NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-5702505.html

Does anyone else have misgivings about this new idea for a national ID card? What the article doesn't mention in detail is what security features would be in place in case your card gets stolen. I'm assuming it would have a lot of personal data stored on it, and, as the article says, would make identity theft easy. I doubt it would make it harder for terrorists, or any other criminal, to gain access to things this card is supposed to prevent them from obtaining.

I dont know much about it but...

I doubt it would be "easy" for some non friendly persons to obtain the information on the card. It would make it easier for our governmemnt to track each individual though and possibly help prevent other terrorist, or just simply illegal, acts from happening. I also like the "it's needed to stop illegal immigrants from obtaining drivers' licenses"... personally Im sick of not only immigrants in general but illegals as well of course... of course all of this is useless if the government doesnt keep track of all the cards and people, which they do a piss poor job of now... :headbang:

http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-5702505.html

Does anyone else have misgivings about this new idea for a national ID card? What the article doesn't mention in detail is what security features would be in place in case your card gets stolen. I'm assuming it would have a lot of personal data stored on it, and, as the article says, would make identity theft easy. I doubt it would make it harder for terrorists, or any other criminal, to gain access to things this card is supposed to prevent them from obtaining.

You might check out a thread I started called "Does anyone care to defend this?" It also is about Real ID cards.

IMHO, the biggest effect of a standardized national ID card would be to make things easier for the fake ID industry.

The idea was proposed in Australia once, and it died.
Now we got this thing called a Tax File Number ...

To be honest I fail to see the problems with a mandatory ID card (excepting the frustrations of actually getting hold of one).

I have lived in a state where ID cards were required and it did not really have any great effect on us...it's something you get used to.

I'm all for it.

http://news.com.com/FAQ+How+Real+ID+will+affect+you/2100-1028_3-5697111.html?tag=nl
For instance, you'll need to bring a "photo identity document," document your birth date and address, and show that your Social Security number is what you had claimed it to be. U.S. citizens will have to prove that status, and foreigners will have to show a valid visa.

State DMVs will have to verify that these identity documents are legitimate, digitize them and store them permanently. In addition, Social Security numbers must be verified with the Social Security Administration.

...so all this does is hold the states to the same level in granting driver's licenses, which have always been valid is US photo ID anyway? Fine. :)

veering very slightly o/t..

Why did these ID requirements get attached to an "emergency" military spending bill?
Because it's difficult for politicians to vote against money that will go to the troops in Iraq and tsunami relief. The funds cover ammunition, weapons, tracked combat vehicles, aircraft, troop housing, death benefits, and so on.

I've never understood the idea of 'attaching' totally irrelevant suggestions to other bills, it seems utterly idiotic (for the reasons evident here). Can anyone explain why they do it? :/

veering very slightly o/t..



I've never understood the idea of 'attaching' totally irrelevant suggestions to other bills, it seems utterly idiotic (for the reasons evident here). Can anyone explain why they do it? :/

Because they are politicians and this is politics.

veering very slightly o/t..



I've never understood the idea of 'attaching' totally irrelevant suggestions to other bills, it seems utterly idiotic (for the reasons evident here). Can anyone explain why they do it? :/
They do it because it works.

The most disgusting thing about this bill is that the Senate version passed 100-0. 100-0!!! :eek: WTF!!!??? If you ever see anything passing the Senate 100-0, it should litteraly scare you so much that a turd falls from your anus. Anytime they all agree on something you can absolutely guarantee that you're being screwed.
...or should I say 'FUCKED'?...



...up the poop shoot with no reach-around and only an insulting pitance of lube
This means THEY ALL AGREE!!! They're all in this together, not a single one found enough wrong with the bill to even abstain! I wonder what else they all agree on?

They do it because it works.

The most disgusting thing about this bill is that the Senate version passed 100-0. 100-0!!! :eek: WTF!!!??? If you ever see anything passing the Senate 100-0, it should litterly scare you so much that a turd falls from your anus. Anytime they all agree on something you can absolutely guarantee that you're being screwed.
...or should I say 'FUCKED'?...



...up the poop shoot with no reach-around and only an insulting pitance of lube
This means THEY ALL AGREE!!! They're all in this together, not a single one found enough wrong with the bill to even abstain! I wonder what else they all agree on?

Or the legislation is so sensible that no one in their right mind would vote against it... ;)

Check out What the honorable statesman from Texas (and I mean that), Ron Paul had to say (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul248.html) when the criminals he works with overwhelmingly passed the house version of this bill.

Or the legislation is so sensible that no one in their right mind would vote against it... ;)
Not a chance. If anything was that sensible at least some of these corrupt men and women would surely have a problem with that. I don't think you understand politics.

Not a chance. If anything was that sensible at least some of these corrupt men and women would surely have a problem with that. I don't think you understand politics.

Or: No one wants to be seen as weak on homeland security, or illegal immigration.

I understand politics. I also understand constituencies. :D

will we have to change the address "mr president" to "big brother"?

Check out What the honorable statesman from Texas (and I mean that), Ron Paul had to say (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul248.html) when the criminals he works with overwhelmingly passed the house version of this bill.

I have to totally agree with you on this. Ron Paul kicks ass!

The sad thing is all the ignorant Americans who believe this is the greatest thing to happen in the fight against illegal immigration and such (read the Letter to my congressman thread, a shining example of ignorance towards what this really accomplishes). It's amazing how many Americans will claim they're not ignorant or stupid yet blindly praise bills like this that only further restrict their own freedoms and do nothing against the problems they claim to be adressing with it.

There are positives and negatives to a national ID. The positives include the fact that it would be a hell of a lot easier to get things done. As it is, I need to keep track of multiple official identification, like birth certificates, my passport, my California identification card, my Social Security card, and so on.

I would hope that a single I.D. would add to convenience. I have no illusions it would assist in the fight against illegal immigration. That's something that will only be solved by humanpower, border patrols, and technology (and possibly a less recalcitrant Mexican government).

The biggest potential negative I can think of is the problem of what will happen if I lose the damn thing. I had to jump through a dozen hoops when a bureacratic screw-up led to another name being attached to my Social Security number (of course, in the national bureaucracy the SSN IS your identity).

I think it's entirely possible, given the nature of biometrics and anti-counterfeit methods these days, to create a card that is more or less forge-proof. As long as no one's sticking a bloody microchip in my wrist, I'm fine.

http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-5702505.html

Does anyone else have misgivings about this new idea for a national ID card? What the article doesn't mention in detail is what security features would be in place in case your card gets stolen. I'm assuming it would have a lot of personal data stored on it, and, as the article says, would make identity theft easy. I doubt it would make it harder for terrorists, or any other criminal, to gain access to things this card is supposed to prevent them from obtaining.
Don't like it. Don't want it. Don't need it.

It just smacks of brownshirts walking up and saying "Your papers, sir?" :mad:

Don't like it. Don't want it. Don't need it.

It just smacks of brownshirts walking up and saying "Your papers, sir?" :mad:

Totally playing devil's advocate. Don't take it personally. ;)
What do you think your Social Security number and Texas (soon to be Virginia) identification card are? Brownshirts ask for your papers every time you get caught speeding or try to board an airplane.

Totally playing devil's advocate. Don't take it personally. ;)
What do you think your Social Security number and Texas (soon to be Virginia) identification card are? Brownshirts ask for your papers every time you get caught speeding or try to board an airplane.
I never said I liked those either. Those are already in place I we pretty much have to live with them. But we don't need ANOTHER ID.

veering very slightly o/t..



I've never understood the idea of 'attaching' totally irrelevant suggestions to other bills, it seems utterly idiotic (for the reasons evident here). Can anyone explain why they do it? :/

The reason for that is because it become a great hassle to get rid of the bill. It all has to do with how bills are turned into laws. They're written up, announced, sorted out for subcommittees to review them, sent to the subcommittees, reviewed, edited, submitted to the floor, voted on, possibly sent to another subcommittee for further review..and I THINK that if you attach a bill to another, like that (I forget the actual name for doing so), you have to have yet another subcommittee to review that, and that has to be voted on. So, the easiest way to get a possibly controversial issue passed is to attach it to a bill that IS likely to get through. The reason this one got through, most likely, was due to the fact that it was attached to an appropriations bill that would allocate $82 billion more for the "War on Terror", specifically for Iraq.



I'm almost tempted to prefer the microchip, because it'd be hard to lose that. Problem is if someone wants it from you bad enough...or that you could be tracked with it. Anyways..My whole problem with this is that I don't think it'll help curb illegal immigration or terrorism to any extent. I'm rather certain that given enough time, counterfeiters will find ways around the system and provide fake cards to anyone who can purchase one.