Slashdot Mirror
Real ID: You Can Still Fight It
toupsz writes "Bill Scannell has created a website where anyone and everyone can fax their senators regarding the Real ID Act. Note that the act is up for vote on Tuesday, May 10th!
All those against the Act might want to go to Bill's site: UnrealID.com.
Thanks, Cory from BoingBoing!"
This will swing the deal, because nothing -- and I mean nothing -- persuades Senators faster than a room full of bulk faxes, all sent from the same website and all basically the same!
Sheesshh.
How can so mainly nominally smart people be so dumb about how best to influence the democratic process.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
I don't care about the Big Brother side, I care about the part where our officials are enacting pointless legislation that won't solve anything but will create a whole new department of bureaucracy that you and I get to pay for. Hell no.
"I have never won a debate with an ignorant person." -Ali ibn Abi Talib
and cuss him out for not reading it, you might want to read the text of it yourself. You know, just maybe. Democracy requires an informed populace to work, and if you believe the partisan propaganda in the headline of a Slashdot story, how are you any better than a Republican senator who buys the partisan propaganda of the bill's author?
Yeah, that's some REAL good insight.
I, on the other hand, don't give a flying expletive who they are or what their visa status is, as long as they don't have a weapon.
(It would be a distinct bonus to know that they also don't have a communicable disease!)
You've satisfied yourself that Yet Another ID card won't be issued and obtained fraudulently? To paraphrase the patron saint of the current administration, "I find your excess of faith disturbing."
"But all your emitter and collector are belong to me!"
Well for one, I am not required to have a passport.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
How about this? It will cost money and will not make anyone safer.
It will, however, provide a false sense of security which is dangerous.
====
Crudely Drawn Games
I don't give a shit if the guy in the seat next to me claims to be bobo the dog-faced boy. What I do care about is that he does not have a weapon, and cannot get into the fricking cockpit. A National ID does not stop that from happening.
It will also not stop another Timothy McVeigh, who as far as I understand was never busted for anything prior.
What it will do is create more red tape, and the perception that government is doing SOMETHING so it must be making us safer. It will probably INCREASE terrorism as well. Why?
Because as the government continues to push more draconian laws, they will begin to piss "patriots" here in this country off. It may very well create a positive feedback loop.
I value what little privacy I have remaining, and I should not have to carry a piece of plastic just to fricking travel.....
If we were serious about stopping terrorism, we would stop playing world policeman. The arrogance of my fellow countrymen just amazes me sometimes. It's as though americans believe we have a god given right to intervene around the world if we don't like a certain government, etc.
The Republic is Dead. Long Live the Empire...
Service guarantees Citizenship! Questions Guarantee GITMO.... Amerika Uber Alles!
Ah, we seem to have forgotten already about all the judges Bill Clinton couldn't even get voted on. Did you know that most federal judges now sitting are Bush and Reagan appointees? Doesn't it bother you that these "conservative" judges now are even too liberal for the current crop of neo-fascists who control the Republican Party? No, I didn't think so...
"Is this Winkhorst a nova criminal?" "No just a technical sergeant wanted for interrogation."
???
Peer pressure is exactly the mechanism being used to get this act passed. Seriously you don't expect us to believe that its inclusion into a "support our troops" bill is an unintentional side-effect of an absent minded congressman? No sane congressperson would dare to vote against the troop funding omnibus because all of his peers would immediately label him an enemy of the troops. If that's not peer pressure, I don't know what is.
I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.
What's wrong with capital punishment and ownership of weapons by the law-abiding public? ("Weapons in every house" is a pretty serious overstatement, unless you count kitchen knives). The latter is pretty damned near necessary in the rural regions, anyhow; I have friends (in rural Texas) who literally have alligators and water snakes in their back yards.
Getting back to topic, a National ID is just one more step away from a group of independent states who are members of a federation with strictly limited powers, and one more step towards a strong central government which flaunts the document supposedly limiting its extent. Look: You out in the rest of the world don't like the US federal government getting too much power, especially when it's mismanaged as badly as it is. Us here in the US don't like our Federal government taking too much power, either, when that power would better be left closer to home where we have more influence -- in our state governments.
I'm glad the Republican control of Washington means a smaller, less intrusive government, protecting state's rights to self-government. And real tough security measures, to protect us from terrorists.
Wait - Republicans have controlled the White House, Senate and House of Representatives for years? The WTC planebombers and OK City bombers all had legitimate ID? I'll have to wait for the next Fox News cycle to get ny updated talking points.
--
make install -not war
Who determines need? Maybe we should create a Politburo to determine how much someone "needs"...oh wait...that was tried already...hrmm..
Seriously though, I have still not been able to figure out the whole "privacy" debate. All the information that is on these cards, as far as I can tell, including address, is information that can be publicly observed. Of course, this raises the question "should it be legal for someone to follow someone around to determine where they live?"
Where you live isn't necessarily a private piece of information, but I can understand the desire people have to not make that information easily available to anyone who might want it. The plain fact of the matter is, there isn't really any such thing as privacy except where there is no possibility of observation.
The dilemma faced by legislators - and the average citizen - is how do you know if people are telling the truth? How do you ensure "trust"? It's a pain in the rear in modern society - it used to be that you lived your life in a small town where you knew the entire town, and when outsiders came in they were treated with suspicion until they were around for long enough with demonstrated character to be trusted.
That is, in fact, the only way to build trust: continued demonstration of certain behavior. This isn't even a guarantee of future behavior, which is the nasty caveat. So, as far as I see it, at best any new type of ID will be a neutral thing. In reality, it will probably carry some nominal fee and so not be good, and it will also probably be abused by certain people or organizations.
The thing is, society is based on trust, and all this type of thing demonstrates is that people are less likely to trust than in the past. The other interesting thing is that you really cannot legislate trust, or behavior for that matter. You can only build trust, and you can only punish or reward behavior. Those are the only controls in society: reward and punishment. It's the unfortunate reality of the world in which we live.
"There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
"Starting three years from now, if you live or work in the United States, you'll need a federally approved ID card to travel on an airplane, open a bank account, collect Social Security payments, or take advantage of nearly any government service."
How is this substantially different from the situation today, where I need to present a state-issued driver's license and/or a federally-issued Social Security number in order to do any of those things?
I'm sure there are some pretty nefarious riders attached to this bill, since that's the case with almost all legislation. But the basic concept of a national ID card is not anything that I have any objection to.
I think in the old days you were right. But now it's more like this:
- Democrats: For any problem the poor and middle class have, the solution is bigger government.
- Republicans: For any problem the ultra rich have, the solution is bigger government.
- Libertarians: For any problem, the solution is smaller government.
That looks about right for the year 2005.What if these so-called illegals aren't stupid enough to apply for a state ID or driver's license? What then? [That sensation that your soul is being pierced is from the blank stare you'll get when you ask any politician for an honest answer to this question.]
Obviously, the guy wants to cut down on the potential terrorist threat. But who in HELL says that a terrorist needs a driver's license? Or a state ID?
So who suffers? The criminals and terrorsts? Hell no- they'll just route around it. That leaves only one other class...the vast, vast majority of people who are neither terrorists nor criminals.
Second, clearly the site is designed to spread FUD. The fake image of the "Real ID" card indicates that the card will contain information such as Religion and Occupation. It will not. Read the bill. FUD.
Granted, their 'mock ID' is designed to spread fear with lines such as religion and occupation, however the text of the bill itself grants the power for other information to be added to the ID as the government sees fit. Most people assume this will be retina or fingerprint, but it could include anything, including religion! FUD is FUD, but their example is illustrating one of the key points why myself, and many others, are opposed to the bill - the fact that it hands the government arbitrary and vastly expandable powers of information collection and tracking. If Big Brother says your new ID must carry and display your political party affiliation, your stance on abortion, and if you've bought a 'support the troops ribbon magnet' then that info will be collected and added for anyone reading it to see. They could add your 'terrorist score' to the card, they can add your campaign contributions info to the card, anything!
Also in regard to your comment about your data being scanned and sold by convenience stores being FUD, I think that's very likely to happen. Right now, at least in MA, if you look under the age of 27 - which is a totally objective evaluation by the store clerk - you must present ID to purchase tobacco or alcohol. In most of the stores around here they not only check your birthdate listed but they scan the drivers license to make sure it's real and not forged. Guess what? You want to make that transaction, you have to let them scan it or they won't accept it as a valid ID, and once they scan it they have your ID and all your data and it can be sold. It's bad enough you have to scrutinize privacy policies for every webstore you buy from, but now I need to find and read the privacy policy of every 7-11 or liquor store I want to make purchases from? Yes, consumers can vote with their wallet for those establishments but a majority of the populace either is unaware, or doesn't even care most of the time. Do you really think you and a handful of morally conscientious (sp?) geeks boycotting the 7-11 will affect their bottom line when 2000 other Joe Publics will buy smokes from them regardless?
This is not a personal attack, and I am against FUD. But I think people need to be shown examples of what this ID allows and - lets face it - things this government will probably get around to trying to track with these cards. They want a nationally standardized ID? Fine, but it should outline all the info and a new bill should have to be passed (to allow for public input to their reps) to change what that card tracks. Simply giving the government un-checked, unmonitored ability to add info as they see fit is dangerous to freedom!
I recommend everyone follow the parent poster's lead and read the text of this bill in full, think about it, read some arguments for and against, then send your opinion to your senator. Informed decisions people! Basing your choice on kneejerk reactions from any source (esp /.) would be just as bad as the people trying to fly this under the radar by attaching it to must-pass legislation!
-- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
They are criminals by definition. They broke immigration laws and entered the country illegally. Calling them undocumented workers or another PC term is intellectually dishonest.
So do tell me how a national ID will prevent another 9/11. Considering all the hijackers had valid ID, and none of them were on any watch list.
What's going to stop the next batch of terrorists from having perfectly valid ID? Nothing.
What will this prevent? Nothing.
Remind me again what the point of this bill is then?
Public bathrooms. Public swimming pools. Public schools.
Think about the above three things, and then tell me you want public healthcare.
This is one of the perplexing paradoxes of a pro-capital-punishment society. You people think the government lacks the competence to run schools or hospitals, yet you put your faith in its ability to conclusively determine a person's guilt with enough certainty that you're willing to execute someone when that same government has concluded is "guilty." Mind-boggling.
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
"If you don't like that idea, I'm sure you could move to Rwanda and be perfectly happy without all the responsibilities of being a US Citizen."
:
I not only have a right, but an OBLIGATION as an American Citizen to question the actions of my government.
"I'm not saying that we do it perfectly... there's plenty of intervention that i think we could stay out of and not be the worse for it, and at the same time I know there are plenty of circumstances that the US could intervene that it doesn't"
That is just it, the USA intervenes ONLY when it is in its interests, i.e. OIL, or geopolitical games.
"If you can live with the ridicule and guilt of your nation NOT doing something that was considered so "wrong" to the rest of the world when you COULD HAVE... fine, I can't"
Hmmmm.... Why haven't you volunteered to go fight for "freedom" in Rawanda, or Darfur yet? Oh that's right you are perfectly happy to say "we" have a duty to fix the world, as long as YOU don't have to risk your life for it. I just love people who talk about how we need to fix the world, as long as the potential cost is someone else.
Frankly we do not have a responsibility to any other nation or people. We have no obligation to send our soldiers to die for someone else, nor do we have an obligation to spend our taxes upon them.
That said I have no problem if you or any other private citizen voluntarily donantes your money, or volunteers to fight for the cause of freedom in another country.
As for Patriotism I offer this quote
Theodore Roosevelt:
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. (1918)
Service guarantees Citizenship! Questions Guarantee GITMO.... Amerika Uber Alles!
"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door."
That is inscribed on what may be the most famous symbol of the USA. The statue of liberty. She stands in NY harbor, welcoming the immigrants since being given to the USA by France, in 1886.
Should we just take the old girl down, then?
Take the 90-Day Challenge! http://rwmurker.bodybyvi.com/
A couple of years ago, I was in Finland with a group of people (performing at a folk festival ;-). One of the group's members got a toothache, and went to a clinic. They advised a root canal, which she agreed to. Afterwards, the people at the clinic were apologetic that they had to charge her the equivalent of about US$15 because she wasn't a citizen.
Now, we are all aware that this was paid for out of the taxes of Finnish workers. But when you compare, they don't pay much more in taxes than we do here in America. They sure do get a lot more for it.
OTOH, they don't get the fun of watching their nation's troops expending large quantities of munitions in another country. But if they're into that, they can follow the news of American troops, and cheer them on. I did meet a number of Finns who rooted for the French or English or Italian soccer teams; I suppose this wouldn't be much different.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.