NationStates Jolt Archive

i have very strong feelings about the subject,and alot of people don't.

so i am quite curious about "my fellow americans" position on the subject.

i feel it will define our liberties and freedoms in a marked way,as well for our children and childrens children.

unless you havent guessed it..i am very much against any form of national identifacation,but i am curious to hear opposing views.

i guess i am old school american..."someone that trades freedom for security,deserves neither"

but that's just me..i may be wrong or a neanderthal,however..i dont want to be asked for my papers..ever.

within reason of coarse,like if i am driving,or carrying a concealed weapon i should be carrying some proof of the fact that i am permitted to do above.

however,if i am walking down the street,do you think the police have a right to stop me and ask me for id?

looking forward to your responces. :fluffle:

actually i guess it is a 2 part question,do you think there should be a national id(yuck) and do the police have a right to stop/detain and demand id if you are on the street and have not committed a crime...

Isn't America that civil rights respectless country which is ruled by one party effectively that forces four year old kids to pledge alliance to the country.

Or was that North-Korea, I keep getting those mixed.

Hmmm wouldn't the social security number count as a nation id system?

Isn't America that civil rights respectless country which is ruled by one party effectively that forces four year old kids to pledge alliance to the country.

Or was that North-Korea, I keep getting those mixed.

Oh ooookayyyyyyy.

Everyone who drives has to have a driver's license. Everyone has to have a Social Security number. Every business has to have a Tax ID number ( or the SSN of the owner ). Every member of the Armed Forces has to have an ID card. I see nothing wrong with every voter having to have a voter ID.

Oppose natn'l ID vehemently. Just *where* in the Constitution is this focking permitted?

Isn't America that civil rights respectless country which is ruled by one party effectively that forces four year old kids to pledge alliance to the country.

Or was that North-Korea, I keep getting those mixed.
Never paid attention in either geography or social science, eh? Tsk. :D

Oppose natn'l ID vehemently. Just *where* in the Constitution is this focking permitted?
( shrug ) Where in the Constitution is it prohibited? Hmmm?

Everyone who drives has to have a driver's license. Everyone has to have a Social Security number. Every business has to have a Tax ID number ( or the SSN of the owner ). Every member of the Armed Forces has to have an ID card. I see nothing wrong with every voter having to have a voter ID.

But isn't that duplication of effort?

What do they use to id you in NC?

In Cali, it's just a license or your military ID.....

Can the police not already ask you for identification and detain you if you can't prove your identity?

But isn't that duplication of effort?

What do they use to id you in NC?

In Cali, it's just a license or your military ID.....
Driver's license or a State ID for those who don't drive.

Can the police not already ask you for identification and detain you if you can't prove your identity?
Not that I'm aware of, unless you're under suspicion of having committed a crime.

( shrug ) Where in the Constitution is it prohibited? Hmmm?
Lol I am an ultra strict constructionist

Our identification cards are replaced with a driver license (therefore a drivers license = I.D. card).

And in any case, I don't think a stupid little card with my name, address, and physical description is stomping on my civil rights.

The only possible infringement I can possibly see...is that we need to have it at all times (Just in case we need to present it during purchases or liquor stores). But in any case, like I said earlier, it's not like we have a reason to leave it at home when we're driving.

( shrug ) Where in the Constitution is it prohibited? Hmmm?

The Constitution only allows the gov't to do things. Everything not in the constitution is prohibited. Not that the Supreme Court cares anymore :/

Of course, provisions are made to append the Constitution

Not that I'm aware of, unless you're under suspicion of having committed a crime.
So how would that change if people had national ID cards?

How much would this essentially cost the government? I think the purpose of these cards is halt/lessen voter fraud correct? National ID cards are otherwise useless.

How much would this essentially cost the government? I think the purpose of these cards is halt/lessen voter fraud correct? National ID cards are otherwise useless.
They are wonderful for determining whether or not someone's old enough to drink, or when writing a check, or when buying an M-rated video game...

...Or when cleaning your teeth...;)

i have very strong feelings about the subject,and alot of people don't.

so i am quite curious about "my fellow americans" position on the subject.

i feel it will define our liberties and freedoms in a marked way,as well for our children and childrens children.

unless you havent guessed it..i am very much against any form of national identifacation,but i am curious to hear opposing views.

i guess i am old school american..."someone that trades freedom for security,deserves neither"

but that's just me..i may be wrong or a neanderthal,however..i dont want to be asked for my papers..ever.

within reason of coarse,like if i am driving,or carrying a concealed weapon i should be carrying some proof of the fact that i am permitted to do above.

however,if i am walking down the street,do you think the police have a right to stop me and ask me for id?

looking forward to your responces. :fluffle:

actually i guess it is a 2 part question,do you think there should be a national id(yuck) and do the police have a right to stop/detain and demand id if you are on the street and have not committed a crime...


Well, my answer to your questions would be no and no.

I don't like national ID, because it reeks of a police state. And it allows the government to pry way too much into your personal life and dealings. what happens when you are required to produce your ID for even the smallest transaction? The Government can track you, and your activities and expenses. They have no need, nor right, to be that included in our daily lives. Especially as most of us are law-abiding citizens.

Sure, they say, if you have nothing to hide, then what's your objection? Well, I will tell you one of mine. I believe this could be abused to the point of targeting and tracking "enemies" of the government...which could someday include opinionated people like me, who do not like their current government. I don't like Bush, I hate Republicans, and I have the right to feel that way. But what if, one day, they decide to abuse their power and declare ME an enemy, just because I don't like our current government, and have the temerity to actually say so?

I think there may well come a day when a lot of people are gonna wish they WEREN'T findable! Because I believe the evil neocons will abuse this and turn this country into a police state. This is just the first step.

And, no, the cops have no right to stop you if you are not doing anything wrong. What the hell ever happened to presumption of innocence...and illegal search and seizure? For sure, some cops may well decide to rough you up, just because you're a member of a minority group that they don't like...and in the end, who will be believed? The cop...or you?

This is a massive assault on our civil rights.

P.S. I only feel this way because of the political party currently in power, because I believe THEY (the Republicans) WILL abuse it. I do not believe the Democrats would. In my opinion, at least, Democrats do not do evil...and Republicans do not do good.

Well, my answer to your questions would be no and no.

I don't like national ID, because it reeks of a police state. And it allows the government to pry way too much into your personal life and dealings. what happens when you are required to produce your ID for even the smallest transaction? The Government can track you, and your activities and expenses. They have no need, nor right, to be that included in our daily lives. Especially as most of us are law-abiding citizens.

Sure, they say, if you have nothing to hide, then what's your objection? Well, I will tell you one of mine. I believe this could be abused to the point of targeting and tracking "enemies" of the government...which could someday include opinionated people like me, who do not like their current government. I don't like Bush, I hate Republicans, and I have the right to feel that way. But what if, one day, they decide to abuse their power and declare ME an enemy, just because I don't like our current government, and have the temerity to actually say so?

I think there may well come a day when a lot of people are gonna wish they WEREN'T findable! Because I believe the evil neocons will abuse this and turn this country into a police state. This is just the first step.

And, no, the cops have no right to stop you if you are not doing anything wrong. What the hell ever happened to presumption of innocence...and illegal search and seizure? For sure, some cops may well decide to rough you up, just because you're a member of a minority group that they don't like...and in the end, who will be believed? The cop...or you?

This is a massive assault on our civil rights.
Sheesh...calm down...the current situation of our civil rights is bad enough without people exaggerating.

The Constitution only allows the gov't to do things. Everything not in the constitution is prohibited. Not that the Supreme Court cares anymore :/

Of course, provisions are made to append the Constitution
Really. Hmmm. ;)

well, i did a report on this awhile back. a national id card system would most likely not be much of a card, but biometrics. basicly you would almost never have to "show your papers". it can keep track of where you go, but of course tht would be one hell of a massive system to keep track of anyone. so the solution to that is simple, they watch the top of the list, (convicted criminals and such).

for all that think that some government official has nothing better to do then to watch what you send over the internet or where you go, your wrong. ill just leave it at wrong to prevent a personal arguement from starting.

i have very strong feelings about the subject,and alot of people don't.

so i am quite curious about "my fellow americans" position on the subject.

i feel it will define our liberties and freedoms in a marked way,as well for our children and childrens children.

unless you havent guessed it..i am very much against any form of national identifacation,but i am curious to hear opposing views.

i guess i am old school american..."someone that trades freedom for security,deserves neither"

but that's just me..i may be wrong or a neanderthal,however..i dont want to be asked for my papers..ever.

within reason of coarse,like if i am driving,or carrying a concealed weapon i should be carrying some proof of the fact that i am permitted to do above.

however,if i am walking down the street,do you think the police have a right to stop me and ask me for id?

looking forward to your responces. :fluffle:

actually i guess it is a 2 part question,do you think there should be a national id(yuck) and do the police have a right to stop/detain and demand id if you are on the street and have not committed a crime...

No they need probable cause . If they want a national ID I will get one for my dog .

Hmmm wouldn't the social security number count as a nation id system?

good point....

i have numerous ss#'s...just kidding..but you are right.
thats mostly for taxes and benefits

Sheesh...calm down...the current situation of our civil rights is bad enough without people exaggerating.

Hey, I think everyone here knows I am part of the tinfoil hat crowd already. I believe in the black helicopters, too.

I read 1984, and it is eerie how much of what was in there, and seemed impossible...is now coming to pass under the evil Republicans.

I am honestly afraid of them.

I don't like national ID, because it reeks of a police state. And it allows the government to pry way too much into your personal life and dealings. what happens when you are required to produce your ID for even the smallest transaction? The Government can track you, and your activities and expenses. They have no need, nor right, to be that included in our daily lives. Especially as most of us are law-abiding citizens.

you mean like atm transactions?, ever time you use your credit card?, when you sign legal contracts? well they already have acess to all of these records and can get it easily.

Sure, they say, if you have nothing to hide, then what's your objection? Well, I will tell you one of mine. I believe this could be abused to the point of targeting and tracking "enemies" of the government...which could someday include opinionated people like me, who do not like their current government. I don't like Bush, I hate Republicans, and I have the right to feel that way. But what if, one day, they decide to abuse their power and declare ME an enemy, just because I don't like our current government, and have the temerity to actually say so?

if they really had nothing better to do now, they already can do that.

I think there may well come a day when a lot of people are gonna wish they WEREN'T findable! Because I believe the evil neocons will abuse this and turn this country into a police state. This is just the first step.

just the conservatives?, liberals would use this for sure, to make sure a white middle class man doesnt get anything over a poor black man.

And, no, the cops have no right to stop you if you are not doing anything wrong. What the hell ever happened to presumption of innocence...and illegal search and seizure? For sure, some cops may well decide to rough you up, just because you're a member of a minority group that they don't like...and in the end, who will be believed? The cop...or you?

cops wont need to stop everyone, they will be able to find the suspects they are looking for.

This is a massive assault on our civil rights.

civil rights, set by what, i dont think the constitution or bill of rights says no national id card, or the right to be unfindable

P.S. I only feel this way because of the political party currently in power, because I believe THEY (the Republicans) WILL abuse it. I do not believe the Democrats would. In my opinion, at least, Democrats do not do evil...and Republicans do not do good.

is this hillary clinton? in this forum, wow. if you dont think democrats do bad, your either blind, or young and blind.

Oppose natn'l ID vehemently. Just *where* in the Constitution is this focking permitted?

wow if i was a girl i would kiss you...lol..just kidding...thats my point..if you are not breaking a law/hurting someone...what gives you the right to ask me for my id..i would never presume to be above you and think i was somehow more important then you...to ask for you to produce proof that you are real..but thats just me..like i said..i am prolly foolish,..but i dont bother no one and i dont want to be bothered...i figured the anarchists would agree.

I'm against it soley for the reason that I have fifty other ID cards that I have to lug around.

Oppose natn'l ID vehemently. Just *where* in the Constitution is this focking permitted?

just where is it not permitted?

is this hillary clinton? in this forum, wow. if you dont think democrats do bad, your either blind, or young and blind.

Actually, no...I despise Hillary Clinton. she has sold us out, and gone over to the Dark Side. She's more right-wing than her husband was.

No, Hillary is way too far to the right for my taste! I'll vote for her if she wins the Primary in 2008, though....only because even she would be better than another Republican.

( shrug ) Where in the Constitution is it prohibited? Hmmm?

i have nothing but respect for you etrusca...but....the right to privacy and the right to unlawfull search and seizure...

respectfully

you know...the part about probable cause and warrants?

wheres the probable cause if your walking down the street...and have not committed a crime.

Actually, no...I despise Hillary Clinton. she has sold us out, and gone over to the Dark Side. She's more right-wing than her husband was.

No, Hillary is way too far to the right for my taste! I'll vote for her if she wins the Primary in 2008, though....only because even she would be better than another Republican.

i have concluded, that you really are ignorant, and you say all this crap about republicans

just where is it not permitted?

9th Amendment. Rights not specifically delegated by the Constitution to the Federal Government, are retained by the States.

i have concluded, that you really are ignorant, and you say all this crap about republicans
On the basis of what, have you concluded I am ignorant? Because I hold a different opinion and a different ideology than you?

Watch it, buster, you are very close to flaming/flamebaiting/making personal attacks here. I am attacking an ideology, a political party. You are attacking me personally. Unless you would care to state on what basis you believe me to be "ignorant." You can't just make a statement like that and then walk off...oh, no, buster...you got some explaining to do. I suggest you suck it up and do so, NOW. I'm not going to let you do a "drive-by" on me and get away with it. You'd better back up your words.

9th Amendment. Rights not specifically delegated by the Constitution to the Federal Government, are retained by the States.

just for future reference if the federal governemtn wants to do anything, its not too hard to "persuade" the states to do so, funding can go low, or benefits may not be the best, both sides have done it through out US history

On the basis of what, have you concluded I am ignorant? Because I hold a different opinion and a different ideology than you?

Watch it, buster, you are very close to flaming/flamebaiting/making personal attacks here. I am attacking an ideology, a political party. You are attacking me personally. Unless you would care to state on what basis you believe me to be "ignorant." You can't just make a statement like that and then walk off...oh, no, buster...you got some explaining to do. I suggest you suck it up and do so, NOW. I'm not going to let you do a "drive-by" on me and get away with it. You'd better back up your words.

damn you scared me, the basis of me calling you ignorant is because you have absolutely no backing to your whole, republicans = evil theory. you praise the democrats, but have you ever even read a newspaper, what were you when dems were in majority? six?

just for future reference if the federal governemtn wants to do anything, its not too hard to "persuade" the states to do so, funding can go low, or benefits may not be the best, both sides have done it through out US history
I know that. But someone asked where it was specifically prohibited in the constitution. My point was that it needn't BE specifically prohibited....due to the 9th Amendment.

damn you scared me, the basis of me calling you ignorant is because you have absolutely no backing to your whole, republicans = evil theory. you praise the democrats, but have you ever even read a newspaper, what were you when dems were in majority? six?

Actually, in 1994, when the Republicans grabbed control, I was 24 years of age.

I voted for Bill clinton in 1992...my first time where I was old enough to vote in a Presidential election. I missed by six months, the chance to vote for Dukakis, or I woulda voted for him, too.

I wouldn't vote a Republican dogcatcher. They hate workingpeople and poor people. They care only about the wealthy white folk. Since I'm not wealthy white folk, the Republicans are my enemy.

Actually, in 1994, when the Republicans grabbed control, I was 24 years of age.

I voted for Bill clinton in 1992...my first time where I was old enough to vote in a Presidential election. I missed by six months, the chance to vote for Dukakis, or I woulda voted for him, too.

I wouldn't vote a Republican dogcatcher. They hate workingpeople and poor people. They care only about the wealthy white folk. Since I'm not wealthy white folk, the Republicans are my enemy.

perfect example of only listening to stereotyping information, you obviously havnt done a damn bit of research on either party, youwere most liekly brought up being told republicans only care about rich white people, republicans care alot more of the working people then democrats do, democrats have the majority of plans to raise taxs, to make employers spend more moeny(in effect makes them give you less) etc... but yes there are a few republicans that are far from decent human beings, and there are also democrats. both sides.

if you actaully care about what goes on in your life, how about you do some research on who you chose to run your country.

*note* i have no problem with democrats, as long as they can provide a better explanation then "BUSH SUCKS", you can question me all you want about my political views. *end note*

Hey, I think everyone here knows I am part of the tinfoil hat crowd already. I believe in the black helicopters, too.

I read 1984, and it is eerie how much of what was in there, and seemed impossible...is now coming to pass under the evil Republicans.

I am honestly afraid of them.
You're ... very strange. Heh!

i have nothing but respect for you etrusca...but....the right to privacy and the right to unlawfull search and seizure...

respectfully

you know...the part about probable cause and warrants?

wheres the probable cause if your walking down the street...and have not committed a crime.
And this happens where???

Also, why do so many begin their posts to me with, "I have nothing but respect for you ... BUT ...!" Sigh.

The Constitution only allows the gov't to do things. Everything not in the constitution is prohibited. Not that the Supreme Court cares anymore :/

Of course, provisions are made to append the Constitution

incorrect...the constitution prohibits the government from doing things,like denying your freedom of speech,the right to bear arms,the right to a trial by your peers...the constitution PREVENTS the gov.from just railroading you...like they are trying to do today...if you disagree with the status quo...well we have the patriot act to deal with you...and the kick in the nuts is..i am mostly conservative in my views...but it stops at the police state crap.

i agree with who ever said..the national id reeks of a police state...maybe i got unpaid mv tickets,unpaid parking tix...so what...we are in a war with terrorists that want to "hate our freedom" but the gov will use that to lock me up for unpaid tix,while wasting manpower on me instead of looking or applying that manpower to finding terrorists...lol...no they are creating revenue by using or eroding our rights to pad there budgets..but what do i know,,

so lock me up for a ticket,but meanwhile the terrorist walks by..what a fuckin joke...it is moneywhores..no more no less...repubs or dems are the same...making it a us vs. them is silly..thats what they want..keep us distracted with bullshit while we get fucked arguing over inane shit like abortion and gay rights.

And this happens where???

Also, why do so many begin their posts to me with, "I have nothing but respect for you ... BUT ...!" Sigh.

because your not as "crazy" as the rest of us "crazy, minority hating, rich loving, christians<--(and yes people do refer to this as an insult")"

incorrect...the constitution prohibits the government from doing things,like denying your freedom of speech,the right to bear arms,the right to a trial by your peers...the constitution PREVENTS the gov.from just railroading you...like they are trying to do today...if you disagree with the status quo...well we have the patriot act to deal with you...and the kick in the nuts is..i am mostly conservative in my views...but it stops at the police state crap.

i agree with who ever said..the national id reeks of a police state...maybe i got unpaid mv tickets,unpaid parking tix...so what...we are in a war with terrorists that want to "hate our freedom" but the gov will use that to lock me up for unpaid tix,while wasting manpower on me instead of looking or applying that manpower to finding terrorists...lol...no they are creating revenue by using or eroding our rights to pad there budgets..but what do i know,,

so lock me up for a ticket,but meanwhile the terrorist walks by..what a fuckin joke...it is moneywhores..no more no less...repubs or dems are the same...making it a us vs. them is silly..thats what they want..keep us distracted with bullshit while we get fucked arguing over inane shit like abortion and gay rights.
I take full credit. I am the one who said national ID reeks of a police state. And it does, too.

Now, I wouldn't want this even with a Democrat Administration, because I'd be fearful that one day, the Republicans would gain power, and then THEY would abuse it. But I wouldn't feel as strongly opposed to it as I do right now...if we currently had Democrats in power, instead of Republicans in power.

The fact that we are getting this...with Republicans in power...scares the crap outta me, because I know they will abuse it. They will find ways to make their political opponents into targets.

Wow, how did it go from having a nationally recognized ID card to prove citizenship when voting to a police state, stoping people in the street without probable cause, rampant civil rights violations, and Republicans are Satan incarnate and Democrates can do no evil?

Yeah I'm not getting that either. Having one national ID card instead of 50 state-issued ones does not entail armed guards at every corner demanding to see your identification when you pass.

I like the idea of a national ID. Ive had to work an Identification & Registration security job before (which involves registering people, creating security and access badges for secure buildings, etc.). The problem was that people would come in with licenses from all sorts of different states. How was I supposed to know what the security features of the licenses in each state were? We werent trained in recognizing the characteristics of the licenses of each state. Heck, someone could create a license that does not resemble an official state license in any way and there is no way that we would know that the license was fake if it happened to be from a state we dont get many visitors from. Sure, we couldve been better trained, but such training wouldve been expensive and keeping up to date with the latest changes would be difficult too. I imagine that people who work at airports face the same problems. The way things currently work, someone interested in assuming a false identity has 56 different US licenses to choose from (50 states + 6 territories), they can shop around for the one they find easiest to counterfeit.

It would be so much better for security purposes if there was just one license rather than 56. The privacy implications of this? none. The real danger is if the government attempts to create a national database with a bar coding system. If the government tried to create such a system, that is what people need to fight, not the national ID card which by its self is harmless and extremely useful.

And this happens where???

Also, why do so many begin their posts to me with, "I have nothing but respect for you ... BUT ...!" Sigh.

it happened to me the other day,some kids were setting off fireworks about a mile away and johnny law was snooping around the woods looking for them,i was sitting on my brothers back porch having a beer and a smoke and got a flashlight in my face along with the overly aggressive who are you..blah blah blah...

i usually dont have an issue with cops,but i said...fuck off in much nicer terms(they have guns and allready beat me into the hospital once)and went in the house.

they actually sat there till the next morning,and when i went to get coffee in the morning,of coarse i was pulled over..for a seatbelt(which i was wearing)and they got there stinking id..and i got a ticket for no seatbelt.lol...to serve and collect is the new motto...yeah baby.

i said with respect because i do have respect for anyone that served our country.
and i suppose i figured your pretty conservative(as am i)but that you are kinda fixed in your opinions being old and shit(joking)and would disagree with my opinion so i prefaced it with all due respect so you would read my opinion rather then auto. discount it as me being a liberal...which i am not.

real conservatives believe in small gov. and the constitution,individual rights above the collective good...a police state runs contrary to those ideals in my opinion.

Yeah I'm not getting that either. Having one national ID card instead of 50 state-issued ones does not entail armed guards at every corner demanding to see your identification when you pass.

i disagree..in a way it does,i am not so much against the 1 id thing but i am very much against having to produce identity everytime a cop wants to stop you for no good reason...and they are doing that...to generate revenue...not for our security but to snag people with warrants and mv violations.

the first thing outta a cops mouth now is..licence registration and insurance.or give me your id...why...tell me what you want or what i did,if you dont believe my answer then arrest me.

it just grates me that someone can boss me around i guess ,because they want to...i dont walk down the street demanding things from strangers,i guess i would have been happier in the old days when if you werent bothering anyone..you werent bothered.

i know that sounds childish,but i like to go around unmolested if i am not doing anything.
hell,after what happened to me last week,i was talking to a neighbor and they said yea..i know,i was walking my dog and a cop demanded id from me...how the hell did we get here.

the conservatives have betrayed the ideals i use to respect them for...what are we soviet russia or nazi germany now?
and i am not so foolish to think the dems are equaly malicous in there reasons for wanting my info.

i guess i just want to be able too walk unmolested without having to prove who i am to some jbt when i havent done anything,and your kidding yourself if you think we aint heading there.

:mp5: :sniper: :headbang:

i disagree..in a way it does,i am not so much against the 1 id thing but i am very much against having to produce identity everytime a cop wants to stop you for no good reason...and they are doing that...to generate revenue...not for our security but to snag people with warrants and mv violations.

the first thing outta a cops mouth now is..licence registration and insurance.or give me your id...why...tell me what you want or what i did,if you dont believe my answer then arrest me.

it just grates me that someone can boss me around i guess ,because they want to...i dont walk down the street demanding things from strangers,i guess i would have been happier in the old days when if you werent bothering anyone..you werent bothered.

i know that sounds childish,but i like to go around unmolested if i am not doing anything.
hell,after what happened to me last week,i was talking to a neighbor and they said yea..i know,i was walking my dog and a cop demanded id from me...how the hell did we get here.

the conservatives have betrayed the ideals i use to respect them for...what are we soviet russia or nazi germany now?
and i am not so foolish to think the dems are equaly malicous in there reasons for wanting my info.

i guess i just want to be able too walk unmolested without having to prove who i am to some jbt when i havent done anything,and your kidding yourself if you think we aint heading there.

:mp5: :sniper: :headbang:


Thats not what national ID cards are about, they are about bringing uniformity to the system by having a common ID rather than 56 different ones. If you are against cops asking you for an ID without reason then what you need to do is support laws to prevent cops from doing that and be against laws that allow them to do that. Such laws have nothing to do with a national ID card. They can do that whether you are using a state ID or a national ID, thus it is an entirely separate issue.

I like the idea of a national ID. Ive had to work an Identification & Registration security job before (which involves registering people, creating security and access badges for secure buildings, etc.). The problem was that people would come in with licenses from all sorts of different states. How was I supposed to know what the security features of the licenses in each state were? We werent trained in recognizing the characteristics of the licenses of each state. Heck, someone could create a license that does not resemble an official state license in any way and there is no way that we would know that the license was fake if it happened to be from a state we dont get many visitors from. Sure, we couldve been better trained, but such training wouldve been expensive and keeping up to date with the latest changes would be difficult too. I imagine that people who work at airports face the same problems. The way things currently work, someone interested in assuming a false identity has 56 different US licenses to choose from (50 states + 6 territories), they can shop around for the one they find easiest to counterfeit.

It would be so much better for security purposes if there was just one license rather than 56. The privacy implications of this? none. The real danger is if the government attempts to create a national database with a bar coding system. If the government tried to create such a system, that is what people need to fight, not the national ID card which by its self is harmless and extremely useful.

not to sound trite..but so what if it is hard for your job,get trained or get another job...what are you..a lazyhippie..lol..j/k

if you can make a fake dl..you can make a fake national id card...unless it is barcoded so you are at where you just said you dont want to be.

actually i guess it is a 2 part question,do you think there should be a national id(yuck) and do the police have a right to stop/detain and demand id if you are on the street and have not committed a crime...Depending on the circumstances. If a crime has just recently occured or if something has happened, then yes.
The idea behind national IDs is that if you get into a situation where identification is necessary, such as being witness to an accident, then you should have some with you. No one goes out of their house knowing that they won't be part of something were the police should know your identity.

not to sound trite..but so what if it is hard for your job,get trained or get another job...what are you..a lazyhippie..lol..j/k

This was a job I had before I graduated and moved on to better things.


if you can make a fake dl..you can make a fake national id card...unless it is barcoded so you are at where you just said you dont want to be.

That is not true. Some state ID cards are easier to create than others. For example, the ID for Puerto Rico as of last I saw was still the old laminated style. These are much easier to counterfeit than ones that use a card pre-printed with holographic watermarks (common in many states these days). On top of that, if I create an ID purporting to be from American Samoa, what cop or airport security official is going to be able to tell that it is a fake ID? What are the chances that they have seen an American Samoa ID card before and know that they are not supposed to look like the one I created?

It is a very basic security principle. It applies to any system, physical or logical. Your security is not the sum of all the measures you take, your level of security is equal to your weakest link. For example, if you have the greatest lock ever created mounted on the strongest door ever made but your window is large enough for a person to fit through and made out of glass, then your security is not made better by the door and lock, your security remains extremely weak because breaking the window and climbing in makes the door irrelevant. With 56+ ID cards available, the government has no control over what the weakest link is. Worst of all, it places greater burden on what is typically the weakest link of any system, the human (by forcing them to learn to identify 56+ different types of ID each with different security features).

Well after thinking about this for a few seconds , I decided that if the government wanted a national ID card all they would have to do is issue Social Security cards with a hologram / photo ID on it. After speaking with police friends on the job and others in law enforcement its pretty plain that they would loath having to check IDs of normal everyday citizens and do not support a mandatory ID . BUT concede it would come in handy in certain situations .

Really. Hmmm. ;)

Pulled from the United States Constitution:

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Pulled from the United States Constitution:
National ID's wouldn't violate the 9th. A national ID doesn't deny or disparage any rights of the people.

Someone who has a better understanding of Constitutional Law would have to tackle the 10th.

I oppose a Nat'l ID. While it may "make us safer", there is to much in the way of possibility for abuse by the Federal Gov't.

Even w/ a system such as the NICS, there are already cases of Federal Authorities illegally using data from it to harass individuals.

i guess i am old school american..."someone that trades freedom for security,deserves neither"

As am I. I do NOT approve of national ID. To hell with big brother.

we already have a national id.

it's called a passport. It's not mandatory unless you plan to travel far outside the United States.

However, i don't think i would oppose a national id for DL/voting/etc. Just don't attach my bank accounts to it or expect me to be able to charge it.
1. it would make it easier on the people who need to ID other people, less chance of fraud.
2. it would take less space in my wallet.
3. Would probably streamline gov't spending/jobs on making IDs for DLs and what not, and thus be cheaper on everyone.
4. can't think of anything else atm.

hell, here in texas, we don't need a bar code. the DL has a magnetic strip that businesses can swipe to see if you're 21 or not. It at least pulls the name and address info on it. Don't know of those are stand-alone machines being used to swipe or not...

Wow, how did it go from having a nationally recognized ID card to prove citizenship when voting to a police state, stoping people in the street without probable cause, rampant civil rights violations, and Republicans are Satan incarnate and Democrates can do no evil?

You're obviously not American...or if you are, you got your head in the sand, or you would know that these subjects are very closely related. and it is all happening on the Republicans' watch. How can I see them as anything other than evil, filthy, dirty...when they have ripped apart everything that was once good about this country, and laid it to waste?

I like the idea of a national ID. Ive had to work an Identification & Registration security job before (which involves registering people, creating security and access badges for secure buildings, etc.). The problem was that people would come in with licenses from all sorts of different states. How was I supposed to know what the security features of the licenses in each state were? We werent trained in recognizing the characteristics of the licenses of each state. Heck, someone could create a license that does not resemble an official state license in any way and there is no way that we would know that the license was fake if it happened to be from a state we dont get many visitors from. Sure, we couldve been better trained, but such training wouldve been expensive and keeping up to date with the latest changes would be difficult too. I imagine that people who work at airports face the same problems. The way things currently work, someone interested in assuming a false identity has 56 different US licenses to choose from (50 states + 6 territories), they can shop around for the one they find easiest to counterfeit.

It would be so much better for security purposes if there was just one license rather than 56. The privacy implications of this? none. The real danger is if the government attempts to create a national database with a bar coding system. If the government tried to create such a system, that is what people need to fight, not the national ID card which by its self is harmless and extremely useful.


I call bullshit. I used to work at a grocery store in Texas. In Texas, one can purchase beer and wine in the grocery store, and so I have seen my share of fake ID's. Most fakes are not very good.

I remember one time, a guy came thru my line with a Florida ID, so I got suspicious. I scrutinized the license, looking at the seal in the center, and it said "Texas Identification Services"...ON A FLORIDA DRIVER'S LICENSE!! So I knew it was as fake as the day was long.
I pretended to be looking for the date of birth, as I carefully examined other features. The guy, impatient, pointed out the date of birth for me. So I called my manager to my register.

Guy: what's the problem?
Me: Nothing. I just have to get my manager's approval on any out-of-state license. It's policy.
My Manager: Yes?

At this point I took my manager off to the side, and explained why the license was fake.

My Manager: Sell it to him.
Me: What?!?! I KNOW it's a fake!
Manager: Sell it.
Me: Nope. Tell you what...YOU come behind my register, YOU sell it to him, and then I will take back over.
Manager: Fine.

Manager goes back to my place at the register, sells the alcohol.
Guy begins to pick up bag as if to leave...sets it back down
Guy pulls a second wallet from his back pocket, flips it open.

Guy: TABC, you're busted!

My manager turns ghost-white.
Guy write out a $250 ticket to my manager.

Guy then turns to me.

Guy: Why wouldn't you sell me that stuff?
Me: You need a better fake. That license is as fake as the day is long.
Guy: you gotta be kidding me, I got 600 dollars worth of shit in my car, and you're the first one to even question me. Why do you say I need a better fake?
Me: Because you don't see "Texas Identification Services" on the seal of a Florida driver's license.
Guy: You're good, no one else has picked up on that, but you're right....you are good.
Me: No...not good...just observant, and well-trained.

Needless to say, three months later, that manager finally found a reason to fire me, and did so. Can't say I was surprised!

My point: If you are well-trained, and observant, you can usually pick out a fake. And what makes you think, for even a second, that someone will not fake the national ID cards?

i disagree..in a way it does,i am not so much against the 1 id thing but i am very much against having to produce identity everytime a cop wants to stop you for no good reason...and they are doing that...to generate revenue...not for our security but to snag people with warrants and mv violations.

the first thing outta a cops mouth now is..licence registration and insurance.or give me your id...why...tell me what you want or what i did,if you dont believe my answer then arrest me.

it just grates me that someone can boss me around i guess ,because they want to...i dont walk down the street demanding things from strangers,i guess i would have been happier in the old days when if you werent bothering anyone..you werent bothered.

i know that sounds childish,but i like to go around unmolested if i am not doing anything.
hell,after what happened to me last week,i was talking to a neighbor and they said yea..i know,i was walking my dog and a cop demanded id from me...how the hell did we get here.

the conservatives have betrayed the ideals i use to respect them for...what are we soviet russia or nazi germany now?
and i am not so foolish to think the dems are equaly malicous in there reasons for wanting my info.

i guess i just want to be able too walk unmolested without having to prove who i am to some jbt when i havent done anything,and your kidding yourself if you think we aint heading there.

:mp5: :sniper: :headbang:


Yep. And remember on WHOSE watch this all has happened! The Neocons. The Republicans. I hate them. They've killed my country!

Yep. And remember on WHOSE watch this all has happened! The Neocons. The Republicans. I hate them. They've killed my country!

Really last time I checked America still had a pulse....in sofar as an inanimate country can have one...... :rolleyes:

Every member of the Armed Forces has to have an ID card. I see nothing wrong with every voter having to have a voter ID.
He didn't mean every voter. He means every citizen.

I'm not sure about the ID Card issue. I have yet to be convinced of its necessity, but I am not ideologically opposed to it. Come on people, it's not a civil liberties violation.

Lol I am an ultra strict constructionist
Hey, I am Swimmingpool. Perhaps I can bring you back to the reality of the modern world.

I think there may well come a day when a lot of people are gonna wish they WEREN'T findable! Because I believe the evil neocons will abuse this and turn this country into a police state. This is just the first step.
They would never get away with turning America into a police state. Americans are so heavily armed; they would never get away with it.

And, no, the cops have no right to stop you if you are not doing anything wrong. What the hell ever happened to presumption of innocence...and illegal search and seizure? For sure, some cops may well decide to rough you up, just because you're a member of a minority group that they don't like...and in the end, who will be believed? The cop...or you?

This is a massive assault on our civil rights.
What has this got to do with national ID Cards?

P.S. I only feel this way because of the political party currently in power, because I believe THEY (the Republicans) WILL abuse it. I do not believe the Democrats would. In my opinion, at least, Democrats do not do evil...and Republicans do not do good.
OH, and you're not a partisan hack. :rolleyes:

Both parties are almost the same.

I read 1984, and it is eerie how much of what was in there, and seemed impossible...is now coming to pass under the evil Republicans.

The novel 1984 was not a prophecy. It was a parody. George Orwell just looked at the USSR and Nazi Germany and wrote about what he saw there.

Actually, no...I despise Hillary Clinton. she has sold us out, and gone over to the Dark Side. She's more right-wing than her husband was.
She is a Democrat though.

I wouldn't vote a Republican dogcatcher. They hate workingpeople and poor people. They care only about the wealthy white folk.
Just like most of the Democrats these days. You think Clinton was not a cold hard capitalist conservative?

Also, why do so many begin their posts to me with, "I have nothing but respect for you ... BUT ...!" Sigh.
It's because they're a bunch of weak lemmings. At least I don't pretend to respect you.

How can I see them as anything other than evil, filthy, dirty...when they have ripped apart everything that was once good about this country, and laid it to waste?
Exaggeration? I don't like Bush and co. but they have hardly changed all that much. America was already up the creek even before Bush came to power.

She is a Democrat though.


She's a DINO. Democrat In Name Only.

She's a DINO. Democrat In Name Only.
Well, Democrat is only a name and nothing more. Thus, all Democrats are Democrats In Name Only.

( shrug ) Where in the Constitution is it prohibited? Hmmm?The Tenth Amendment.

She's a DINO. Democrat In Name Only.

I hate this type of labeling. Shit like RINO and DINO is the political equivilent to a racial slur. It only exists as a derogitory term to try to make people of one party think the person is really siding with the other.

Not that I'm aware of, unless you're under suspicion of having committed a crime.
the US Supreme Court disagrees (http://www.papersplease.org/hiibel/index2.html)

I don't know why anyone would claim they can trust Democrats with personal information any more than Republicans. Likely the opposite in fact.

Sen C Schumer (D-Penitentiary), breaks the law. (http://www.newsday.com/news/printedition/nation/ny-usschu224436974sep22,0,7846085.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-print)

The odd thing is, Schumer wasn't even running against this guy or anything. He's just a general "enemy" of the democrats. Further, one of Schumers big platforms is credit privacy.

Given the silence of the democrats on this, I would say that they are probably less trustworth with people's private information.

Oh, and national ID is a silly idea, because the federal government has no general police power.

Not that I'm aware of, unless you're under suspicion of having committed a crime.

I'm rusty on my criminal procedure, but here is what I remember:

Yeah the police can stop you and ask you your name and where you are going, etc. Your refusal to answer may lead to a higher level of suspician that will allow further police conduct.

They only need a small amount of suspician (probable cause) to do a stop and pat and actually pat you down on the street. A higher level of suspicion (probable cause) is required to actually detain you. Higher still for arrest and then a higher level for indictment and survival of the probable cause hearing surely to follow.

If I remembered this incorrectly, please set me straight.

I'm rusty on my criminal procedure, but here is what I remember:

Yeah the police can stop you and ask you your name and where you are going, etc. Your refusal to answer may lead to a higher level of suspician that will allow further police conduct.

They only need a small amount of suspician (probable cause) to do a stop and pat and actually pat you down on the street. A higher level of suspicion (probable cause) is required to actually detain you. Higher still for arrest and then a higher level for indictment and survival of the probable cause hearing surely to follow.

If I remembered this incorrectly, please set me straight.

your right. it started w/ an off duty detective (or cop) who was near a jewelry store, and saw a guy pocket a handgun. Then the cop stopped him before the crime was commited and searched him, found the handgun and took him to jail (i think this was before conceal n' carry laws :P)
the guy challenged on illegal search and seizure, but it wasn't held up. And thus cops can search you on suspicion(sp) only.

National ID's wouldn't violate the 9th. A national ID doesn't deny or disparage any rights of the people.

Someone who has a better understanding of Constitutional Law would have to tackle the 10th.

Path:


The Constitution only allows the gov't to do things. Everything not in the constitution is prohibited. Not that the Supreme Court cares anymore :/

Of course, provisions are made to append the Constitution

Really. Hmmm.



Pulled from the United States Constitution:


Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

You're obviously not American...or if you are, you got your head in the sand, or you would know that these subjects are very closely related. and it is all happening on the Republicans' watch. How can I see them as anything other than evil, filthy, dirty...when they have ripped apart everything that was once good about this country, and laid it to waste?
I have to pity you. I actually think you believe what you are writing.

Please, post non-personal examples of police state, civil rights violations, stoping without probable cause that is directly related to the idea of national ID.

I think its the mark of the beast. or at least a predeccessor. I know how laughable that sounds but oh well. I hate anti privacy acts like that

I don't know why anyone would claim they can trust Democrats with personal information any more than Republicans. Likely the opposite in fact.

Sen C Schumer (D-Penitentiary), breaks the law. (http://www.newsday.com/news/printedition/nation/ny-usschu224436974sep22,0,7846085.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-print)

The odd thing is, Schumer wasn't even running against this guy or anything. He's just a general "enemy" of the democrats. Further, one of Schumers big platforms is credit privacy.

Given the silence of the democrats on this, I would say that they are probably less trustworth with people's private information.

Oh, and national ID is a silly idea, because the federal government has no general police power.

Yeah??
Congressman Tom DeLay (R-Felon) Indicted AGAIN!! (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9583433)

I have to pity you. I actually think you believe what you are writing.

Please, post non-personal examples of police state, civil rights violations, stoping without probable cause that is directly related to the idea of national ID.

Yes. I do believe it. Every word of it.

And, does it matter if I post non-personal examples...you still won't buy it, anyway, because you're obviously a shill for the right wing.

Yeah??
Congressman Tom DeLay (R-Felon) Indicted AGAIN!! (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9583433)

he isnt convicted yet, you should know that, all liberals are all for the innocent untill proven guilty for all people, oh, is that except for people we dont like?

Yes. I do believe it. Every word of it.

And, does it matter if I post non-personal examples...you still won't buy it, anyway, because you're obviously a shill for the right wing.

and your obviously ignorant enough to think right is bad and the left are perfect gods.

National ID's wouldn't violate the 9th. A national ID doesn't deny or disparage any rights of the people.

Someone who has a better understanding of Constitutional Law would have to tackle the 10th.

Congress probably has the authority to create national IDs through Article I, section 3...the commerce clause. But the way they'll do it is through appropriation and spending bills.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the REAL ID Act (though I've only scanned the previous pages). Congress passed this just five months ago -- it standardizes all driver's licenses and IDs throughout the US and will be overseen by Homeland Security. For example, now every state will have to keep certain records of everyone who applies for a card for a certain number of years, each card will have to use a common technology (most likely RFID, which is incredibly stupid in my opinion) among other things.

You can read the REAL ID act here:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.00418:

You can read an FAQ here:
http://news.com.com/FAQ+How+Real+ID+will+affect+you/2100-1028_3-5697111.html

As for my personal opinion, I believe that national ID cards will do nothing significant to increase our security or safety. What they will do, though, is undermine the American spirit of independence and chip away at our cherished belief in privacy.

and your obviously ignorant enough to think right is bad and the left are perfect gods.

And you....vice-versa.

[

"As for my personal opinion, I believe that national ID cards will do nothing significant to increase our security or safety. What they will do, though, is undermine the American spirit of independence and chip away at our cherished belief in privacy. "

a big amen and attaboy to you.

i was of mixed opinion about the national id previously...and definately against being forced to produce id on demand from leo unless there was some type of probable cause.

now i am steadfastly against a national id...it is just one more step towards our loss of individual freedoms and a step towards a police state..i allready see how the police abuse there authority on a daily basis.

if they were really serious about security,they could start with doing something about the thousands of illegal aliens that come here daily....and i am not against immagration...just against illegal immagration is all.

a national id does nothing towards that goal,just makes me a crimminal if i dont jump on board.

[

"As for my personal opinion, I believe that national ID cards will do nothing significant to increase our security or safety. What they will do, though, is undermine the American spirit of independence and chip away at our cherished belief in privacy. "

a big amen and attaboy to you.

i was of mixed opinion about the national id previously...and definately against being forced to produce id on demand from leo unless there was some type of probable cause.

now i am steadfastly against a national id...it is just one more step towards our loss of individual freedoms and a step towards a police state..i allready see how the police abuse there authority on a daily basis.

if they were really serious about security,they could start with doing something about the thousands of illegal aliens that come here daily....and i am not against immagration...just against illegal immagration is all.

a national id does nothing towards that goal,just makes me a crimminal if i dont jump on board.
I've seen the argument that it's a "step towards our loss of individual freedoms..." but so far no one, not even Lyric, can explain just how a national ID would cause a loss of individual freedoms.

Please provide some explanation as to why it would be such.

I've seen the argument that it's a "step towards our loss of individual freedoms..." but so far no one, not even Lyric, can explain just how a national ID would cause a loss of individual freedoms.

Please provide some explanation as to why it would be such.

The right to privacy is a long honored right for Americans and its history can be traced from the common law notion of "a man's home is his castle," to the first, third, fourth, fifth and ninth amendments, to Griswold v. Connecticut and so on.

The REAL ID Act, which I mentioned above, threatens this right in at least three ways:

1. First of all, it requires that every driver's license and state ID card contain the full address of your residence. Why is this bad or different? In the past, you could have a PO Box listed -- this is very important for people like police officers who could be in danger if people could easily find where they live.

2. In order to get a license or ID, you'll need to show documentation of your legal status, residence, and et cetera. Copies of these documents must be kept by the state for 7 - 10 years. The database from each state will be linked to one another and will be available to state and federal authorities.

3. Each license and ID must have "common machine readable technology." This means barcodes, magentic strips or RFID tags. Either way, it will be easy for third parties to mine the data from your ID card. Bars can swipe or scan the card to see your age -- but then they can also keep your data and sell it to information companies (think telemarketers) to make money. If it's RFID, it's even worse -- you could be sitting at starbucks and any nerd with a laptop and the right equipment could scan your information as you walk past him (some have gotten RFID scanners to work from 10 meters away).

I'm not talking about a hypothetical situation, guys -- this is the new law. It was passed in May and states must comply by 2007. You will have to get a new license by then to make sure your's is up to date. If you don't, states will likely not officially recognize your pre-REAL ID driver's license.

The right to privacy is a long honored right for Americans and its history can be traced from the common law notion of "a man's home is his castle," to the first, third, fourth, fifth and ninth amendments, to Griswold v. Connecticut and so on.

The REAL ID Act, which I mentioned above, threatens this right in at least three ways:

1. First of all, it requires that every driver's license and state ID card contain the full address of your residence. Why is this bad or different? In the past, you could have a PO Box listed -- this is very important for people like police officers who could be in danger if people could easily find where they live.

2. In order to get a license or ID, you'll need to show documentation of your legal status, residence, and et cetera. Copies of these documents must be kept by the state for 7 - 10 years. The database from each state will be linked to one another and will be available to state and federal authorities.

3. Each license and ID must have "common machine readable technology." This means barcodes, magentic strips or RFID tags. Either way, it will be easy for third parties to mine the data from your ID card. Bars can swipe or scan the card to see your age -- but then they can also keep your data and sell it to information companies (think telemarketers) to make money. If it's RFID, it's even worse -- you could be sitting at starbucks and any nerd with a laptop and the right equipment could scan your information as you walk past him (some have gotten RFID scanners to work from 10 meters away).

I'm not talking about a hypothetical situation, guys -- this is the new law. It was passed in May and states must comply by 2007. You will have to get a new license by then to make sure your's is up to date. If you don't, states will likely not officially recognize your pre-REAL ID driver's license.

that sickens me as an american.

i guess i gotta pay those old mv warrants now...lol...or should i just get off the scope and let the real(read)sheeple enjoy the liberties i use too...wtf..i am sick.

I remember one time, a guy came thru my line with a Florida ID, so I got suspicious.

A clear indication that seeing IDs from different states is unusual where you worked, this of course, would not apply to some of the more important places where you would want to reliably check an ID (on a freeway, at an airport, at a military installation, etc.). At such places, the suspicion you got would have never come up because its normal to see out of state IDs.


[snip]
Guy: you gotta be kidding me, I got 600 dollars worth of shit in my car, and you're the first one to even question me. Why do you say I need a better fake?
Me: Because you don't see "Texas Identification Services" on the seal of a Florida driver's license.
Guy: You're good, no one else has picked up on that, but you're right....you are good.


Your personal experience, if true, just reinforces what I already said, it is far too easy to fool people who are supposed to scrutinize ID because you have 56+ different ones to choose from. The fact that you were the only person able to spot the fake and you clearly admit that most people were unable to do so simply proves my point.


My point: If you are well-trained, and observant, you can usually pick out a fake. And what makes you think, for even a second, that someone will not fake the national ID cards?

A bad fake, yes. A good fake? No. If you knew nothing about Florida licenses and that license had not had such an obvious mistake, you would not have spotted it. Of course people will make fake national ID cards, you can never fully stop people from doing that. But you can make it far more difficult and costly. The same thinking applies to currency. You can never make currency completely counterfeit proof, but by having only one standard currency and then informing people on the security features built into that currency, it becomes far more difficult for a person to counterfeit currency. Yes, it is still possible, and you can never eliminate risk completely, but it is far more difficult and only people with extensive resources would be able to pull off a good counterfeit. The fact that you will never be able to stop something completely does not mean that you should give up and make it easy. You can never make your home completely immune to burglary either, but that doesnt mean you should leave doors open.

The right to privacy is a long honored right for Americans and its history can be traced from the common law notion of "a man's home is his castle," to the first, third, fourth, fifth and ninth amendments, to Griswold v. Connecticut and so on.

The REAL ID Act, which I mentioned above, threatens this right in at least three ways:

1. First of all, it requires that every driver's license and state ID card contain the full address of your residence. Why is this bad or different? In the past, you could have a PO Box listed -- this is very important for people like police officers who could be in danger if people could easily find where they live.

2. In order to get a license or ID, you'll need to show documentation of your legal status, residence, and et cetera. Copies of these documents must be kept by the state for 7 - 10 years. The database from each state will be linked to one another and will be available to state and federal authorities.

3. Each license and ID must have "common machine readable technology." This means barcodes, magentic strips or RFID tags. Either way, it will be easy for third parties to mine the data from your ID card. Bars can swipe or scan the card to see your age -- but then they can also keep your data and sell it to information companies (think telemarketers) to make money. If it's RFID, it's even worse -- you could be sitting at starbucks and any nerd with a laptop and the right equipment could scan your information as you walk past him (some have gotten RFID scanners to work from 10 meters away).

I'm not talking about a hypothetical situation, guys -- this is the new law. It was passed in May and states must comply by 2007. You will have to get a new license by then to make sure your's is up to date. If you don't, states will likely not officially recognize your pre-REAL ID driver's license.
This post is an excellent delineation of the potential for identity theft. However it doesn't show any civil rights violations.
Far cry from the police state some people are crying about.