Slashdot Mirror
Connecticut To Store Biometric Information
AugstWest writes: "I just got word that when I renew my driver's license, I will have to submit to allowing the CT DMV to store biometric information, as well as smile for facial recognition software from Viisage to be able to continue driving. I am so appalled, I don't even know where to begin. With all of the national law enforcement agencies opening up their databases to each other, is this the first step in taking a surveillance society to a tracking society?"
Like, for example, here in south carolina. Except, here, they don't tell you that they are doing it. At least you in conneticut have the privelege of knowing what rights you are losing; here, they never mentioned it. PS: new system has been in place for several months.
---
the pen is mightier than the sword, the sword is mightier than the court, the court is mightier than the pen.
we still have the old picture-less licenses. blows their mind at the out of state car rental counters. just renewed mine and it expires in 2006, so i guess i am hopefully good until then.
The difference is that the authorities can't use a computer to see into your pocket and get all your personal information (name, address, SS#, etc), however they can set up video cameras everywhere, even in public. and scan your face and have all that info and more.
Do you think the government should know where you are at all times? That's what they're shooting for.
Example 1: Nazi Germany. Not a hell of a lot of freedom there. Back then, the threat to Germans' livelihoods was not terrorism, it was hyperinflation and the Great Depression. So the Germans made a deal with Hitler to trade their freedoms in exchange for decent employment and material comfort. Well, the safety of 6 million Jews and others Hitler considered enemies were pretty thoroughly compromised between 1933 and 1945.
Example 2: Stalin's Soviet Union. Very similar to Hitler, both in the circumstances leading to his acension to power, and in the way he treated those he felt threatened his power base. As a matter of fact, Stalin may have killed up to 40 million people during his 30 year rule.
Example 3: Twenty-first century Israel. How ironic, considering that within the lifetimes of many of those living there the Jews were themselves the targets of one of history's great atrocities by a police state. And now, by and large, they have become one themselves. Granted, Prime Minister Sharon and his predecessors have not been as evil as Hitler and Stalin, but the tendancy since Israel's founding, and especially since 1967, has been towards increasing government power and declining individual rights for the sake of trying to prevent terrorism. And look where this policy has gotten them: absolutely nowhere. Suicide bombings at supermarkets, on buses, and in nightclubs and restaurants have become literally a weekly occurrence. While Israelis are still certainly freer than many other nations' citizens, they are undeniably less free than they were 35 years ago, and will probably be less free a generation from now than they are today. In fact, if Israel decides that the terrorist situation is worth going to all-out war for, this decline in rights may accelerate. And look how much safer Israelis are now in exchange for giving up many of their rights. Not much, if at all.
Bottom line: Police states tend to be no safer than democratic states, and in the long run can prove to be even less safe than free states. In addition to all the kinds of external threats that free states like the U.S. face, police states usually add one more threat to the mix: citizens' own government. IMHO, the Israeli situtation is a good lesson to Americans that giving up freedoms to the government in exchange for safety is a bargain in which the government usually doesn't hold up its end of the bargain for very long.
Instead of giving up our freedoms, we must find a way to get these herds of buffalo to defend their own interests and directly attack the threats of their safety and freedoms. It can be done. In fact it was done on September 11, where the passengers of Flight 93 gave the hijackers the finger and took control of their own destinies. They made sure that no more Americans on the ground would become additional victims the attacks (the hijacking of 93 came after the crashes in New York and Virginia), even if it meant the deaths of everyone on board that plane.
A couple of months later, the infamous shoe bomber was stopped by people who took personal responsibility over safety and freedom. Imagine how much safer and freer we could be if we could convince everyone to take responsibility for themselves. No, it still won't be a perfect world; once in a while a terror attack will manage to take place despite the best abilities of those best positioned to stop it. The only reason why those on the first three planes did not try to stop Sept. 11 is because they had no way of even imagining the plans of the hijackers. Occasionally sickos will again manage to outimagine sane people and carry out attacks; no government however free or totalitarian is going to stop these attacks either.
However, even in these circumstances, we can minimize the collateral impact of these future attacks by getting our asses immediately back off the canvas, implementing the appropriate measures (I don't consider things like installing Jersey barriers to deter future truck bombings of major buildings to be an assault on liberty) to prevent a similar attack from ever happening again, and moving on with our lives without relying on Uncle Sam to tell us how everything is going to be OK. Determination is the most potent weapon against terror, not guns or bombs. If the government or media can steer this herd of buffalo toward one goal, with time and effort we can steer it toward the goal of protecting both liberty and safety simultaneously. If we manage to do that, then we can all then laugh as Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, and all those who agree with these guys' tactics for expressing their political ideas get caught in the stampede.
When I got my Georgia drivers license ab out 5 years ago I had to have my thumbprint encoded on the back of the card.
I think this is a good thing, it's not like the government has planted a tracking device in it. If anything it has the potential to reduce identity theft, which is a big problem in the US
85% of Americans think this signature sucks
It really isn't the hassle that most assume that it is, I assure you. :-)
Oh, not having a car is most certainly a hassle.
I'm 26 and I have yet to own a car. At this point, the novelty has been completely lost, and yet I still need one.
Shopping is ridiculous without one. I can only buy so much as I can carry, which in terms of groceries is usually half of what I want. In terms of capital investments like tools, lumber, or furniture, being carless becomes an absolute joke. Home Depot laughs if you ask about delivery; why would you go to home depot without a car?
I'm limited in my shopping range to only the most convenient, rather than cheapest/best stores, which means I spend more money on inferior products. And it takes a minimum of an hour to go to the supermarket, even though it's right inside my freaking neighborhood.
Travelling is a joke. I tried going to suburbia once without a car, I figured that since everyone in suburbia has one, it would be fine. Nope, disaster. And in the urban environment in which I live, the few people who have cars are so protective of them that asking to borrow one is a serious imposition.
The economics of public transportation are a joke. The next-nearest airport to this city is an hour away. Bus fare is cheap ($15), but if you add in shuttle or taxi fare, round trip becomes $50-80.
If it wasn't the airport, I'd rent a car, as I do for all other trips. A car is $50 a day. Divide by 12 for a two-hour stint, and that $80 trip to the airport should be $4. Where did the other $76 go? To pay for the bus driver?
I admire the fact that you went your whole life without a car, but I can't imagine that it wasn't a hassle, or that you did it without generous help from car owners. My experience being carless is that simple tasks become logistical nightmares. Being carless consumes far more of my planning abilities than it deserves.
Georgia's DLs have these on the back.
And unfortunately Georgians need to put their right index finger on a scanner to get a license.
But as far as the bar codes go, which in Georgia are printed on the back of the licenses, don't worry. After a few months of taking it in and out of your wallet with the raised numbers of a credit card behind it rubbing on them, it gets completely unintelligible and smeared.
Yes, they (state DMV, and thus likely Fed Gov't computers) already have the biometric info you "voluntarily provided" (digital face scan, finger print, etc), but the vehicle of the DL card itself accurately retaining this is a very short-lived affair.
Andy