in control because you have the money. Now for the more important thing that goes over your head, is the fact that you would have the government intervene on your behalf. and at the same time you are willing to give up our liberties to correct your very minor problems. In other words it is your problem and not the people of America. We as a nation are so much into ourselves that when you examine the ramifications of Sept. 11 I think it in the helped this country. We are no longer into ourselves but rather we seem to have become one and it is a shame we had to arrive here in this way but we are , I think as a country we are stronger people.What I am saying is wake up and smell the coffee.

[Undertoad]

What if, instead of her checkbook, she lost her National ID Card in the year 2008?

Now she'll have more problems than pizza delivery.

[wwarner11]

What this woman needs is more then pizza. I wonder if she would be interested in a bridge? I would throw in a toll both, but I would not accept a check, cash only

[jaguar]

That kinda got me.....Sure so you centralise stuff to one card/smartcard/stick/piece of bubblegum you stick on your forehead when you walk out the house - doesnt that mean you're jsut TOTALLY fucked if you lsoe that hting instead of only one thing....its a bit like the arguements agasn't M$ hailstorm.

[lisa]

Ouch! I do think that's a little harsh, wwarner11. It feels like you're calling her stupid for losing her checkbook but I'd say that's something that we all might do at one time or another. I, myself, left a purse in a restaurant at lunch last week. Fortunately it was still there when I went back.

But, I do agree that it was a mistake and actions should be in place to lessen the impact on the individual when sometheing like this happens... I would say that there are a couple of problems in this check scenario, none of which, IMHO, would be solved by a national ID card.

Dafydd, I'll accept your story as given... That you realized the loss less than 30 minutes after it occured and (implied) immediately notified the bank.

If the bank holds you accountable, in any way, for checks that were cashed there, I'd lodge a formal complaint against them and switch banks. That should be easy enough -- there's usually plenty of banks around.

As for the pizza places, If what you are saying is true I think their company policies stink! First off, they accepted checks with NO ID? I doubt that a NID card would solve the problem since I doubt they even ever asked for a state one. I'd again seriously consider writing a letter to their corporate HQ explaining the situation and contact the local press and BBB. I would bet that you could put some pressure on them if it bothers you that much to not be able to get a Domino's pizza.

Yes, these things are nusisances and we "shouldn't" have to go through this trouble. But, considering how few (relatively) people have to deal with these problems, I still hold my opinion that an NID would, in the long run, remove freedoms and that is NOT worth the small additional security that we would gain.

BTW, did everyone know that MasterCard and Visa's agreements with stores state that they cannot require ID before accepting the cards? Many consider that stupid... I consider it a convienence. Especially given that, by law, the maximum that I can be held liable for, without proof that *I* made the charges, is $50.00.

the way to have them require id (if you're paranoid) is to write, on your signature spot

SEE ID

now, i know they don't always look. but if they see that, they're supposed to ask you for an id with a signature on it.

the $50 liability is nice. people should understand that it does not apply to check cards or debit cards. that varies from bank to bank. here's what i do:

i pay for EVERYTHING on my credit card, which i have through my bank. i keep $20 in my checking account in case i need it. i keep my check card in my wallet in case i need money out, but i never use it. i keep all my real money in my savings account, and when i need money (either to pay off my credit card, which i do every month) or to put money in my checking account (so i can get money out of the atm), i transfer it in through my bank's online banking system. that means that, at any given time, the vast majority of my money is safe, should my check card number (or the card itself) get stolen. wahoo!

[wwarner11]

If my post was seen as harsh, that was not my intent. The point I was trying to put across was the fact that many people are so willing to relay on the government for almost everything. And I believe this is a case in point. Just because she had a problem years ago with a bank or pizza parlor does not preclude the fact that the author of that particular post is willing to give up the liberties of everyone because they could not resolve their problems. More people today feel with indenity thief that a national id will solve the problem and it will not. What scares me the most, is if polling data remains at it's current level with regards to a national id card, it will at some point move forward and congress will become involved, and this is the beginning of the end with respect to many of our liberties. I brought this out in a prior post and history will prove me right. There will be so much deal making and compromising that when all is said and done a national id program will look nothing like what so many people envision it to be. I am sorry if I came across harsh, that was not my intent.

[tw]

Originally posted by wwarner11
If my post was seen as harsh, that was not my intent. The point I was trying to put across was the fact that many people are so willing to relay on the government for almost everything. And I believe this is a case in point. Just because she had a problem years ago with a bank or pizza parlor does not preclude the fact that the author of that particular post is willing to give up the liberties of everyone because they could not resolve their problems.

wwarner11's post should not be considered harsh. It should be considered fundamental to why he fears a National ID system. It displays a rather naive view of where the world is going. Once, one only worried about a credit rating. There were a few national credit databases (ie. TRW). Now, even your pizza shop will maintain a your credit rating and distribute it to their other stores across the country without your knowledge. Eventually everyone will have access to databases based upon your ID. How do you protect your good name? Today, you don't.

IOW wwarner11 feels that a National ID would diminish liberties - without any logical reason why or any example. But wwarner11 ignores this fact - no National ID means less liberties as demonstrated by the pizza shop example. He dismisses what will happen almost everywhere.

wwarner11 demonstrates a "don't worry, be happy" attitude. We already have an example of threats to one's liberty. One already has been blackballed from a pizza chain. It's the 'Canary in the Coalmine' - because we have no National ID system (that one can use or avoid). What happened in the pizza shop will eventually be everywhere.

Anyone can get your birth certificate, to use your good name, to steal. Do you know that Kroger's database has blackballed you because someone has stolen your name? You don't. Kroger does business where you don't shop. Again, like the pizza shop example, you have NO protection as your good name is trashed throughout the country.

1) Anyone can steal your ID. 2) You have no way to know your good name has been stolen. #2 is most appaulling. You have NO way of keeping another from making you a criminal in another state or country. That too has already happened. Even the president's daughter may have done it to a MD woman. There is no National ID system to protect you. That means we all have less liberties every day - if the fearful deny us a National ID system.

Tomorrow, it will be even easier to steal your ID. Next year, it will be easier than that. Every week, it becomes easier to destroy your life because no one is currently permitted to have protection - no National ID system. That is threat, directly, to my liberty.

Furthermore, every week, a reputation becomes more important as new databases appear everywhere. Yes, even the dry cleaners will access a database based upon your ID. That is inevitable. How do you protect your ID in all those databases?

There can be no disagreement here. A need for a National ID system is obvious. Not one post proves otherwise. I only read "fear of government - or all organizations as if it was the KKK". Any logical reason for no National ID system must first prove that ID theft is not and will never be a problem. Who will prove that? (Gaunlet thrown to the floor).

No logical reason is presented here to fear a (properly implemented) National ID system. There is plenty of logic (and reams of examples) to fear 'no' National ID system. However emotion rules minds of some posters who would deny others a right to protect their ID. Others would threaten the liberty of all lurkers because of an emotional fear of anything new.

"It involves government, therefore it must be evil." Silly. Government is more evil than the Mafia? Government is more evil than terrorists? Government is more evil than a citizen with a grudge against you?

Logic. First prove that ID threats don't exist and will not become more common. Only then does a poster have a LOGICAL reason to deny a need for National ID.

We clearly require something we did not need even 20 years ago. Strategic Objective: 1) We require a system to provide who we are. 2) We require a tool so that we can protect our ID.

If one fears a National ID, then one must also define a system that meets the Strategic Objective. IOW I demand that naysayers instead provide a solution. These are the Objectives. Define a solution. Add something productive (positive) to this thread such as ideas and solutions.

The need for a National ID is a given: a system available to anyone who requires such protection - such as 90+% of those who read this post. Those other 10% who fear the government have no reason to sign up nor deny the implementation of such a system. There is absolutely no logical reason to make a National ID system mandatory - except in minds that fear.

Strategic objectives of such a system are defined. The next question is, "who should run it?" Is it to be operated by Visa and Master Charge, or better by a government agency?

BTW, a National ID system does not record that you masterbate every third day or that you have a genetic disease. Again, that is the emotional fearing wildly. A National ID is based on commonly available and unique information that even Kodak products have already recorded. (Is Kodak also to be feared?)

Who is to run such a system? There are good reasons to ask this question. It is not a threat to a person's privacy. But there is a threat to those whose ID has special protection requirements, such as witness protection. Can Visa be trusted with such information?

[lisa]

Originally posted by tw
There can be no disagreement here. A need for a National ID system is obvious...Any logical reason for no National ID system must first prove that ID theft is not and will never be a problem. Who will prove that? (Gaunlet thrown to the floor).

Hmmm... Obviously there can be a disagreement since there are a number of us here who disagree.

Also, showing that ID theft is not an issue is obviously not the only argument against a NID program. Hypothetically, if I could prove that the government was planning on using such a device to track people who oppose whatever party is in power, I think most would agree that that would be a valid argument against such a system.

Again, like anything else, it's a question of the weighing of the benefits vs. the liabilities. And know one knows for sure how effective the benefits will be and how bad the abuses may be. We are all only guessing.

Like tw, I can say one thing. I have seen nothing here to change my opinion, either.

[jaguar]

tw: If you put all your eggs in one basket doesn't mean than when it does get stolen, and lets be seirous here it will be, the same as passports are you will be TOTALLY stuff instead of partly stuffed with one ID thingy such as your credit card?

[wwarner11]

TW, there are a few things in your last post that I feel I must respond to. First of all I would say that I think what you are advocating with a NID is very commendable but alas what you desire will not fly. Let me explain, you say a NID system does not have to be mandatory. It has been my experience that once something is put into the hands of congress the product that entered the congress exits the very same congress in such a way that you will not recognize it. You just have to review some well intentioned legislation to see what I mean. I am not saying the system is evil or corrupt, but deals will be made for what ever reason, compromises will occur, and special interest will have their say in this process. This is our system of government , it may not be perfect but no one has come up with a better system then what we now enjoy.Your concern and I know you have good intentions with this matter , is identity thief. My first question is how many people lost their identity ? We have I think 280 million people in this country (I think) and let us assume 1 million had their id stolen last year, I fell I am high on that number , but if 1 million people did loose their identity last year we are talking about 1/2% of the people of this country. I do not feel that would justify a NID system. Furthermore laws are there to protect us with regards to identity thief, and where there are deficiencies in the law that area will be corrected. You wrote "There can be no disagreement here. A need for a National ID system is obvious. Not one post proves otherwise. I only read "fear of government" The fear of government is very real. Example the IRS is used as a political weapon, in fact any agency of government is used that way. Cameras at traffic lights. This was a story in Drudge today

LIGHTING UP AT HOME: MARYLAND COUNTY PASSES MEASURE ORDERING FINES IF SMOKE OFFENDS NEIGHBORS...These are just a few reasons to fear government.you have not demonstrated to me why we need a NID other then identity thief. Remember once that is in place the Feds are in total control, they can restrict our travel, and know your location at all times. You say to the naysayer that you demand a solution. My solution is very simple no NID , remember once in place you are then in possession of a domestic passport. Sometimes when I see how this government is growing and becoming insensitive to the needs of its people I then say to myself maybe George 111 was not such a bad person after all.