Are You Guys Ready For Your National ID Cards?

[Taomon]

Invasion of privacy is a strawman the size of the one burned in the desert and lack of funding is a goddamn joke.

So you condone domestic spying and are not concerned about the potential invasion of privacy inherent in the National ID card and RFID chips?

 

[mattskramer]

So you condone domestic spying and are not concerned about the potential invasion of privacy inherent in the National ID card and RFID chips?

I'm not bothered by it.

 

[Taomon]

I'm not bothered by it.

Anyone who would give up a little bit of freedom for a little bit of security deserves neither.

You are not bothered by it because you are a fool.

 

[Helios]

Natalie Halloway's circumstances are highly unique, so you cant really compare them to the issue at hand. Chips don't have to be implanted in YOU, they will be in the ID. The same ID you are required to carry around everywhere you go, the one you will need to drive your car and enter government buildings... If I had to guess what was to come next, it would be "Papers, please." The gestapo is already in place. Got the Blackwaters to keep us safe here at home. Hmm.. didn't something similar happen in Rome? Big empire, expanded until military was decentralized? Created an elite military police with a big political agenda, the Praetorian Guard? Praetorian Guard used to exorcise political enemies and keep the people suppressed? What came next... ah yes, Rome was overrun by barbarian mercenaries.



I can compare whatever I feel like, dude. If you reject the example then such is your own deficiency. Merely saying that Holloway doesn't count really isn't very impressive. UNIQUE? yes, yearly missing person reports suggest that it's a total blue moon event that an American goes missing.

You make staggering leaps of logic in that paragraph. I take it that you'vbe burned your social security card then? Have you sold your number to a Mexican who will appreciate it? No? Then spare me the paranoid gestapo routine. If someone asked you to prove who you are before voting then so be it. I know, it's almost as fucking nutty as proving your ID and using your SS# when opening a bank account, isn't it? Next thing you know the MAN is going to force you to pay with debit cards instead of cash! Those thumbprints used for verification when cashing a check?!? IT'S MADE FROM PEOPLE! IT's SOILENT INK!


Yeah, you can compare what you want. That doesn't make your comparison any less illogical. I'm saying like 100 kids go missing and get raped or whatever in the U.S. a year. Yeah, it's a problem. But it's not more significant than the welfare and privacy of the other 300, 000, 000 citizens. IMO, of course. You may want to put the security of a 100 over the 300 million.


Like I keep saying.. you tinfoil hat wearing nutters are in a tight race with dogma junkies in a race to see who is more irrational and reactive to paranoid delusions.

And you idiot mainstream conservatives and you idiot mainstream liberals are rather hilarious, arguing semantics with only Faux and CNN to help you... I pity you. You eat the scraps the ruling class kicks down to you.



Once again, without the chip you wouldn't be able to do shit. And if you could take it out, how does that make the principle of the Real ID Act any more desirable?


Don't worry, dude. After we have you in our clockwork orange entertainment center for a bit you won't even care!



You laugh because you don't know what's coming. I'll let you laugh at me for the few years until you realize the what the government is all about.

The premise of your question hinges on some delusional 1984 fantasy, dude. Why don't you go ask the Amish how heavy handed is the US government with it's applied standard. I guess, with the advent of electronic voting the Amish are just shit outa luck too, eh? You probably don't hear from too many Amish anyway since we've got em all sitting in a concentration camp waiting for re-education on switching from XP to Vista! Those bitches will conform!

Can you honestly say that National ID, removal of habeas corpus, and the MCA Act are not steps toward an Orwellian world? Maybe you haven't read 1984, or maybe you haven't looked around in your country as of late. I don't think we are there yet, but moving in the general direction of fascism.


Im confident that you'll be able to function without some revelations night terror turning the US into a Dark City landscape. You've functioned this far without the social security admin swoopin at your head like the SS, yes? There you go.

The price of liberty is eternal VIGILANCE. When you lose your VIGILANCE, you allow the government to spread out like an octopus, with one tentacle printing money, one tentacle in Iraq, one tentacle in Afghanistan, one tentacle erasing borders, and the other 4 taking money out of your fucking pocket.



I'm willing to sacrifice some employers' good day for continued freedom and liberty in America. The Real ID Act would end that.

Of course you are. Because cheap, plastic talking points that are void of critical thought beyond the same ole regurgitated shit from a generation that desperately wishes it was still the 60s is to your paranoid delusions what titties and ass are to marketing.

You have no evidence that a Real ID will produce fire and brimstone. You really are the left's version of Pat Robertson predicting the second coming every disapointed decade.

Well I'm all for closing the borders. That way you poor businessmen wouldn't have to worry about hiring illegals. Yes, there is no evidence that the government will abuse the Real ID. But the potential for easy abuse is clearly in the bill, I'm sure you could agree if you'd read it. And if there is potential for abuse, why are we allowing them to pass it? The government always fails when it's needed most (New Orleans, Iraq, etc.) and it would fail to represent our interests if we gave it too much power.



The amount of tracking possible with the social security number doesn't hold a candle to the tracking enabled by Real ID. Point challenged. Look up your facts kiddo.

You are a fucking crackhead. Point challenged? With what? A statement of opinion? OHHH NOOOOEZ! Again, here you sit crying about your paranoid delusion while your SS# is sitting on the the desk of a credit rating company. Right now. Right now, your identification can be used to track every location you use a debit card at. I can triangulate your location every time you use a cell phone. Did you refuse to show two forms of ID when being hired? Or, I almost garenfuckingtee, did you use your SS card and Drivers license to VERIFY your eligibility to work in the US? Hey, did you feel your tinfoil hat heat up slightly as you typed something in the google search bar that will be archived in a database?

I tell you what, why don't you do provide evidence that Real IDs will lead to more data mining than that which is already a fact of our collective American existence. As it is, I've given you specific examples of the benefits of a real ID and here you are offering me goofy fucking talking points that would make Ken Mehlman's crotch require sly readjustment.

Everything you've brought to the table is just as much an opinion as what I say. I'm giving you specific examples of the detriments of Real ID, and here you are offering me goofy fucking mainstream slobber.



You want to give access to all of the electronic information collected about you to ONE organization? That's smart. Power corrupts. You know the rest.

You mean like the Social Security Admin? Ignorance is contagious. Beware the FLOURIDE! Electricity is just a scam to make people dependent on the STATE! Run for the HILLS!

Whenever you don't want to respond intelligently to a point, you blow it out of proportion and scream "conspiracy theory"?

If privacy isn't a big enough concern for you, I don't know what will. If you want to believe the government isn't fucking you over, fine. But how can you relax if you know that the government knows what library book you just checked out. And that pair of underwear you bought yesterday. I'm not going to address WHY they need to know all this, but I will say the Real ID Act is a blatant violation of privacy, and should be shot down, if just for that.


How have you been "fucked over" specifically within the last 4 years? Go ahead and give me a non-rhetorical answer. AMAZON knows what fucking books you read every time you use AMAZON to order a fucking book, dude. Name one poor motherfucker that has been treated like Ferlinghetti in the last 50 fucking years. WAL MART doesn't know what undies you buy, with a debit card linked to your SS# no less?

I think our personal information shouldn't be avaliable even to companies, but that's another story. What I'm talking about here, is consolidation of information in the government. When the gov can access all information about you with the click of a button, I would argue they have too much power. Information is power.

No, please elaborate on WHY anyone would give the first flying fuck what book you read or underoos you wear. I'm all about reading funny, misguided delusional rants. Hell, I like schitzo fiction just like the next fan of sci fi.

Books: the medium for social change. Why would a growing government that is increasingly interested in restricting your freedoms want to know what you've been reading? Well, genius.. Common Sense by Thomas Paine inspired the American Revolution... need I say more about the power of literature? As for underwear. I was just making a point about privacy... why would they need to know every purchase you've made? That is the power Real ID would grant the government.

Sorry, your baseless opinion just isn't all that attractive as a national standard these days. If only you had more to give as a tangible reason for fear beyond, again, talking points that got old 20 years ago.

If you can't see the evidence posted in this thread (see Nuclear Winter spam), then you're beyond help.. you're standing on a sinking ship staring into the horizon pretending life is good.

don't worry, dude... you can always take your fucking ass to Mexico. I hear they don't give a fuck about their population enough to even enforce laws so you'll probably just love the anonymity, ya fucking unibomber.

Wait... what does Mexico have to do with this? You must be getting desperate... that's some random shit.





Hm... I wonder if you've ever read the Constitution.

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am10

Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

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.

uh, and this invalidates Real Id's how? Are you really going to tell me that you think the tenth Amendment prohibits a federal ID?

The tenth Amendment prohibits the federal government from superseding the State government.

Yes, i've read the Constitution. I guess the next question you need to ask yourself is if YOU understood what you were reading while acting like some poser trying to look smart.

Poser? Your fifth grade insults are notwithstanding bud. I've actually taken a year worth of Constitutional Law.. do tell me how you know about the constitution? Googled it?

Also, after you wipe your tears away from this mudhole being stomped, please show me where you have ANY enumerated right to privacy per the Constitution.

Calm down buddy, calm down.

The U. S. Constitution contains no express right to privacy. The Bill of Rights, however, reflects the concern of James Madison and other framers for protecting specific aspects of privacy, such as the privacy of beliefs (1st Amendment), privacy of the home against demands that it be used to house soldiers (3rd Amendment), privacy of the person and possessions as against unreasonable searches (4th Amendment), and the 5th Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination, which provides protection for the privacy of personal information. In addition, the Ninth Amendment states that the "enumeration of certain rights" in the Bill of Rights "shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people." The meaning of the Ninth Amendment is elusive, but some persons (including Justice Goldberg in his Griswold concurrence) have interpreted the Ninth Amendment as justification for broadly reading the Bill of Rights to protect privacy in ways not specifically provided in the first eight amendments.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/rightofprivacy.html





That means the Fed isn't supposed to call the shots. Hence, States should be able to pass their own ID laws. So explain again the constitutionality of the Real ID Act. Where in there does it say national ID is allowed?


Are you fucking kidding me? The FED doesn't call the shots when Ca decriminalizes pot? Did the FEDS call the shots when forcing Alabama to let blacks into its colleges? You play the part of an uber liberal yet you just used the same arguement that conservatives use to ban gay marriage!

Over the decades, the FED has gotten more and more powerful. But originally, constitutionally, it is supposed to be a strong but yielding alliance of the states, not the shot caller.



The Supremacy Clause is the common name given to Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, which reads:
" This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause

Have a taste of the Constitution, you political savant you.

The supremacy clause is meant to dictate the importance and enforcement of U.S. laws... however, the tenth Amendment is supposed to delegate the vast majority of political decisions to the States. In which case, there would be very few "U.S." laws and very many "State" laws. It's pretty logical, if you think about it. Every State differs extremely in economic income, population, political lean, problems... why would they all be subject to the same set of laws? It doesn't make sense.




Every State has denounced the Real ID Act, because of lack of funding and invasion of privacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_id_act

Yea yea yea.. they said the same thing about letting blacks off of the cotton field. Invasion of privacy is a strawman the size of the one burned in the desert and lack of funding is a goddamn joke. I suggest you reach for something a little more tangible than your paranoid delusions and total confusion regarding the Constitution, dude.

You know, like the specific examples detailing the necessity of a real Id like I posted.

All I've heard so far is Natalie Halloway and illegal immigrants. Still not worth the people's freedom and privacy.



Have a great life in Mexico, buddy.

What?

 

[mattskramer]

Anyone who would give up a little bit of freedom for a little bit of security deserves neither.

You are not bothered by it because you are a fool.

I call it reasonable curiosity as opposed to your paranoia.

Think! Haven’t you given up a little bit of freedom? If you work for an employer, doesn’t he submit information on your behalf to the SSA and to the IRS? How private is that? Think about the census that is taken every 10 years. That is not too private. Do you have the freedom to practice any religion that you may want to practice? Do you have the freedom to chant racial slurs in Harlem at night? Do you have the freedom to gambol or solicit prostitution? There rare many freedoms that you do not have. Do you have the freedom to run naked down the sidewalk?

After all of that, I guess that we do not have any freedom at all. I’m sorry but Ben, in his superlative and absolutist rhetoric, was wrong in this case.

 

[Helios]

I call it reasonable curiosity as opposed to your paranoia.

Think! Haven’t you given up a little bit of freedom? If you work for an employer, doesn’t he submit information on your behalf to the SSA and to the IRA? How private is that? Think about the census that is taken every 10 years. That is not too private. Do you have the freedom to practice any religion that you may want to practice? Do you have the freedom to chant racial slurs in Harlem at night? Do you have the freedom to gambol or solicit prostitution? There rare many freedoms that you do not have. Do you have the freedom to run naked down the sidewalk?

After all of that, I guess that we do not have any freedom at all. I’m sorry but Ben, in his superlative and absolutist rhetoric, was wrong in this case.

Privacy is relative. What one person sees as an invasion of privacy, another sees as perfectly justified. In my opinion, the government should receive any information about us, there's really no reason for them to know ANYTHING about us, other than birth-death records, without our prior permission. Why do they get to DECIDE to rule your entire life?

According to the constitution, you actually DO have most of the freedoms you listed. Except maybe prostitution and indecent exposure. But hey, you can do those things at home, just not out in public.

 

[Shogun]

So you condone domestic spying and are not concerned about the potential invasion of privacy inherent in the National ID card and RFID chips?

I am not quick to assume that either will be used for such a nefarious purpose since, like I keep saying, none of you have burned your Social Security card yet.

 

[Shogun]

Yeah, you can compare what you want. That doesn't make your comparison any less illogical. I'm saying like 100 kids go missing and get raped or whatever in the U.S. a year. Yeah, it's a problem. But it's not more significant than the welfare and privacy of the other 300, 000, 000 citizens. IMO, of course. You may want to put the security of a 100 over the 300 million.


hmmm.. lets see.. the paranoid delusion of a projected fear that has the validity of a nostradamaus prediction or tangible, yearly hazards to children everywhere in the US. Yes, clearly you brought your big guns.


And you idiot mainstream conservatives and you idiot mainstream liberals are rather hilarious, arguing semantics with only Faux and CNN to help you... I pity you. You eat the scraps the ruling class kicks down to you.

No, we think with our brains instead of the box of tinfoil. There is a reason you are on the FRINGE, dude. You know who else is one the FRINGE? Fred Phelps. enjoy your version of God Hates ID's silliness.


You laugh because you don't know what's coming. I'll let you laugh at me for the few years until you realize the what the government is all about.


No, I laugh because neither one of us can predict the future and neither one of us KNOWS whats coming but one of us is willing to look at FACTS outside of a paranoid delusional rant. I'll ask again, have you burned your SS# yet? NO!?!?!?! Then you obviously don't see the irony of your modern version of the same goofy argument. I know exactly what the governdment is about and, to your disappointment, it's not an X Files episode.


Can you honestly say that National ID, removal of habeas corpus, and the MCA Act are not steps toward an Orwellian world? Maybe you haven't read 1984, or maybe you haven't looked around in your country as of late. I don't think we are there yet, but moving in the general direction of fascism.


Bush's interaction with Habeas Corpus has absolutely nothing to do with a national ID any more than Lincoln was trying to conquer citizenship when suspending the same during the civil war. MAYBE I realize that 1984 was a piece of FICTION rather than a window into the future. for the love of god I hope you never read any Philip K Dick.


The price of liberty is eternal VIGILANCE. When you lose your VIGILANCE, you allow the government to spread out like an octopus, with one tentacle printing money, one tentacle in Iraq, one tentacle in Afghanistan, one tentacle erasing borders, and the other 4 taking money out of your fucking pocket.

You forgot the tentacle that protects your silly ass from an entire host of hazards that you take for granted.. Like regulating employment eligibility, providing for the common welfare and protecting your sorry ass from international threats. If you want to sidetrack the thread with a pissing contest on who can be more liberal then go start a thread. As it is, you really shouldn't point any fingers at blinded conservatives acting like sheep over terrorism paranoia while refusing to think beyond your political identity. You are on the road to being proven just as wrong as they were about phantom WMDs. Again, want to convince me you mean what you say? Then go sell your SS# to a mexican who will appreciate it.


Well I'm all for closing the borders. That way you poor businessmen wouldn't have to worry about hiring illegals. Yes, there is no evidence that the government will abuse the Real ID. But the potential for easy abuse is clearly in the bill, I'm sure you could agree if you'd read it. And if there is potential for abuse, why are we allowing them to pass it? The government always fails when it's needed most (New Orleans, Iraq, etc.) and it would fail to represent our interests if we gave it too much power.


closing the borders does WONDERS for filtering out the millions who are already here, don't they? As it is, I have to hire an illegal before I can run their ID. That is a catch 22 that requires that I break the law in order to follow it. Federal I-9's, which I'm betting you have no experience at all with, could take up to 6 months when validating work eligibility. Not to mention, that I guarantee that you could not differentiate between fake SS cards and legitimate ID. YES, there is NO evidence that the fed will abuse this any more than they have abused social security. Hell, the POTENTIAL to abuse the fucking military is always around but we don't use that to nix the armed forces do we? What legislation DOESN'T have the potential to be abused, for crying out loud? I mean, I realize that naming a state ice cream is fun for second graders but our government has a few other things to think about this side of the year 2000.

And no, the GOVERNMENT doesn't always fail like iraq and Katrina. Those are squarely the product of George W Bush. It's a total logical mindfuck to assume that this nation's government is shitty in every facet of it's authority independent of the specific policy makers involved. Hell, if you don't like it THAT much then spare me this discussion and move to Brazil.



Everything you've brought to the table is just as much an opinion as what I say. I'm giving you specific examples of the detriments of Real ID, and here you are offering me goofy fucking mainstream slobber.


No, since out of the two of us IM not the one ADMITTING that the government has no record that indicates future abuse, you are totally wrong. I've given you specific examples of the necessity for a nation ID as it relates to our current issue with illegal immigration... and you offer what? A fucking BOOK REPORT on 1984? Projected hypothetical that have as much basis in reality as a piece of fucking FICTION? Go get a job, homeboy... Take a step into the real world and burst your code pink bubble.



Whenever you don't want to respond intelligently to a point, you blow it out of proportion and scream "conspiracy theory"?



Yes, nothing says INTELEGENT POINT quite like regurgitating 1984.... Holy fuck let's assume commerce should be regulated by Ayn Rand fans next. Hey, I hear those "Birth of a nation" fans make GREAT masters of race relations! I saw Tron back in 1982 so maybe I should be the CEO of a tech company or something. Yes, I'm blowing your silly paranoid, tinfoil rebuttal out of the water with ACTUAL TANGIBLE FACTS. You know, like the above shotgun blast of articles indicating how easy it is to create fake ID. Tell it to Fred, dude. He'll listen as long as you are not a fag.



I think our personal information shouldn't be avaliable even to companies, but that's another story. What I'm talking about here, is consolidation of information in the government. When the gov can access all information about you with the click of a button, I would argue they have too much power. Information is power.


No, education is power. I suggest you start achieving one before letting the black 'copter crowd sway you into what amounts to cookie cutter arguments that are as profound as a hippy at a dead show wearing tye-dye and hemp rope. The gov can already access this kind of info with your SS# and yet.. you still keep that around... funny how that works. Establishing citizens from aliens is HARDLY too much power anymore than filtering law abiding drivers from serial drunk drivers is too much power.


Books: the medium for social change. Why would a growing government that is increasingly interested in restricting your freedoms want to know what you've been reading? Well, genius.. Common Sense by Thomas Paine inspired the American Revolution... need I say more about the power of literature? As for underwear. I was just making a point about privacy... why would they need to know every purchase you've made? That is the power Real ID would grant the government.


Can you show me a single example of a single citizen of the US being hogtied because of what he reads? For real, this isn't the Ferlinghetti trial and you are neither Alan Ginsberg nor Lenny Bruce. The power of literature doesn't validate the fuckwad brainfarts of every reader. If this were the case then Holden Caulfield and JD Salinger have a LOT to answer for. Again, before you start lecturing me on how books validate your paranoia go ahead and give me one example of ANY American being harassed by the fed for the books they choose to read... I'm betting you'll find proving this just as easy as you had of proving past abuse of Social Security numbers.


If you can't see the evidence posted in this thread (see Nuclear Winter spam), then you're beyond help.. you're standing on a sinking ship staring into the horizon pretending life is good.

SPAM? SPAM is your fucking evidence?




Yes, stand on your soap box ya doomsday cryer.. go get a sandwich board and take it too the masses like the voices in your head are telling you to do.


Wait... what does Mexico have to do with this? You must be getting desperate... that's some random shit.

Not at all, I'm advising you to exercise the rights that you have, and east germans wanted, to leave the country if you think it is so evil. So far, you have provided nothing to support your paranoia. Even going so far as to admit a total lack of historic evidence proving your point. You use a piece of fiction, 1984, as if it were a crystal ball and then post SPAM as evidence?




fucking bravo, man. Clearly, you know what you are talking about.


The tenth Amendment prohibits the federal government from superseding the State government.


10th amendment
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.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_amendment



Sorry, son.. you might want to take another look at that without your dumbo goggles on...

The Supremacy Clause is the common name given to Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, which reads:
“ This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause

Who'se the MASTER?

(this is where you say "Sho'nuff!")



Poser? Your fifth grade insults are notwithstanding bud. I've actually taken a year worth of Constitutional Law.. do tell me how you know about the constitution? Googled it?

CLEARLY that was money well spent. So, what did you change your major to after that semester?


Calm down buddy, calm down.

found that your quiver was empty, eh? So, did you REALLY just accuse me of googling for answers when that very source was the fourth hit on the same google search I just did?



Again, show me where the Constitution says you ahve a right to privacy rather than your interpretation of such using pieces of actual amendments.


Over the decades, the FED has gotten more and more powerful. But originally, constitutionally, it is supposed to be a strong but yielding alliance of the states, not the shot caller.

You just totally gloss over the entire reason there was initial debate regarding the powers of the states versus the fed, don't you? Take that argument to the ghost of George Wallace.


The supremacy clause is meant to dictate the importance and enforcement of U.S. laws... however, the tenth Amendment is supposed to delegate the vast majority of political decisions to the States. In which case, there would be very few "U.S." laws and very many "State" laws. It's pretty logical, if you think about it. Every State differs extremely in economic income, population, political lean, problems... why would they all be subject to the same set of laws? It doesn't make sense.


riiight.. just like we don't make every state conform to anti-discrimination laws, right? USDA regulation? FDA regulation? Sure, why on EARTH would we have expected ALABAMA to conform when, clearly, they were within their STATE RIGHT to segregate the college going population??




Indeed, every Dr prescribed cancer patient busted for federal marijuana laws despite decriminalization in CA reflects the truth of your words! After all, if New York wants to limit free speach during elections? It's their state right!

The tenth amendment specifically says that the test for which all other states rights must pass is "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution" while Article 4, clause 2 FROM THE CONSTITUTION says "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." Maybe you interpret this the same way that George Wallace did.


All I've heard so far is Natalie Halloway and illegal immigrants. Still not worth the people's freedom and privacy.


In your OPINION.... which, paired with assholes, is something we all have. Now, did you want to offer something tangible that validates your paranoia or is this where Im supposed to say "the truth is out there"? Natalie Halloway and Illegal immigrants are FACTS. Can you compete with this?


What?


enjoy whatever new nation that you emmigtate to that better fits your federal criteria. Imean, how can you STAND to have a social security number attached to your citizenship?!?!?!

 

[mattskramer]

I am not quick to assume that either will be used for such a nefarious purpose since, like I keep saying, none of you have burned your Social Security card yet.

Like I often say, so many issues are relative and subjective and on a sliding scale. There are very few, if any, absolutes. Anyone who comes up with an absolute can usually be presented with an exception. There are shades of gray almost everywhere and the debate about privacy and freedom is no exception. Even though we do not have absolute privacy, we still have a good amount of freedom in America.

 

[Shogun]

absolutely. And shit.. I argue FOR the ninth amendment too.


but.


in this case, people who carry SS#'s should not be crying about their chicken little predictions of the future when we NEED a tamperproof national ID in this period of illegal immigration. Like I said, I have to HIRE a motherfucker before I can verify his eligabiliy status. Thus, I have to break the law in order to abide by it. This is tangible bullshit miles beyond the same ole "world is going to end" predictions. If it gets abused? fine, we address the ABUSER. Are all American presidents pieces of shit just because W fucked up Katrina? fuck no. It's that kind of illogical shit that makes me sugesst selling your SS# to someone who will appriciate it on your way to attaining citizenship in Guatemala.

 

[NuclearWinter]

A review of U.S. state laws on privacy and driver's licenses shows that there is an enormous variety in the statutes that are on the books in the various states. This has two important implications. First, it is clear that many states do not have adequate protections in place to combat the type of privacy invasions that Real ID will spur, such as the ability of private businesses to grab all your data off the new, standardized "machine readable zones" that Real IDs will be required to contain.

Second, for Real ID to take effect, a lot of states that do have privacy laws and other laws governing driver's licenses will have to scrap or revise those laws. That process will often be complicated, controversial, and time-consuming, and is another of the many practical obstacles that this most impractical Act must overcome.

The following is a chart that provides an overview of the relevant state laws that will require change as a result of Real ID. It was prepared by Min-Jae Lee, Lauren Gelman and Jennifer Granick of the Cyberlaw Clinic of Stanford Law School. It provides state-by-state information based on the following five criteria:

Any mention of liberty or privacy in the state constitution. Real ID is likely to conflict with these fundamental protections.

Any controls over what type of information can be included on a driver's license. That in turn may govern what information can be contained in cards with machine-readable zones, such as bar codes, RFID chips, or magnetic strips. Where they exist, such provisions may need to be harmonized with Real ID - and where they're absent, they could allow the machine-readable zone to expand to contain an ever-growing amount of information about the cardholder.

Any privacy protections that the state currently mandates for the technology employed in the driver's license, such as digital image capture or magnetic strips. For example, some states bar inclusion of social security numbers, or data not on the face of the card, from current magnetic strips to prevent them from expanding into all-encompassing digital dossiers.

Any controls over who has access to the information contained on the physical license or in the MRZ. With a standardized national machine-readable zone, it will become easier than ever for a wide variety of peopl - from police officers and security guards to store clerks to bartenders - to access whatever data is on that license.

Any controls over what data can be collected from driver's licenses, where and for how long that information may be stored, and who is authorized to access that information. Where restrictions are lacking, private-sector companies, for example, will be tempted to begin compiling license data they grab into valuable databases that will be sold or traded.

As the chart demonstrates, many of the statutes crafted by individual states to protect the safety of their roads and the privacy of their citizens will be swept under the rug in favor of an unfunded mandate poised to do little to protect the nation from terrorism. The laundry list of state laws that will need to be revised in the face of the federal statute represents not only an enormously daunting feat for legislators, but also an arrogant, big government rebuke of states' rights.

Overall, it is clear that the Real ID Act's attempt to impose a rigid uniformity upon state licensing practices will have a sweeping impact on state laws protecting citizen and consumer privacy.

 

[NuclearWinter]

In a few states legislation has been introduced that tries to move the states closer to overall compliance with the Act. The fact that each of these bills is distinct in its aims indicates a lack of clarity about what Real ID will actually require.

Despite differences in the individual bills, however, there are several reasons why all these bills are a bad idea:

Real ID isn't a sure thing. As states begin to realize the huge price tag and administrative burden associated with Real ID, more and more are calling for Congress to revisit the Act. With such criticism mounting, it is far from certain the Real ID will take effect in its current form. States that attempt to comply now risk wasting vast sums of money on a misguided law that isn't set in stone.

They are premature. The Department of Homeland Security has yet to issue final regulations describing precisely what states must do to comply with the Real ID Act. The draft regulations that have been published are deeply problematic. Until final rules are in place, it is impossible to know exactly what steps must be taken to comply fully with the Act, and even after carrying out this kind of legislation, motor vehicle departments would not necessarily come into proper compliance.

It is unwise to buy a "pig in a poke." As the old saying goes, it is foolish to pay for something when you don't know what you're getting. Similarly, it is not smart to invest a large amount of state money in a Real ID bill without knowing how far this money will go toward actual compliance, and how much full compliance will ultimately cost.

They are incomplete. All the current bills that attempt to comply with Real ID leave out many required provisions of the Act. For example, many of the systems for document verification are either in their infancy or do not yet exist. Until the final regulations are released, it is impossible for states to draft complete legislation for Real ID implementation.

 

[NuclearWinter]

Passage of any legislation enabling the federal REAL ID Act of 2005 is premature. REAL ID forces almost every American over the age of 16 to carry a common identity document and use it for all federal purposes including flying or entering a federal building. In short it is a National ID. REAL ID law represents a grave danger to the privacy of citizens and lawmakers should be cautious in implementing any of its provisions.

REAL ID will represent an enormous administrative burden. States will likely have to copy, store and verify as many as four different documents in order to grant every drivers license. This will mean long lines for consumers and increased costs, either in the form of higher taxes or license fees. The DMV will also have to change the composition of their license and the way that information is stored in a machine-readable format. The Act also calls for the creation of a system to link all state motor vehicle databases. The cost of these changes is likely to run in the billions of dollars. Currently no federal funds have been appropriated to implement REAL ID.

The Federal Trade Commission estimates that 10 million Americans are victims of identity theft annually. The drivers license contains valuable information for an identity thief including date of birth, gender, driver's license or identification card number, digital photograph, address and signature. Identity thieves recognize this and are increasingly targeting state Motor Vehicle Departments. REAL ID will make drivers license information accessible from tens of thousands of locations across the country.

Requiring the machine-readable elements of the drivers license to be standardized enables the private sector to collect and save this information. Bars swiping licenses to collect personal data on customers will be just the tip of the iceberg as every convenience store learns to grab that data and sell it to data aggregators like ChoicePoint. This data will become part of existing private sector databases not subject even to the limited privacy rules in effect for the government.

 

[NuclearWinter]

In the days after 9/11, President Bush and others proclaimed that we must not let the terrorists change American life. It is now clear that despite its lack of effectiveness against actual terrorism we have allowed our security agencies to push us into making a deep, far-reaching change to the character of American life. Identification is already necessary to board a plane, open a bank account or participate in many routine activities that are part of living in a modern society. REAL ID dramatically expands the use of identification and its intrusions. It was passed without hearing or stand-alone vote on its merits in Congress. The federal government has already abdicated its responsibility to consider the serious issues raised by REAL ID.

REAL ID requires the capture of a digital photograph that lays the groundwork for a sophisticated biometric system that allows for electronic storage and easy comparison against other facial images. The new system envisioned under REAL ID warrants a rethinking of this open access by law enforcement.

Legislators have a duty to see that whatever state level legislation passes regarding REAL ID addresses these real and serious concerns. Moreover, if none of these issues are addressed the state must consider the possibility that, in order to protect the rights of Americans, the states must reject REAL ID and attempt to force Congress to repeal or amend it.

 

[NuclearWinter]

What are the States saying about REAL ID? Not good things:

ALABAMA

Alabama's attempt to take Real ID for a test drive has been a disaster.

"Legislator Says He Will Oppose National License," The Times Daily, February 9, 2007. http://www.timesdaily.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar.../702090328/1011

"Real ID Intrusive, Says State Lawmaker," Tuscaloosa News, February 7, 2007. http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/2007...341/1010/NEWS05

"Driver's License Woes Expected to Get Worse," Tuscaloosa News, November 5, 2006. http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/apps/pbcs.dl...389/1007/NEWS02

National survey of motor vehicles administrators uncovers deep concern over Real ID across the nation.

"Documents Show Alabama Department of Public Safety has Serious Concerns About New Driver's Licence Law," ACLU Press Release; http://www.aclualabama.org/News/PressRelea...ghts/011306.htm

Mark Harrison, "License confusion possible," [Fort Payne, Alabama] Times-Journal, October 1, 2005 http://times-journal.com/story.lasso?WCD=4641Online >

Alabama officials' response to national survey of DMV's on problems posed by Real ID is available here. http://www.realnightmare.org/images/File/Alabama.pdf

Watch this space for actions you can take to stop Real ID in Alabama
For more information http://www.aclualabama.org/

 

[NuclearWinter]

ALASKA

"Lawmakers Consider Whether to Oppose National ID Card," Associated Press, February 15, 2008. http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=7876038

"Lawmakers Oppose National ID by Opposing Funds for it," Juno Empire, February 15, 2008. http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/021508...247185977.shtml

"Senator Calls Real ID Law an Intrusion," Anchorage Daily News, February 15, 2008. http://www.adn.com/front/story/315722.html

"The Answer Still is No," Anchorage Daily News Editorial, January 18, 2007. http://www.adn.com/opinion/view/story/286462.html

"'Real ID' Meets Opposition from State Lawmaker," KTUU News, January 12, 2008. http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=7617024

"National ID Card Proposal a Bad Idea," Anchorage Daily News Editorial, September 10, 2007. http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/091007...070910001.shtml

"Big Brother is Almost Here," Juneau Empire, July 13, 2007. http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/071307...esoped001.shtml

"Real ID Act has some concerned," KTUU Anchorage, March 4, 2007. http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=6175984&nav=menu510_2

Jo Dee Pederson, "Yes, I really am Jo Dee. Still. Really." Anchorage Daily News, November 1, 2006. http://dwb.adn.com/opinion/compass/story/8...p-8260700c.html

Alaska refuses to go forward with national ID system: SB-189 dies in committee. http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/get_sch...80000&comm=HSTA

 

[NuclearWinter]

ARIZONA

"Arizona GOP Lawmakers Vow Fight Against 3-in-1 License," The Daily Dispatch, December 17, 2007. http://www.douglasdispatch.com/articles/20...74691979267.txt

"Unlikely Allies Unite to Fight Enhanced-ID Plan," Arizona Republic, December 13, 2007. http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/l...icense1213.html

"Senate Bill on Path to Ignore Real ID," Tuscon Citizen, March 8, 2007. http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/local/44228.php

"Arizona Senate OKs Complaint About ID Law," Tuscon Citizen, February 20, 2007. http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/local/42508.php

"Bills Would Protect Arizona's Wallets, Privacy," Arizona Daily Star, February 13, 2007. http://www.azstarnet.com/dailystar/168921

"Feds Need to Add Reality to Real ID," East Valley Tribune Editorial, February 11, 2007. http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/83929

"No One Certain What Real ID Act Will Cost Arizona," Yuma Sun, January 12, 2006.

Arizona legislation prohibiting the Real ID Act. http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/48leg/2r/bills/hb2677p.htm

 

[Shogun]

fine then.. fuckit.


let the aliens come and mingle. I mean, we sure don't want to become THX-1138, do we!?!?!

it's right around the corner, you know....

oh.. and don't forget.. soilent green is made from PEOPLE!

 

[NuclearWinter]

fine then.. fuckit.


let the aliens come and mingle. I mean, we sure don't want to become THX-1138, do we!?!?!

it's right around the corner, you know....

oh.. and don't forget.. soilent green is made from PEOPLE!

lol. You act like the government is doing something about the problem as we speak.

Perhaps if they actually secured the border RIGHT NOW than people would have a little more faith in them. Not that the people would ever go for a National ID here in this free country, but at least we would trust the government more when it comes to protecting our borders.

 

[Shogun]

hell, even if they tried half of you would bitch about it and the other half would cry that either the antichrist or the illuminati were behind it.


Do you have a debit card? do you use it? Y'know when you swipe that bad boy and your bank account is charged instantaneously? Imagine that kind of time frame when determining eligibility for employment. Further, imagine if the current system was able to be spoofed with bubble jet printers making copies of your debit card as is the fact today.


Let me take a WILD STAB IN THE DARK and guess that you have also not burned your SS#.