NationStates Jolt Archive

I despair at my countrymen.

80% of Brits don't oppose the introduction of ID Cards.

As long as they don't have to pay for it.

What's wrong with ID cards that they would oppose to?

Well, the fact that I don't implicitly and unquestioningly trust the State now and forever, for a kickoff. To say nothing of the offensive notion that *I* have to justify *my* existence to the State, rather than the other bloody way round.

Blunkett can shove his ID cards up his arse. Sideways.

What's wrong with ID cards that they would oppose to?


Well, in theory 'if you've done nothing wrong, you've nothing to be afraid of'. But that only works if you trutst the government not to abuse the information. I don't trust the Government.

The point being they have an ideological belief, but aren't prepared to pay for it...

It's better than having to carry your health card and drivers license card all the time and having to get pictures taken for both. This would simplify matters. Ok, so, in Ontario we already have two forms of photo-ID. This is along with your proof ofcitizenship if you're an immigrant or Indian Status card....

I see...

What kind of ID cards are we talking about here? Over here in the States, we're issued ID in the form of passports, drivers licenses, etc. (that we have to pay for) and I've never really thought much of it, so the fact that ID might be controversial elsewhere never really crossed my mind.

I see...

What kind of ID cards are we talking about here? Over here in the States, we're issued ID in the form of passports, drivers licenses, etc. (that we have to pay for) and I've never really thought much of it, so the fact that ID might be controversial elsewhere never really crossed my mind.


They'd just have important ifomation on them i think.

I see...

What kind of ID cards are we talking about here? Over here in the States, we're issued ID in the form of passports, drivers licenses, etc. (that we have to pay for) and I've never really thought much of it, so the fact that ID might be controversial elsewhere never really crossed my mind.

Passports, right! I forgout about that!

Anyway, yeah, I mean, it would make everything so much simplier. Also, try and work in your work/school ID. I mean, crap, I have four forms of photo ID (or at least am required to have 2...my student card and health card (which needs to be updated)... as well as my drivers license and passport).

If it was free, why not?

It's just one piece of ID instead of three or four!

No to ID cards

Not too happy about the new drivers licence either (plastic card with your picture)...

No to ID cards

Not too happy about the new drivers licence either (plastic card with your picture)...

I already have my drivers license like that... health cards and student cards are also like that...i'm sure citizenship cards and senior cards will be like that soon.

Yeah...well in the UK we have only had ID cards like this once...and that was WWII...

The fact is that what the Gov proposes is far and away more than tghe system you have....they are going to use this to create a national database of UK citizens...

From a technical prespective its niegh on impossible and ethically its an abomination.

Um, aren't these essentially all the ID cards most people already carry? And you are already on a database. Healthcare, Social Security, and Driver.

Given the amount of crap already in my wallet (suprisingly little cash), I only see this as a way to simplify my life.

1-9-8-4..................Big Blunkett is Watching You

People must get out of the habit of trusting the government so much. If I came up to you and asked to include your details in a database of everyone, you'd tell me to sod off, yet people seem happy to give them to the government, giving them unlimited power to restrict freedom.

People must get out of the habit of trusting the government so much. If I came up to you and asked to include your details in a database of everyone, you'd tell me to sod off, yet people seem happy to give them to the government, giving them unlimited power to restrict freedom.

Yeah, it's amazing how people will spend all their days slagging the Government off, claiming that they are incompetent, unjust, have their priorities wrong, power hungry, but yet seem to have this inbuilt willingness to accept everything they're asked to do
Bizarre

what have you got to fear if you haven't done anything?

oh yeah, Blunkett CAN'T shove them up his arse sideways.....the dog does that.

what about the EU constitution? would you vote yes?

no I wouldn't would you?

what have you got to fear if you haven't done anything?

How can you be so blissfully unaware of the sheer potential for abuse created by government monitoring of people's, all people's lives?

1984 (http://www.mondopolitico.com/library/1984/1984.htm)

OK who here has information that would be on this card that the government doesn't already have on you?

Social Security number? They issued it to you.

Credit Report? No, they can get that.

Citizen status? Again they do the paper work for you already.

The ID cards wouldn't have any data they don't already have or have access too: But there's no way I'm carrying one unless it's mandatory. I've got plenty of photo ID as it is, although having a single piece to replace a driving liscence etc could come in handy.

As for the EU Constitution, what I've read of the current draft looks perfectly acceptable to me.

I, admittedly, haven't read it yet but I am a bit worried about making a rather large leap into the EU. After all it was set up to prevent the further outbreak of wars within Europe and encourage trade routes, not to become a super power, which is what it sometimes feels like.

As for the ID cards, its important to carry identification but I'm not sure just how much people need to know about you from the ID you carry. I don't think its purely for the government to find out more, after all, as stated before, if they really wanted to find out information, they can, easily.

Also, its not just having the card, but being FORCED to carry them at all times, and being punished if you haven't go it. We should run our government, not the other way round. At the moment, sure I have N.I card, credit card, drivers licence et al, but I don't have to carry them round at, say, anti-government protests. Sorry, but I think the last year has shown we REALLY can't trust our government. I plan not to carry them, even if they are mandatory. I hope that there will be major protests like during Poll Tax. I'm willing to go to jail for not carrying an ID card. I think David Blunkett is a FAR bigger threat to our lives and liberty than any idea of a 'European Superstate'.

what have you got to fear if you haven't done anything?

How can you be so blissfully unaware of the sheer potential for abuse created by government monitoring of people's, all people's lives?

1984 (http://www.mondopolitico.com/library/1984/1984.htm)

I'm an American or a Yank if you prefer. 1984 happened way before 1984 both here and in the UK. Here we are registered at birth, given a life long ID # that cross references our lineage with that of our parents and siblings. Then when school runs around our names and #'s are sent to the gov't annually (at least). Our whereabouts and decisions are trackable through our every movement through our financial transaction (banks, credit cards, etc.), video surveillance, car registrations, public transport, etc. Our television providers know what channel we watch and how long we watch it - therefore what we watch - therefore, to an extent, a peek into our psyches.

I could go on & on save one last parting thought. This medium, even at it's most secure, is only as secure as the gov't allows it to be. A copy of this post will wind up in an NSA computer database sooner than it makes it to the NS server if I use words they deem noteable. Only those at the very inner sanctums of the NSA know what those words might be, but they are indeed there and only BB - Big Beureaucrats hold the keys.

Smile pretty! You're on BB camera!

:shock:

Why don't we just tell Blunkett we have identity cards? He'll never know...

Why not skip the whole national ID card alltogether and just go straight for the RFID-microchip implant? It's the next logical step: if it is manditory for all citizens (and only citizens have 'liberties') to carry an ID card -- then why make it an external entity? It can double as your debt-card, no more lines at the grocery-store! Since every citizen has the 'chip' (which logs your consumption habits into a government database) cash will become unnecessary: if you don't have a 'chip' then your not even citizen -- good luck trying to buy food! But why would you want to give-up your "citizenship"? The government will allocate a job for you -- give you plenty of drugs to keep you happy (or atleast complacent) -- and even provide you with a mate! It's your job to produce two new consumers -- and remember, only SOMA can prevent thought-crime!

what have you got to fear if you haven't done anything?

Beside the point.

You could make the same arguement for putting cameras in everyones houses. Or banning curtains.

There is also the economic arguement. The ID cards are being intriduced to combat benefit fraud (I cannot think of anything else, especially after Blunkett admitted they will not help combat terrorism). The cost of having a centralised database, along with checking everyone has one etc, will not justify the money saved by clamping down on benefit fraud.

There is also the question of everyone being a suspect, despite being innocent. They want to keep biometric data and fingerprints on file too, as this will hasten the tracking of criminals.

I wonder if the courts could claim that the scheme is unconstitutional (iirc, the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" [or the equivelent] appears in the Magna Carta).

1-9-8-4..................Big Blunkett is Watching You
lol...But I am afraid that Britian is becoming a bit like that. Have any of your read the book, Thief? I'm afraid Britian may become like that.

Revelation 13:16-18:

"And he causeth all, both great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the Beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the Beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666."

lets review what Blunkett has proposed so far, these are all true proposals or ideas of his, no exaggertion

1. Monitor released criminals by chipping them and following the via satellite

2. cracking down upon the rights of protestors to protest in public places (in light of the recent animal rights protesters, which wether you agree with them or not seems like a nightmarish piece of legislation to me)

3. Introducing I.D cards, and inflicting punishments upon those that don't carry them

Now, is it just me or is Blunkett a threat to all of our civil liberties? I don't want Big Brother watching me, inspecting me, regulating me, weighing me. I don't want to be boiled down to a number on some beurocrats database. I do not want the state to opress and crush its citizens more than it already does. Britain already has the highest number of CCTV cameras in the world! Isin't that bad enough? And whoever voted for the mindless voyeuristic society that would provide a market for TV programs like Big Brother. The popularity of that program worries me deeply. I would rather go to jail than carry an I.D card

Which is why he said that those who refuse to have one will be fined. not jailed, because he does not want to create "ID card martyrs."

and what if I don't pay? What will the man who poses the biggest threat to our civil liberties in the world today do then? He'll be forced to jail me. He already holds people without trial in Britain's version of Guantanamo Bay, and has passed legislation allowing him to hold people without charge for ages, breaching the magna carta

why i.d. cards can become a threat to civil liberties i don't know. i've had an i.d. card for 6 years, switching into the adult version next year, and i'm dead proud to have an i.d. card.

why i.d. cards can become a threat to civil liberties i don't know. i've had an i.d. card for 6 years, switching into the adult version next year, and i'm dead proud to have an i.d. card.


Good for you. I don't want one. And I resent the state having the authority to MAKE me have one, and to punish me wanting to retain my liberty. This is a huge threat to the British tradition of liberty and indiviualism. I don't want the state to control every aspect of my life, and I don't want the state to have the sort of power it'll have if it forces me to carry them.

The fact they're using 'asylum' to make it easier for Daily Mail readers swallow is just as dispicable- it's stirring up xenophobia. What more do you expect from a fascist like Blunkett?

I have no opinion on this.

Good for you. I don't want one. And I resent the state having the authority to MAKE me have one, and to punish me wanting to retain my liberty. This is a huge threat to the British tradition of liberty and indiviualism. I don't want the state to control every aspect of my life, and I don't want the state to have the sort of power it'll have if it forces me to carry them.

The fact they're using 'asylum' to make it easier for Daily Mail readers swallow is just as dispicable- it's stirring up xenophobia. What more do you expect from a fascist like Blunkett?

isn't an i.d. card just supposed to show that you're a british citizen and permanent resident? that's just like you holding a passport....unless you think passports are also a way to control your civil liberties. right now they're updating the i.d. card so it also serves the purpose of library card and driving licence.

isn't an i.d. card just supposed to show that you're a british citizen and permanent resident? that's just like you holding a passport....unless you think passports are also a way to control your civil liberties. right now they're updating the i.d. card so it also serves the purpose of library card and driving licence.


Yes, but the police cannot stop me in the street (or anti-government protest, for example) and demand that I show them my passport. My passport doesn't contain my genetic information, and if I don't want to, I don't have to have a passport. A passport isn't a legal requirement.

Okay, I'll way up the pros and cons:

PROS

-Perhaps they'd make the media shut up a bit about isolated cases such as the Ian Huntley thing, which would allow police to spend their time and money on real problems.

-Lower terrorist threat

-Catching criminals will be much, much easier.

-Help with illegal immigrants

-Hassle of carrying around several types of ID will disappear

CONS

-The Government may be using this information to be doing something dodgy. God only knows why or what, but there's a strange outside chance that they might.

-The right to do whatever the **** you want without people knowing who you are is, apparently, vitally important.

How, exactly, will it stop Crime or Terrorism? Someone nicks my video- how will them carrying around their details make them easier to find?

And the same goes for terrorism- even Blunkett admits it won't do much to stop terrorism.

1) As far as collecting data on us, they do it anyway. As it is the only difference between having several different cards linked to several different databases and having one card linked to a central database is efficiency. I for one want that data to be used for proper purposes only, such as tracking those on parole, whether your car insurence is paid up, whether you have medicinal allergies or (as I have) something like anisicoria which can be deadly if EMS workers are not informed, etc.

But the thing is, one card vs. many cards is merely a matter of efficiency. When used properly, more efficiency is more good. When abused, more efficiency is more bad. As I see it improper use comes in three forms: incompetence, overzealousness and malice aforthought... IOW, government conspiracy, whether large scale or small.

In the use of a one-card system incompetence is curtailed, or at least the effects of it are. No more ID mix-ups, no more guys who were "Born In East L.A." being shipped "back" to Mexico, no more "accidental" purges from the voting rolls of people with names similar to those of felons, immediate EMS access to pertinent medical information like blood type, medicine allergies, etc.

The overzealousness of our "servents" may be another matter, but it is a mixed bag. In terms of a truly sociopathic crusader cop with a boner for getting the guy he has prejudged, it makes matters worse because it is easier for him to find that guy, at least, and it may make it easier to frame matters so as to "help the cause of justice". Of course such cops are criminals when they cross such a line, and a one-card system that they must swipe through a reader to access records, and to alter them, actually makes it easier to catch THEM. As far as a cop who has an honest hard-on for one suspect, that is, one who is willing to be proven wrong, better access to compiled information is better for that suspect, if he is innocent, because it will help prove that. And if he is guilty, fine.

Finally, the conspiracy. As far as the small scale conspiracy just refer back to what I said about criminal cops above. And as far as the large scale, if you believe in such things, then you probably realize that such far reaching conspiracies as most conspiritors speak of are already beyond the compartmentalization of databases that hampers those who are supposed to be our protectors. In short, if the Illuminatti/NWO/Vatican Club of Rome/etc. are really running things, they've already got your number.

So the information is already out there, just spread around between discorporate and uncommunicative beurocratic agencies like the 9-11 warnings, as we are told, were. If there is a dark secret cabal conspiring against us, having a multicard system only lends us the illusion that they don't really know what they're doing, but if they're there, it really doesn't stop them. All it does is make those who are actually trying to protect and serve us far less efficient.

In terms of privacy, as of a person's medical records, such things would be kept on a seperate database, accessable only under certain conditions... perhaps a swipe of your own card through your physician's reader, to authorize his access to your med recs. But in any case, limited access for limited purposes, with just one identifying number at the center of your personal web. The bank your asking for credit needs to know your credit history and income, but it doesn't need to know how many driver's license points you have. A one number system gives them an added assurence that the you that you say you are is really you, the only you, and seperate authorization networks would allow them only the info that they really need. The added assurence for them would reduce lender risk, reducing lender cost and reducing (at least in theory) consumer price. All by making more efficient the flow of information that the banks you apply to for credit from are getting right now anyway.

Off course if you are anti-credit-slavery the above example might not impress you... rest assured it is not the only one.


2) As far as requiring people to have ID cards, fuck the Hell out of that with a white hot barbed electric knife. To drive a car, to use a credit card, to vote, OK... can't just let anyone do these things without proof that they have the right or privilage to. But just walking down the street, doing nothing suspicious, should not have any accompanying obligation to justify or identify yourself. The idea that citizens are justified by the state, that they exist for the state, is a tenent of Facism. The state exists for the people, not the people for the state, and when what we do is none of the state's business, who we are is not either.

3) As far as biometerics... biometrics refers to the coding of pshysiological information about an individual, usually spoken of in terms of compressing certain such information on something like an ID card or a microchip implant. The latter I will address below, but to say that biometrics in an implant seems rather redundant.

Basically the idea is that if your credit card, driver's licence, passport, etc. contains an encoded, and presumably write protected, bitmap of your fingerprints &/or retinal patterns etc., you can use that card and provide full and incontravertible proof that it is indeed your card, not your twin's, not some doppelganger's, not a guy that looks enough like you when you disguise yourself as him, but you, and only you. So no more using your big brothers DL to go out drinking.

The down side of this, aside from the hinderence to anti-government revolutionaries, is that if everybody had a biometric ID card, everybody would have to be fingerprinted, etc. This leads to the possibility of abuses, such as evidence tampering, being more efficient, as well as the tracking of people, through biometrics, who are, as mentioned above, doing nothing that is any of the government's business.

One solution that is already being implimented in another form in U.S. visas today is making biometrics optional. Those with biometrically linked credit or debit cards, for example, would be totally covered if somehow, someone else was allowed to use their card. Like with a picture credit card, the merchent has no excuse.

Even now those who have volentarily participated in a central passport/visa database enjoy fast track privilages at airports and such... at least in certain places, according to the news media. Those who elect not to be fingerprinted for a biometric card would simply wait longer in airports, wait longer while police verify their IDs (when "reasonable" suspicion exists, of course), assume some risk if their bank card is accessed by someone else, etc.

As for making people submit to biometrics, see (2), above.

4) subdural chips &/or barcoding. A very bad idea, and not just because it would lead to Armegeddon, either because St. John forsaw the truth or because so many people will believe he did. It would certainly be cheaper than a databank of all people's retinal patterns, which is why it will remain a temptation. The most prominent reason against it is human dignity. The state exists for us, but if we allow them to brand us, we have let our servents make of us cattle.



All very frightening and very promising. The fact is, all that data on us is out there. Having one ID card/# to access it all is just a matter of living more efficiently, for both good and ill.

Okay, I'll way up the pros and cons:

PROS

-Perhaps they'd make the media shut up a bit about isolated cases such as the Ian Huntley thing, which would allow police to spend their time and money on real problems.

-Lower terrorist threat

How so? Even Blunkett admits that it will not reduce the terrorist threat

-Catching criminals will be much, much easier.

How so? Especially organised criminals, who will be able to rely on help.

-Help with illegal immigrants

How so? They come into the country illegally (which isn't that hard anyway), work cash in hand jobs, generally stay out of site of the authorities anyway. A few may be caught out, but not enough to 'justify' the sceme.

-Hassle of carrying around several types of ID will disappear

So instead of having a few cards that you don't need to carry around at all times anyway, you are forced to have one that you must have on you at all times.

This seems to be a toss up between how far you trust the government and how much the new card will be more convenient. Personally, I don't trust the government, and having a few card versus one is not a terrible inconvenience.

CONS

-The Government may be using this information to be doing something dodgy. God only knows why or what, but there's a strange outside chance that they might.

-The right to do whatever the **** you want without people knowing who you are is, apparently, vitally important.


Also, for too expensive to justify the costs, even if savings will be made elsewhere.

Unconstitutional (and yes we do have a Constitution)

What if I was an anti government revolutionary? I'd be stuck then. And pretty soon all dissenters. Tell you what, why don't we just outlaw other political parties and give everyone a barcode.

This nonsense has gone on far enough. People claiming to me that if you havent done anything wrong theres nothing to fear. You trust a state that incarcerates people without charge? And even if you do trust them, how about the next lot that get into power? What woudl the BNP do with that kind of stuff if they got into office?

Its a myth that the state has all of this stuff already elsewhere. They do not and never will have retinal scans or fingerprints of me.

Unifying this stuff just makes you all that much easier to weigh and measure and control and bully and abuse, and you welcome it, like unthinking dogs.

woo, go me, I'm great!

What if I was an anti government revolutionary? I'd be stuck then. And pretty soon all dissenters. Tell you what, why don't we just outlaw other political parties and give everyone a barcode.

This nonsense has gone on far enough. People claiming to me that if you havent done anything wrong theres nothing to fear. You trust a state that incarcerates people without charge? And even if you do trust them, how about the next lot that get into power? What woudl the BNP do with that kind of stuff if they got into office?

Its a myth that the state has all of this stuff already elsewhere. They do not and never will have retinal scans or fingerprints of me.

Unifying this stuff just makes you all that much easier to weigh and measure and control and bully and abuse, and you welcome it, like unthinking dogs.

And as well as all the practical points, there's a notion that the British have, in general, been proud to hold since John Stuart Mill- that the Individual is more important than the State. The state should not have any absolute power over any individuals life, no matter if he's an 'anti-social' (a phrase the Nazi's used to justify the sweeping up of early degenrates, such as drunks, later used to sweep up Jews, gays, communists et al), asylum seeker, political dissenter or other non-Blunkettite.

It's gone too far.

It doesn't look as if our eleted representatives are going to help. ( http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,11026,1271351,00.html )

I suppose I will have to hope enough fellow country men refuse to get one and don't buckle to state pressure.

It doesn't look as if our eleted representatives are going to help. ( http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,11026,1271351,00.html )

I suppose I will have to hope enough fellow country men refuse to get one and don't buckle to state pressure.


I won't have one. They say that they won't send anyone to prison, just fine them, but I won't pay the fine. Does anyone really think it's wise to trust this government, especially after the last year?

I wouldn't trust them to wash away my crap, let alone take care of my personal details. Remember, once they've got them, they've got them. They may say they won't abuse your trust now, but in the future- who knows? You can't just ask for them back. Once you're in, you're in, and theirs no getting out of the state infrastructure. If they decide to sell them to a big corporation, or your insurance company, or any future bizarre ideological regime- who's to stop them? You will have NO control over your personal details.

It's time for the individual to take control of personal information out of the hands of the state. They've already got my DNA and fingerprints for a political crime, and I'm not sure how much they're watching me as an anti-government activist, I would hate to think that soon they could have EVERYONES details.

German citizens are required to carry an ID card. You have to pay for it too, but its a standard form of ID. You can also use it as a passport when travelling in Europe.
(ADDED)
The reason we have it is so that all residents in Germany can be identified when they get picked up by the police. You can't be forced to have a driver's license, so the Germans thought of something you could be forced to have instead.

Do German's habitually commit crimes over the course of the day? Why else would they need to be easily identified if picked up by the police.

The ID card is just the tip of the Iceberg. What they propose is to hold your details, iris print, finger prints, personal details so they can access this info when ever they wish. They will of course link this to the DNA data base they are building up of UK citizens (guilty and inicent). Not a problem if you could trust the Gov. But I trust this lot as far as I could spit a Rhino!
And for all those who say 'if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worrry about.' You will of course not object to the police turning up anytime at your house and searcing it and your computer (with or without you there) for anything illegal, including unlisenced software, copies of films, unsafe gas biolers, fake cloths etc etc. Well if you have done nothing wrong youcan't possibly object! I think not! Nexrt step will be being arrested for being likley to commit a crime.

I think saying that the next step is looking like you have commited a crime. They already do that.

I think saying that the next step is looking like you have commited a crime. They already do that.
I suppose they do. And this lot are making those powers stronger and freedoms less. Don't start me of two faced Tony and Blunckett (nee Goebbels).

Wow, what an atrocious idea.

What woudl the BNP do with that kind of stuff if they got into office?

Even they are against this proposal. In their opinion it is - and I quote - "Fascist"!

This type of legislation which FORCES someone to do carry something is atrocious. Also, it will cost each citizen around £110 for their card. A card and national database containing biometrics, iris scans, fingerprints.... it sounds absolutly Orwellian. Even if it does prevent crime and terrorism I'd happily agree to turn down the cards and accept greater risks to preserve the civil liberties this country is renowned for having.

I heard that it was in the region of £30-40. However, I think that £0.01 is too much for it, even if I trust the government absolutely.

Re: the BNP, http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/2004_july/news_july25.htm . They probably are right to be scared. It would be another way to track its memebers.