Slashdot Mirror
Congress Debating National Driver's License Rules
hamelis writes "The NYT [FRR: bugmenot]reporting on Congress' attempt to set national standards for issuing driver's licenses. The Secretary of Homeland Security could require licenses to contain fingerprints or retinal scans, and while states are not required to cooperate, if your license doesn't conform to federal standards, you can be denied "access to planes, trains and other modes of transportation." Additionally, the House version would require states to keep all license data in a linked database for quick access, and calls for "an integrated network of screening points that includes the nation's border security system, transportation system and critical infrastructure facilities." How is this functionally different from a national ID card?"
why can't we just use passports for this? Some sort of ID/tracking is a cost of travel any more. I just don't see why the feds need to get involved with state issues, since this doesn't really have anything to do with driving.
Any vote cast for Kerry or Bush is interpreted as support, no matter the voter's actual reason for doing so - to stop one or the other from winning, etc. A vote for either of them is a vote legitimizing these policies.
I am voting Libertarian, but I hope you will vote Green, Constitution, Libertarian, or Socialist according to your beliefs. It is a great day and the time is now to "waste" your vote protesting these big brother policies from the duopoly.
The only "wasted vote" is a vote for either Bush or Kerry. It's wasted becuase they dont give a shit what you think, and it shows.
This scares the SHIT out of me. Would i need to show my national ID before I get on my city bus? How about when I cross state lines? Or get on a ferry?
PLEASE visit the Liberty Committee (Headed up by Congressman Ron Paul, who is a member of the Libertarian Party [even though he's on the Republican ticket]) at:
They have auto generating generic emails that they will send to your congressmen and women. Make your voice heard. DO SOMETHING, AMERICA, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!
Why do I need to carry a piece of paper that has scans of my fingerprints and retinas? I always carry the real things with me!
If the purpose it to store other information linked to the scans/prints, isn't it ridiculously vulnerable to store that data on a forgeable, able-to-be-mislaid or stolen piece of paper in my pocket rather than in a secure database inside a locked building?
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
Before everyone is 'chipped' at birth with some sort of non-removable multi-purpose chip which among other tasks tracks your position at all times.
The chip will be your ID, your method of payment, and will interact with chips embedded in other humans and products so that everything you do will be documented in real-time.
Perhaps the chip will enable the overlo.., um, government to 'correct' you if you're doing something wrong, such as getting into a high speed chase, or using p2p software.
Sure, our country, its associated government, and the life and people here in general are in many respects very different from the USA, but no one here ever even thinks to protest the existence of national ID's. It simply doesn't cause any problems here in anyone's daily life (and no, it's not intellectual laziness or submission to the Big Brother, either - people here like complaining about the tiniest "issues" and are very keen on bashing the government when necessary). Quite the contrary, it's considered a good thing to be able to verify who you are when you want to, as well as to be able to know with reasonable (not perfect) certainty that the person you are in contact is in fact who you think he is.
I mean, sure you have to present the ID from time to time, like when opening bank accounts, or when buying alcohol and looking like you're underage, or making purchases over 50 euros in value with a credit card or a creditless "bank card" (I don't know an equivalent English term for that one, that's a direct translation), or somesuch. There simply is no tracking or snooping into our lives through ID cards. You can walk the streets and interact with people with near-total anonymity, pay in cash, etc. The driver's licenses in our pocket don't change that.
A much worse form of espionage are the regular customer membership cards for various large retail chains - now there's efficient tracking for ya. And they're by no means alien to the USA, but I haven't seen much hubbub about those, even though they are solely a tool for consumer behavior analyzation.
The fact that everyone has a nationally standardized means of identifying themselves doesn't automatically lead to all these worst-case scenarios presented in this thread and who knows how many others in past threads on the subject.
Then again, maybe even average US citizens have some valid reasons to actually fear the emergence of national IDs, dunno. I suppose this thread will bring them out.
2004-10-05 17:44:39 National ID and backend database is on its way (Your Rights Online,Politics) (rejected)
/. rejects your stories only to have them appear a week later?
:
t em p/~r108wRaE7b:e176936:
Dont you love it when
I had a great doublespeak quote from the congressional record by john mccain on this.
Of course i didnt bookmark it DOH.
but he said something like this
1.st sentence "with this bill we are not making a national id"
next sentence "but we recognize that drivers licenses have become a defacto national id."
here is another part of the congressional record on this from Joe lieberman
"Our lenient border policies with our neighbors to the north and south today constitute a vulnerability. Travelers may now cross these borders with no other proof of U.S. citizenship than a verbal statement. Individuals claiming to be Canadians enter our country from Canada without showing a passport. The policies are evidence of our good relations with our neighbors, but in the age of terrorism, that friendship must allow for better security for the benefit of both.
Our amendment would require biometric passports, or an identification document just as secure, for everyone crossing into the United States, even U.S. citizens and our closest neighbors
"
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r108:1:./
Service guarantees Citizenship! Questions Guarantee GITMO.... Amerika Uber Alles!
The federal government has no jusrisdiction over intrastate transportation.
LMAO! From Wikard v. Filburn to Heart of Atlanta Model v United States to Katzenbach v McClung to Daniel v. Paul the Supreme Court has ruled time and time again that there need be very little tie-in to interstate commerce to regulate a wholly intrastate activity. United States v. Lopez has stemmed the tide a bit, but I highly doubt a case can be won against a law which regulates the intrastate portions of an interstate transportation company. Even if it could, do you think these companies are going to fight for your rights or are going to do whatever is most convenient for them? When you fly from San Francisco to LA do you have to show ID?
Simple. Don't vote for her at her next election.
So I don't vote for anyone, because every candidate has at least one issue which I disagree with? That doesn't accomplish anything.
However, I personally do not see how laws against drug abuse, excessive gambling (there is plenty of gambling in this country... what do you want, a craps table in every corner store?), and prostitution are somehow oppressing you.
The laws aren't against drug abuse, they're against cultivation of certain drugs and trafficking of certain others without a license, prescription, etc. They oppress me because they take away my right to grow pot, to buy glasses without going to a doctor, to put into my body whatever I want whenever I want to.
Some forms of gambling are legal in some places, but it's illegal for me to call up a friend in Las Vegas and place a bet on a football game. It's illegal for me to fund a PartyPoker account with paypal. And a bunch of other things, all of which oppress me.
As for prostitution, I'm not sure what the federal laws are regarding prostitution, and they're not oppressing me, but they are oppressing prostitutes.
One of the jobs of government is to protect people from themselves.
This is what I get for discussing things with an anon. IHBT.
What is this majority doing to change the laws?
The majority of people aren't doing shit.
They're certainly not electing leaders who agree with them.
The only way to elect a leader who agrees with you on everything is to elect yourself. Even if I was able to run for all positions (I'm too young), I certainly wouldn't be allowed to hold them all at the same time.
In 2000, the majority of the people in the US didn't even bother to vote in the single most important election our government has.
What, the Electoral College? The majority of people aren't allowed to vote in that.
If people want something done, they should do it.
I want all drug laws repealed, so I should do it?
Don't complain about the system just because people don't bother to use it. It's in place, it works. People just don't care.
It's in place. It doesn't work. And I have every right to complain about it.
Forgive my speeding, sir! Yes, sir! I am aware that I ran a red light three years ago, sir! Yes, sir! I have apologized for chewing gum in class in the third grade, sir! Yes, sir! Very insensitive of me, sir!
Local and federal authorities should be answering to the people--not the other way around. I was once stopped for speeding. I asked the officer, "When was the last time your radar was calibrated?" It's my right to ask--but the cop went ape-shit. "Are you questioning me, sir?!" I said, "No, officer--I'm questioning the accuracy of your instruments." Apparently, he didn't understand my question, because he asked me again, "ARE YOU QUESTIONING ME, SIR?!". He said "sir" with contempt rather than with respect--and never did he actually answer my question.
On another occasion, after moving into a new apartment, I had a neighbor call the police with a noise complaint. I hadn't realized how thin the walls were. By the time the authorities showed up, the stereo was alread off. He knocked on the door and I said (through the door), "Yes? Is there a problem officer?" He said, "I want to talk to you. Open the door." I said, "Well, what's the problem?" He said, "Just open the door." I said, "Do you have a warrant?" He laughed! He said, "I don't need a warrant." I said, "Well, it's not for you."
He yelled and demanded I let him in. Again I refused. He kept pounding for almost fifteen minutes. Finally, he kicked my door--hard--before he finally left.
Our representatives and civil servants are forgetting themselves--and it's only getting worse.
*Sorry--this is a repost. I forgot the breaks!
The assholes at the DHLS won't even TELL you what landed you on the list. You're effectively being interfered with without being told of the charges.
If you're TRULY innocent, even a rabble-rouser in word but not in physical act, you could land on that list, never get off, and if they know you're on a flight to points outside the US, they can effectively detain you.
Worse, still, this kind of listing FORCES, COMPELS a subduing of the nations most vocal, outspoken types, for they who have money and time to travel will keep low. Some already have been, long before the DNF List, preferring to use proxies or lobbyists. But, for those like myself who "mouth from the hip" (umm, a poor play on "shoot from the hip"(sucking of any kind is NOT inferred in this context...)), we could be in deep travel-suspension.
THIS is probably what the damned corruptos in office have been plotting, twiddling their thumbs over for months.
Possible resolutions:
If you're on the DNF List, and you have a clean record,
--then an agent could fly with you and threaten to blast you with a TASER or a cyanide-needle, as case needs determine
--the government could TELL you in timely fashion (especially now that they're getting booking information, but ad-hoc/last-minute flyers will be hit hardest) that you have to clear up some things before they un-highlight your name on the list
--the list needs to be made ADAPTIVE: Just because you get ON the goddamned wretched thing doesn't mean you're SUPPOSED to be on it; once they satisfy that in the near term no real corroborative negative information is sticking to you, they can command the DNFL to silently de-highlight your name and maybe you wouldn't even KNOW you're on it; even the airport ticket or counter agents might never know
--offer the DNFL people a group class charter plane, if they're all lucky enough to fly to general points in the general area; the plane could be shadowed, or the occupants could submit to being restrained to seats but that would be harsh, unusual, and cruel if stretches or bowel or bladder relief could not be facilitated; but REINFORCED DOORS between the cockpit and the pax would solve problems (as long as the cabin pressurization is not subject to abuse); hell, if some greedy, PHB airline officials long ago decided to install reinforced doors and electrical grids when they were cheaper (vs under emergency rush orders after 9/11) then 9/11 probably would have NEVER happened with airplanes-- it would have been something else, and we'd probably NOT have the damned No Fly List.
Many of these problems are the result of bean counters not paying close attention to HISTORY. Some assholes tried to hijack El Al, and the Israelis basically said "NOT EVER AGAIN". The US has a few hijackings and some ASSHOLE insurance companies want to raise rates (as they should if screening is lousy) but the airliners negotiate in back rooms and plead (it's unforseeable; it's never happened before (despite prior incidents in other nations where they conveniently remove that incident from reporting cuz it wasnt' on US soil...))
Now, here in the US, supposedly, we don't have enough sky marshalls on the planes. Airlines want to be REactive vs PROactive. The government (the current occupants/cabal and sulliers of the oval office) sees and grabs for more power, rather than FIXING our screwed-up foreign policy, energy policy, and play-favorites treatment of foreign nationals who starve or die daily from civil unrest.
DAMN, too much of the brownies today! But, have I LIED anywhere in my writings?!
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"