Blunkett Backs Down on UK ID Cards

Anonymous Brave Guy writes "Some people don't like the civil rights concerns. Some think they'll cost too much. Some think they'll lead to more identity theft than identity verification. Some think governments can't manage big database projects and there are bound to be mistakes and over-runs. Any way you look at it, compulsory ID cards have a lot of potential drawbacks, so is the UK's Home Secretary, David Blunkett, starting to back down from the idea? Combining ID cards with passports and driving licenses was the key way to force them on an often unwilling UK population, and seems to have gone for good, but apparently legislation to bring in some form of ID card is still likely in the next Queen's Speech. Is it the beginning of the end of a bad idea, or just more spin to dodge the remaining concerns?"

Comments

Re:i was thinking about them today...

[BasilBrush]

The BNP is a racist organisation. By being a racist you effectively exclude yourself from being either a teacher or a policeman. That's not to say there aren't racist police or teachers, but when they are found, they are got rid of. And being known to be a member of the BNP is a a way to identify such racists. Nothing wrong there, and no connection with an ID card.

What you guys seem to miss is that if the British government were replaced by a facist regime at some point in the future, not having an ID card won't help you. In that particular future, they'd still lock you up for speaking against the government, ID card or not. And they'd probably tattoo you with a bar code at the same time.

What you are proposing is doing without something now, that has benefits now, just in case of some nightmare future scenario that probably won't happen, where doing without the thing wont help you much anyway. One might just as easily say we should do without roads because in the future facist stormtroopers might use them to travel the country.