Slashdot Mirror


Going to Yosemite? Get Your Passport Ready!

rev_media writes to tell us that CNN has a few updates to the Real ID act currently facing legislators. The Real ID acts mandates all states to begin issuing federal IDs to all citizens by 2008. Costs could be as much at $14 billion, but only 40 million are currently allocated. Several states have passed legislation expressly forbidding participation in the program, while others seem to be all for it. The IDs will be required for access to all federal areas including flights, state parks and federal buildings. People in states refusing to comply will need to show passports even for domestic flights.

81 of 969 comments (clear)

  1. Wow by UncleWilly · · Score: 5, Funny

    $14 billion seems a little expensive, I'm glad I already have a passport.

    1. Re:Wow by nurb432 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, actually it did. Just no one noticed.

      It was the war to retain our prior way of life, which we obviously lost.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    2. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      At least you were free-range sheep before... soon you'll be factory farmed.

    3. Re:Wow by jamstar7 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think YOU would have to pay the $14 Billion.

      If he's a US citizen, he will, on April 15th, just like the rest of us.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    4. Re:Wow by thynk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Errrr... I don't think that's the price EACH... rather for price for all of them.

      Personally, I don't see it as a big deal. I already have a federal ID (passport) and have to show an ID when boarding a plane (state issued DL or passport or military ID). I also used to carry a federal (DOD) ID card. Never once have I thought that having to prove who I say I am as an invasion of my privacy or my rights.

      Other than closing loopholes, I'm not sure why they require it to enter a federal park - are we afraid the terrorist will go after the deer and chipmunks?

      --

      Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
    5. Re:Wow by lawpoop · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Otherwise known as the War on Terror. The terrorists won; we have lost our freedoms. They have changed our way of life.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    6. Re:Wow by datapharmer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      wow. I really wish I had that last mod point still... just don't know how I would have modded you... we need a "sadly true" option.

      --
      Get a web developer
    7. Re:Wow by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's approx $46.26 per person (according to census.gov numbers). That's more than 6 hours of work (at my minimum wage).. nice to know that the next time I go to work I'll earn nothing that day so that people can be forced to register their movements within their own country.

    8. Re:Wow by ElectricRook · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think you and I are the only persons to realize this.

      Al Queda struck a magor blow to the American way of life. While not an instant knock down, it may in fact be a mortal blow. More like a bee sting to a person allergic to bee venom.

      We Americans have enjoyed almost total security, in that our three neighbors consist of two good friends (Mexico and Canada), and a weak pseudo enemy (Cuba). This being our only injury since the Spanish American war (concluded 1846). December 7 1941 was actually smaller than September 11 2001. The response to the attack is the only thing we Americans could not withstand, a damage to our freedom.

      Like a bee sting, the root cause, is an over-active immune response to a relatively minor injury. This is driving a catastrophic systemic failure. The political body is consuming the peoples liberty due to an over reaction by the infotainment industry. Which in-fact creates a dangerous situation for the leadership.

      The infotainment industry (facing a loss in power to alternative internet new sources) over-reacted to terrorist acts, causing the politicians to make drastic reductions in freedom in order to appear effective. This in turn provided a positive feedback to the infotainment industry. The infotainment industry in a downward spiral has lost it's past power and glory. With every minor terror threat the press over-reacts again seeking another spike in power. It's a run-away system.

      All this over-reaction is causing a meltdown in the public confidence of congress (currently facing a 10% approval rating), the executive branch, and the press.

      --
      - High Tech workers, please say NO to Union Carpenters, their Union sees fit to control our compensation.
    9. Re:Wow by falcon5768 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      best part, you can use your passport to get a real ID, in compliant states.

      So in order to get your "Real ID" you have to possibly use a passport as one of your multiple documents, but if you dont HAVE a "Real ID" ID you only have to use your passport to get in and not the 3-4 other forms of ID you need JUST to get the Real ID license.

      I had this same issue of stupidity getting my "Real ID" license from the NJ state DMV. In order to get my new license because of the federal rules, I needed a official copy of my birth certificate (one with a seal) which meant I needed to go to the court in the city I was born in. This was along with a bill with my official address, my credit card, and my bank card (since they refused to use my school work ID DESPITE it being a officially accepted means of showing ID by both the state AND the federal governments and pointing out this fact to them by UNDERLINING the print on her sheet showing her what she could use.)

      You know what I needed to get my birth certificate, which counts for the most points in documents?

      Picture ID with my name on it. Didnt matter from where. And could have been easily forged.

      That was it.

      This system is completely fucking flawed, and I swear it will be a Real ID toting terrorist who next strikes the US. Because our government is full of idiotic assholes who think safety comes from a stupid piece of plastic.

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    10. Re:Wow by mcpkaaos · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The terrorists won; we have lost our freedoms. They have changed our way of life.

      The only way this statement could possibly be true is if the terrorists you mention are actually elected U.S. officials. Otherwise, you are either fooled or trying to fool others.

      --
      It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
    11. Re:Wow by maxume · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You don't think it's a problem because you think the ID proves who you are. It doesn't. It demonstrates that some authority went to some level of trouble verifying that you are who you say you are, to the extent that you can trust that the paper was not forged. In the case of many government papers, it is indeed a pretty reliable indicator, but it is still pretty easy for corrupt officials to create very authentic papers with false information on them, information that happens to appear in very official databases. REAL ID does little to address the fraudulent issue of official cards(and makes such a card that much more valuable).

      The data access and homogenization provisions are at least disconcerting, especially in the face of the whole thing being rather unnecessary. If documented illegals were the problem(one of the main things it is supposed to address is illegal aliens 'stealing' jobs from Americans), it might help address the situation, but for the most part, it's the undocumented illegals that are the problem, and the willingness of employers to hire them, not the ones that are trying to get government identification and pay taxes.

      If it is a huge, expensive, pain in the ass and doesn't accomplish anything much other than making life more irritating, Congress must have voted for it.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    12. Re:Wow by lawpoop · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The only way this statement could possibly be true is if the terrorists you mention are actually elected U.S. officials. Otherwise, you are either fooled or trying to fool others.

      If the goal of the terrorists were to change our way of life, and that has happened ( because of our reaction to their terror attacks ), then how haven't they won? In other words, didn't they accomplish what they set out to do with terrorism?
      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    13. Re:Wow by Duhavid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The *only* way?

      Only? Really?

      The "papers, please" thing that we used to deride Russia about,
      as in "you don't have real freedom, you are limited" is upon us.

      The terrorists have won, in part. And we elected the people who
      used that as a wedge issue to inspire fear in the "home of the brave".

      I submit to you that it is equally possible that you are fooled
      or trying to fool others.

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    14. Re:Wow by bigpat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Other than closing loopholes, I'm not sure why they require it to enter a federal park - are we afraid the terrorist will go after the deer and chipmunks? Closing loopholes? What loophole would that be? I suppose they are most concerned about people visiting national monuments in the capital and such and doing bad things to them... not that knowing what someone's name and last known address really prevents people from doing bad things, but it sure does make politicians look like they aren't quite so stupid when they can identify the bad guys after the fact.

      Even the Federal building access seems very questionable, it really doesn't matter who I am as long as I am not carrying an AK47 or some C4. If I get called for Jury Duty and need to show a passport to get to the court room... well that seems pretty stupid to me and I don't think I would comply even if I have a passport floating around.

      If passports are going to be required universally for access to public spaces, then they should be given out for free along with citizenship like a social security card is.

    15. Re:Wow by Keys1337 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I'd say the poor get fucked the worst. Their contribution is smaller yet hurts the most. Sales taxes, semi-hidden taxes on utilities and gas. Pain in the ass regulations.

      You're welcome.

      Just because someone else paid more for the shackles and chains doesn't mean anyone should be grateful.

    16. Re:Wow by jfern · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh, you actually thought this was supposed to stop terrorism? No, it's to make you think that the government gives a shit about fighting terrorism, while they're training the next Bin Laden, or the next Nicaraguan Contras.

    17. Re:Wow by Kadin2048 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This time they spun it quite well, they got us to swallow it all bait and hook it's way down there this time. The timing was also quite effective, The nations youth and middle class are some of the most distractable Americans in history. I don't think the difference is really "distractability." The difference is demographics. In the 1960s and 70s, the Baby Boom generation was in its youth.

      Today, that generation is in decline; they have, for the most part, sold out the values they held as younger people, in favor of security for themselves, their lives, and their families.

      There just aren't enough young people around -- not to mention actually voting -- to overcome the influence of the aging Boom generation. And many younger people realize this, and become more cynical about the entire system, less interested in doing anything to modify it -- which, perversely, actually gives the older people more power.

      I don't think you're going to see a major change in the direction this country is going, until the demographics come back into balance, and that's not going to happen until a whole lot of people in their mid-60s die.
      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    18. Re:Wow by Enahs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The sentiment comes partially from George W. Bush's public speeches following September 11. In a nutshell, since the terrorists hate us for our freedoms, we should go on living our lives as we have, otherwise the terrorists have won.

      Well, we're not able to live our lives as we did before. Therefore, by historical record of our Commander-in-Chief's own words, the War on Terror has been lost. We live in fear, we allow the federal government to impose Constitutionally illegal directives, imposing will both on the rights of citizens and states. And yet, if you point this out to the radical Right, they'll shout you down, reminding you--as loudly as possible--to remember the people who jumped out of the World Trade Center on September 11th.

      Check the statistics. Several times more Americans died due to drunk drivers than terrorist activities in 2001. Yet no one is suggesting that distilleries and car manufacturers be bugged, wiretapped, infiltrated, or bombed out of existence. What will it take for America to stop being ruled by the iron fist of Knee-Jerk Politics? Will it take the end of the Union, the Great Experiment that seems to be in such peril? Will it take seeing the young men and women in uniform marching the "diaper heads" into the ovens? What will it take?

      --
      Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
    19. Re:Wow by ZWithaPGGB · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yep: The war against statism. The people have become sheeple who want the government to keep them safe, so they have willingly given up the right to keep and bear arms, the right to privacy, the right to be secure against unwarranted searches and seizures (see the "War on drugs"), and now the right to freedom of association (movement).
      The biggest threat most Americans face is their own government, which imprisons a greater percentage of its population than even Stalinist Russia, and can knock down your door in the middle of the night with thugs armed with machine guns if they think you are engaged in non-state-approved recreation.

    20. Re:Wow by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Other than closing loopholes, I'm not sure why they require it to enter a federal park - are we afraid the terrorist will go after the deer and chipmunks?
      The parks/Federal Buildings thing is about leverage. When citizens of all those "holdout" states with non-federally-compliant state IDs go on vacation for 2 weeks to Jellystone National Park imagine what will happen. Dad drives up to the entrance in the family mini-van packed with the wife, 2.4 screaming kids, and a bunch of camping gear. The NPS Ranger at the booth takes a look at his NH driver's license and says "sorry sir, but you have to have a federally recognized ID to enter the park." So there they are, staying at the Best Western that night, looking at a long drive back to New Hampshire because their state doesn't want to comply with the federal standard. It's a load of crap, sure, but it's the way the feds do things.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    21. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I just don't get it. I mean sure, I bet some terrorist hate our freedom. And to those terrorists, they've won. But I figured those terrorists were just the ones made up by some sarcastic lefty or some misguided right-winger.

      I think the real terrorists wouldn't give a shit about this. Iraq is the target rich environment. Its like having all the cows come to your home. So why go all the way to the supermarket for milk?

      There are a lot of reasoning behind the recent terror attacks in both the US and Abroad. There's a lot to hate. Our support of Israel. Our foreign policy. Our position as a superpower. Our Culture. Ingrained hatred taught from childhood.

      Tightening security measures changes none of these things. So from a "Win-Lose" perspective, no one wins.

      We're becoming a huge jail, no one in or out without tons of hassle. The only ones that win from this is the Government.

    22. Re:Wow by John+Jamieson · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "We Americans have enjoyed almost total security, in that our three neighbors consist of two good friends (Mexico and Canada)"

      And I don't know how many of our "Comrads" here in the U.S. realize that Bush has been trying to piss off the Canadians ever since 9/11, big time. I live only four hours from the border, and work up there sometimes... and you cannot believe how he went out of the way to stab them in the back.

      On 9/11 we would not allow any international flights to land in our country... they were too dangerous. So what does canada do, they take them, even in Toronto. Now any of those planes could have been compromised for all they knew, they could have lost many lives, but they did it anyway. Well, when I was working up there after 9/11, Bush thanked all sorts of nations for helping, and left out Canada. Don't worry, they are not too dumb to notice.

      Bush does not want Canada for a friend, it is much easier for him to close off the borders if they become an adversary.

    23. Re:Wow by stinerman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fair enough. Here's the deal: let's change places. I don't and have never paid a dime in federal income tax.

      Have fun making about $25,000/yr and having a personal equity of -$88,000. I'll be happy to pay $75,000 in federal taxes because that would mean that I'm making something near 7 figures.

      If you think paying taxes is bad, try being below the poverty line (not that I am, but many are).

    24. Re:Wow by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The terrorists have won, in part.

      Still untrue. We may be losing, but it isn't because some abstract concept is winning. It just isn't that simple.

      That's a matter of semantics. There is no denying that 9/11 was a wildly successful attack, more successful than anyone dreamed even in 2002. The losses from the attacks themselves were largely confined to 3000 innocent lives, two skyscrapers, and four downed airliners. People even across the Middle East were lighting candles for us.

      Our overreaction got us a new ineffective federal agency, an endless quagmire of a long bitter war that has killed more Americans than died on 9/11 and many times as many Iraqi civilians, new torture policies allowing "extraordinary rendition" and "enhanced interrogation" that have made the U.S. into a pariah across the world, a suspension of habeas corpus, and an undermining of the protections behind Amendments I, IV, V, VI, and VIII as well as numerous statutory protections in the federal realm relating to privacy, wiretapping, and individual rights to a fair trial- but we did get a nice rainbow color chart out of the whole thing. Maybe some "abstract concept" isn't "winning" but by any standard the 19 hijackers couldn't have asked for a reaction from the United States that would be more damaging to the United States.

    25. Re:Wow by cammoblammo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yep, the military earned it's pay that day.

      --

      Cogito, ergo sig.

    26. Re:Wow by nahdude812 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Aah, love to hate the poor.

      You're probably right, everyone at or below the poverty level deserves to be there. So it's not useful to feel sorry for them or try to help them get out of the situation.

      I'm not arguing that no one is like this, but I'm arguing that there are probably a lot more than you realize. Unfortunately the people that get noticed are the people who abuse the situation, and as a result they make it harder for the other people who are in that situation through misfortune or who only have the natural talents to land a minimum wage job (which is substantially below the poverty level).

      Watch In Pursuit of Happyness. Although everything turns out ok in the end, it's not a feel-good movie, and that was not its point. The point of the movie is to show how it is that you can try your absolute hardest and still fail through misfortune and bad decisions (which were only identifiable as bad in hind sight). If there weren't programs to help this guy get out of the situation he was in, he would not have been able to, as it was he had to risk everything he had, small as it was, on a long shot, and he got lucky. This is a true story.

    27. Re:Wow by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Their goal is to convert the world to Islam using force if necessary and turn every country into an Islamic state following Sharia law.

      A few nutjobs may want this. Most people recruited by the terrorist/insurgent/resistance groups just want the U.S. out of the Middle East. Bin Laden's original beef was the presence of U.S. forces in Saudi Arabia. (Yes, we're pretty much out of there now, but we're in so deep in Iraq and Afghanistan it doesn't much matter.) Plus the whole Israel/Palestine debacle, of course.

      I would like to see campaigning for the introduction of Sharia law or any other system that overthrows western ideas of democracy and freedom made treason.

      Um., you don't see the irony here? Let me help.

      Freedom of speech is at the root of "western ideas of democracy and freedom". Therefore, anyone working against freedom of speech is campaigning for the introduction of a system that overthrows western ideas of democracy and freedom.

      Ergo, you are arguing that you should be considered guilty of treason.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    28. Re:Wow by DavidTC · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe some "abstract concept" isn't "winning" but by any standard the 19 hijackers couldn't have asked for a reaction from the United States that would be more damaging to the United States.

      Like I've been saying for a while, often you can take a Bush policy, look at it, and realize it is, literally, the Most Harmful Policy they could have done. They often walk the fine line of doing the most damage, while carefully being short of something that people would have risen up and stopped. It's a very fine line, and it's possible they've accidentally wandered over it too often for a Democratic Congress, but there are things that are very hard to explain.

      For example, the response to Katrina. No, Bush doesn't dislike black people that much, and, as others have pointed out, that was known-in-advance disaster (At least, a known minor disaster, and, remember, people thought the hurricane itself would hit New Orleans until right at the end, so everyone thought there would be a different disaster, a leveled city instead of a flooded one.), and a great photo op. He could have ridden in mere hours after the hurricane, with food and water for everyone, yammered about God sparing the city, and then, when the flooding started and everyone realize what was going, been taken pictures of while handing babies up into helicopters and all sorts of shit, even giving people rides in Air Force One.

      For someone whose ratings were starting to slip, it would have been very helpful and not the least bit dangerous to him. Hell, just a normal response would have been non-harmful. Instead he 'completely fucked it up' in ways that are near incomprehensible.

      Other people attribute this sort of stuff to greed, or stupidity, or incompetence, or lunacy, or pettiness. An entire industry has sprung up to attempt to explain the policy decisions of this Administration, and people trying to explain each tree need to take a step back and look at the forest: George W. Bush, or at least his administration, is attempting to destroy this county. It's not a side-effect of anything, it is the actual goal.

      There's even some fairly interesting circumstantial evidence of this: The right, for as long as I can remember, has projected their behaviors on the left. (The list is too long to go into, here, I have to run, but people know what I'm talking about. Think Foley, think K Street, think current obstructionism in the Senate, think Whitewater investigations into land deal vs. Sen. Steven's and others very real corrupt 'deals'. Things the right often does, the left mainly doesn't, and the right accuses the left of all the time.)

      Well, how long as the right been accusing the left of hating America and attempting to destroy it? Did that little concept finally just click into place for you?

      I don't know why they're doing this and I don't know what the end result is supposed to be. I suspect they think they can take and hold control once all faith in the current Republic is lost.

      Next probable step in this process: Invade Iran. We're not losing Iraq fast enough, we need to get drawn into an even bigger war.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    29. Re:Wow by Milican · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't forget the inflation tax. Everyone pays that one, but the poor get screwed by it the most. Your home, your car, your savings, your retirement... it all gets eaten away by the Fed and their inflation. The poor get screwed the most because most of the time their wages don't keep up with inflation, and that keeps them poor.

      JOhn

    30. Re:Wow by Stu+Charlton · · Score: 3, Informative

      Arguably, certain terrorists view Islamist theocracy as the only legitimate form of government. That would not be a very free state.

      Sure, they would start with Iraq, Egypt, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. They've tried, and are even succeeding in some cases.

      But the major thing they hate is our support for dictators in the Middle East that block their efforts towards establishing new theocratic states, either by democratic vote or by coup. The U.S., even though it's "committed to democracy", would rather have a friendly dictator in place than a democratically elected government that rejects the USA. This can be a messy argument (is a theocratic state truly free? etc.)

      --
      -Stu
  2. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did America lose a war I didnt hear about?

  3. Papers please! by BWJones · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Papers please!

    The slow slide to fascism began some time ago, but has really accelerated over the past six years or so. We have fewer rights now than ever before in the USA and I fear for where we are going.

    For instance:

    1) We now torture as part of imprisonment along with imprison people without the protections that the Geneva Convention provides and appear to detain people without formally charging them or letting them know what they are being charged with.

    2) We have a fear mongering national obsession with security that despite all the money and bureaucracy spent and created still leaves us wide open to security threats while taxing business and limiting travel. Threat levels are increased without justification to apparently further political goals.

    3) We have politicized education and science for political gain while at the same time stifled scientists from telling the facts/truth/scientific findings.

    4) We have completely conflated religion and government funneling money into religious groups with strong ties into the government.

    5) Taxation is only low for corporate and the most wealthy, while at the same time we have suppressed labor power and limited funding for intellectual and artistic pursuits.

    6) We have rampant government corruption and funneling of government "no-bid" contracts to companies with strong ties to government.

    7...... How much more do we have to add to really start becoming scared?

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:Papers please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As an old guy who grew up in the 50's and 60's I must say this nation is beginning to sound (and act) like the nation I was taught to fear... the soviet union.
      Showing papers to travel within the country is not what a free people do.

    2. Re:Papers please! by BWJones · · Score: 5, Informative

      "What happened was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to be governed by surprise, to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believe that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security. " ~ an anonymous German Professor from 'They Thought They Were Free: The Germans 1939-1945', by Milton Mayer

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    3. Re:Papers please! by gardyloo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We have fewer rights now than ever before in the USA Careful. African Americans and women can own property, vote, and enjoy the rights that white males do. Gay marriage (and civil unions) is legal in some states now. A woman's right to choose the fate of her unborn child is protected. There are probably more rights which are guaranteed now which I can't think of off the top of my head. So although I agree that things aren't perfect in this country, most of the points raised by the parent poster are in no way new, and some things are much better than they have been at various points in the country's history.
    4. Re:Papers please! by BWJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And if you think any of that is going to change by electing Democrats, you've got another thing coming.

      Republicans....Democrats.... it does not matter. What matters is that we as a people take back those freedoms granted to us. Remember that the Constitution was not so much a document that granted individual rights, rather it was a document that described what government can and could not do. To paraphrase Jim Garrison who was speaking of Nazi Germany when he said that it was not a German phenomenon, "It is not a Republican/Democratic phenomenon, it is a human phenomenon and the slide to a proto-fascist state can happen here."

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    5. Re:Papers please! by BWJones · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Careful. African Americans and women can own property, vote, and enjoy the rights....

      Indeed. I should have qualified that to say that we have fewer rights now than at any time before in the last 50 years.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    6. Re:Papers please! by lawpoop · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're totally correct, but I don't really want to say anything that would dampen the vigilience of the American people against tyranny. For example, In Hussein's Iraq, women were allowed to drive cars, walk around alone, go to school, become doctors, etc. He had a secular progressive state in a region full of Islamic theocracies and kingdoms. However, that doesn't mean that Hussein wasn't a brutal dictator who ruled with fear, megalomania, torture, secret police, etc. etc.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    7. Re:Papers please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, not to mention that unborn babies have the right to choose whether or not they want to live

      They certainly do have that right.

      If they want to live, all they have to do is leave the mother. And don't give me that liberal crap about how they "can't" leave and must therefore be protected by yet more layers of bureaucratic government. What you and your type are really about is a relentless drive for socialism, you goddamn commie pinkos!

    8. Re:Papers please! by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not to be overly pedantic, parent and GP are discussing two seperate issues (I suggest we drop abortion from the topic of discussion.) True, rights are applied to a larger group of people, but the set of rights is smaller. To some degree this is inevitable (a woman/slave gaining rights means their husband/father/owner can no longer beat them as a "right"). But even in 1840, in the South, the idea that a person (then defined to include, white men above 21, now meaning any mentally functionally over 18 and emancipated minors) would have to show papers to travel would violate some notion of rights.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    9. Re:Papers please! by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Change from when?

      Change from the USA. i.e. no one looked at me like I had two heads when I paid cash for a domestic plane ticket.

      I'd also assume that it was much more restrictive under the Jaruzelski dictatorship in the 80s.

      -b.

    10. Re:Papers please! by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I hate to say this,and it's a horrible thing to say, but it's gonna take another Kent state massacre by government police before americans get off their lazy asses and do something. americans do not do anything except bitch about things until the government steps way over a line. It will take several innocent young lives killed on the lawn of a university by police or military before any middle class person will do anything.

      and yes I am an american.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    11. Re:Papers please! by sjames · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I can clearly recall my 4th grade teacher talking about that when she was explaining why America is good and the Soviet Union bad. In the news, point by point, I see today's U.S. becoming the Soviet Union that she taught us was bad.

      I also remember the class asking her why the Russians don't just vote for sombody who will fix all of that and her explaining that nobody they could vote for wanted to make it better. That too has a bit of a haunting ring to it today.

      Here in Georgia, the state government isn't openly revolting against RealID but isn't exactly endorsing it either. I wonder how the Federal government feels about footing the bills for the international airport itself. I ask since if I'm not allowed to fly, I'll be damned if I'm going to let my state taxes pay for an airport.

    12. Re:Papers please! by cyberkahn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually the difference between the Republicans and Democrats is the difference between Coke and Pepsi, one is sweeter than the other but both equally corrosive. As long as Americans still believe in a false left right paradigm then we will be polarized and allow them to keep doing what they are doing.

      Almost half of the Democrats voted No on a resolution that would prevent military intervention in Iran without Congressional approval.

      Here is a good commentary by Keith Olbermann on the Dems and Iraq.

  4. Your papers please. by arthurpaliden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sir, your papers are not in order, please come with us..... No, this is not happening in 'Soviet Russia' this is happening in the United States of America One of the things that the US goverment kept on about during the cold war was that in the United States you did not need 'internal travel documents and passports' because it, the United States, was a free country..

  5. remember when? by lecithin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Borodin: Do you think they will let me live in Montana?
    Capt. Ramius: I would think they'll let you live wherever you want.
    Borodin: Good. Then I will live in Montana. And I will marry a round American woman, and raise rabbits, and she will cook them for me. And I will have a pick-up truck, or umm... possibly even...a recreational vehicle, and drive from state to state. Do they let you do that?
    Capt. Ramius: Oh yes.
    Borodin: No papers?
    Capt. Ramius: No papers. State-to-state.

    --
    It could be worse, it could be Monday.
    1. Re:remember when? by c6gunner · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Your post should be rated +20,000 Insightful. Prior to reading it, I really didn't much care about this ID program. I didn't see it as a big problem. And the fanatical rantings of some of it's opponents (both here at slashdot, and elsewhere) were starting to convince me that all those opposed to it were a bunch of drooling morons.

      Then I read your comment.

      Short, simple, and elegant. In one movie quote you managed to sum up exactly what's wrong with this program, in a way that appeals even to those who DON'T think that all republicans are "Bushitler ts". Thank you for that.

  6. Re:Your papers please. by Skreems · · Score: 4, Funny

    You still won't, to travel between states. As long as you're not on an airplane. We're still free, honest.

    --
    Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
    The Urban Hippie
  7. Vote for Ron Paul 2008 by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't agree with all of his politics, especially his stances on abortion and public health care, but he may be the least authoritarian out there. If you think that most Democrate will be better, they're just as bad.

    1. Re:Vote for Ron Paul 2008 by lawpoop · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't agree with all of his politics, especially his stances on abortion and public health care... I don't agree with Ron Paul about a lot of things, either.

      But the wonderful thing about him is that, as a libertarian, he believes that the federal government has no role in deciding these issues. He would leave them up to the states to decide. In favor of women's reproductive rights? Create a petition to get the matter into your state legislature or constitution. Want single payer health care? Pressure your state representatives, or, again, get enough signatures to get it on your state's ballots.

      Wow, people might actually start to feel like we have a representational democracy again, instead of a bunch of Washington insiders bought by corporate lobbyists!
      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
  8. Costs of passport by Dr+Reducto · · Score: 3, Informative

    If they require a passport to do some of those things like fly or enter public buildings, that will signifigantly impact poor people.

    My passport cost me 97 dollars last time I got one, and not everyone has that kind of money lying around

  9. Re:So ... Basically... by Y-Crate · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, allowed to travel EVEN IN THEIR OWN STATE, in many cases.
    Oh how far we've come from: Capt. Vasili Borodin: I will live in Montana. And I will marry a round American woman and raise rabbits, and she will cook them for me. And I will have a pickup truck... maybe even a "recreational vehicle." And drive from state to state. Do they let you do that?
    Captain Ramius: I suppose.
    Capt. Vasili Borodin: No papers?
    Captain Ramius: No papers, state to state.
  10. Stupid Fear Mongoloid by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the article:

    "For terrorists, travel documents are like weapons," Chertoff said

    But, Walsh said, "any state that's refusing to implement this key recommendation by the 9/11 Commission, and whose state driver's licenses are as a result used in another terrorist attack, should be held responsible." What a fucking fear-mongerer!

    So, if the next terrorists have one of these internal passports, what are the consequences for the people promoting the Real-ID program? Will they be held responsible? Another 9/11 and will the people running DHS be convicted of manslaughter? Can't have it both ways Cheeseoff!
    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  11. A passport is not a requirement by gelfling · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A passport is a fallback document if you don't have one of these Federal ID's pretty much like today if you don't have a photo ID to get on a plane. Now I'm sure my state the Great State of Redneck-NorthCarolinastan will determine that getting one of these Federal ID's is even more expensive but I'm sure they'll accept a hunting license or a document from any Baptist Church in a pinch.

  12. Solution: Pick any other country. Move there. by soldoutactivist · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There was a time when I couldn't imagine living in another country, not even as an exchange student. I've even turned down fantastic job offers from other countries because they simply weren't in America. But almost everyday now something happens, a law is passed, or another degree shaven off of what once made this country great is added to "Why isn't this the greatest country in the world anymore?" The next time a foreign job offer comes around, I'm probably going to take it, there's just not enough reasons not to these days. And even if one doesn't, Vancouver, BC is a very beautiful city. Get out while you still can.

    --
    The downside of being killed is the upside of being dead.
    1. Re:Solution: Pick any other country. Move there. by edisk1353 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let's not get too over the top here. No, I'm not a fan of Real ID either. I think it's expensive, kind of draconian, and largely unnecessary. But I am an American who has lived for recent multiyear segments in Canada and France, and let me put it this way: you can't escape totally from surveillance or ID cards, or any of those other little baddies that come from governments of various stripes. Governments are people, and people aren't perfect.

      The French are proud of their democracy and consider themselves one of its founders and leading lights. (Frankly, with Rousseau and Montesquieu in the bag, they've got as much of a claim to democracy as the USA does.) And let me note that in France, ID is nationally issued and you're required to carry it everywhere. As an alien resident for a year, I was required to carry my passport and laminated visa (i.e. my French ID card) around wherever I went. (I did, sometimes.) Had I ever changed apartments, I would have been required by EU law to report my change of residence to the police. Yet I don't ever see the French complaining that their democracy is under threat because of IDs, and I've never seen any mention of the issue while glossing through either of the two big national political newspapers: Le Monde (leftist) or Le Figaro (rightist). If you wanted, you could make the conspiratorial claim that it's because they're in with the government; but I'd hazard just to guess that it's not perceived as a threat.

      Do I like surveillance? God no! But please, let's just be sure to step outside the hyperbole and remind ourselves that a national ID card does not a police state make. And let's not talk in terms of who is or isn't the "greatest state," because quite frankly, all of us big rich Western democratic states have got our own problems. Sure, elements in the US are currently screaming "security! security!" as the executive branch grabs for power, but let's check out some of our friends: France has high unemployment as immigration spirals upward, Britain's got video cameras going up in every nook and cranny, Italy is trying to hold back an ex-prime minister who was making strides toward authoritarianism, and for God's sake, Canada is just trying to hold itself together. The way I see it, the best you can do is trade one set of problems for another.

      So I've made my choice. This fall it's back to the frozen North with me. And national ID cards had absolutely nothing to do with it.

  13. I left america and I'm NEVER going back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I left America five years ago to live in a European country. Granted, things aren't perfect but I would NEVER fucking go back and live in America again. The country is increasingly deluded, lazy, fearful (Slashdot company excepted), and awash with shit food. Don't even bother to argue - the Stop and Shop has lots of food, but it is mostly crap.

    I make roughly $70,000 per year - so I'm a member of the middle class. Why the hell would I leave this Western democracy where my taxes actually generate a tangible benefit for me and my children in the form of healthcare that isn't contingent on my current employer? The food is generally fresher and the markets more diverse, if I pay for primary and secondary education for my kids it is a HELL of a lot better and the university fees are negligible.

    The American middle class is getting totally fucked - and has been for years. What the fuck do your tax dollars buy you? What precisely does the current federal government do for the middle classes?

    1. Re:I left america and I'm NEVER going back by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Funny

      What precisely does the current federal government do for the middle classes?

            Hey come on, they build freeways and bridges oh wait...

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  14. Round and round she goes.... by Stanislav_J · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Y'all are missing the real Catch-22 here. How could a passport substitute for Real ID? A passport is a federal document. Once Real ID is in effect, no doubt you will need one to obtain or renew a passport, no? So if you have no Real ID, you can't use your passport instead, because you will need the ID to get or renew the passport. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

    This battle isn't over yet by far, because in addition to the few states that have explicitly refused to participate, many others are discussing it in their legislatures, and some of those are leaning towards saying "drop dead" to the Feds as well. Sooner or later, we will reach a critical mass of states that represent a significant enough percentage of the U.S. population (and, hence, of voters) that would be classified as second-class citizens, and that will put the kibosh on the whole mess. I just hope those legislatures have some backbone....

    You can keep up with the current status of Real ID legislation in the various states at the Real Nightmare website.

    --
    "Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
  15. It's not the chipmunks you have to worry about... by benhocking · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's the squirrels!

    --
    Ben Hocking
    Need a professional organizer?
  16. Re:Finally ... a measure that's right on the butto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Every Swiss home has an assault rifle, and it's expected to be operational. Also every man is expected to be proficient with those weapons.
    Funny thing though: you don't hear much about Swiss terrorists and their crime rates are extremely low...

  17. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  18. Re:So ... Basically... by karmatic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm sorry, but the more I hear of him, the more Thomas Jefferson sounds like a dangerous, deranged psychopath.
    Well, the founding fathers committed an armed overthrow of the legitimate government. If you were to ask England, they were murderers, terrorists, and they committed treason. Had they not succeeded, they would have been executed as traitors to the crown.

    The difference between a traitor and a patriot is often a matter of how successful one was. Fortunately for the United States, the people who started it's government did so because they wanted freedom from an oppressive government, rather than simply freedom to institute their own oppressive government. Unfortunately, there has been a sever slide towards tyranny in recent years.

    We could use a few more patriots in this nation, even if it did result in some people dying in a revolution. The safest life is a solitary one in a padded cell, but I certainly wouldn't want to live like that. Besides, if it's acceptable for a soldier to fight (and give his life) to "preserve our way of life", why is it wrong to fight to better our way of life?

  19. Re:Good! by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    think on all of the crimes that would be easier to solve if you had DNA ot match to already in a database.

          The thing is that the "tinfoil hats" are sometimes right, in that governments do tend to abuse power. What happens when 15 years after your national mandatory DNA database is opened to insurance companies and corporations (after successful lobbying) and you can no longer get a job and or health insurance because you're too much of a health risk?

          You think this won't happen? Look what is happening to the national "Do Not Call" list for telemarketers. They (the corporations) are fighting like hell to get permission to call people on it... and this is just the off chance of maybe getting a few sales. Imagine how much they will want hardcore information like your genetic predispositions? Nope sorry you can't be an airline pilot because it shows here you have an increased risk of early heart disease. We're not willing to invest hundreds of thousands into training you if in all likelyhood you can only work for us for 10 years... Oh look, you have an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, if you want health insurance you have to pay 10 times as much, and we'll only insure you until you're 40. Etc.

          Sometimes some of the crap tinfoil hats say makes a lot of sense.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  20. It's worth mentioning. by Inoshiro · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Every single 9/11 terrorists highjacker had a valid passport.

    This is security theatre -- worse still, it removes freedoms from us non-terrorists.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
  21. It gets WAY better, real soon now. by poptones · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Federal law denies passports to many people based on (for example) whether they owe a state money for child support. This is going to get real interesting when those people become locked out of the legal system entirely because they can't get a passport and live in a state not participating in this grand new fascism. The fascism that has denied them their civil right to come and go becomes the fascism that denies them their civil rights entirely on a federal level... just because of financial obligations. So much for the fourteenth amendment.

    Just a couple of years and we get a whole new class of people... legal, official, "dissidents."

    But our Siberia will be a whole, whole lot warmer...

  22. Re:Evil company: RealNetworks by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Funny

    You'll be waiting in line at the airport, and the Real ID reader will say "Buffering..."

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  23. Now wait a minute. by iminplaya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Didn't the USSR lose the cold war?

    --
    What?
  24. AAAALVIIIIIINNN!!!!!!11 by tepples · · Score: 3, Funny

    are we afraid the terrorist will go after the deer and chipmunks? The attacks on 2001-09-11 highlighted "Islamist" terrorism. This movement happens to come from a part of the world where men wear a long nightshirt called a thobe in public. What do the Chipmunks wear?
  25. Re:Papers for Yosemite?! by Enderandrew · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Penn and Teller did a Bullshit episode on Mt. Rushmore and patriotism that was quite interesting. The 4 faces chosen where supposedly chosen because they were responsible for extending the frontier of the country, but also because they hated Native Americans. There are those who suggest that carving the faces of these 4 particular men into native land was a galactic fuck you.

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
  26. Hey, even suicide airplane hijackers gotta relax by sizzzzlerz · · Score: 4, Funny

    You know. You're giving your life for Allah tomorrow so you wanna relax by taking in the falls and scenery at Yosemite. You drive up to the Big Oak Flat entrance and the ranger asks for your ID and boom, you're immediately arrested for being on the watch list. Boo-yah! Score one for DHS!

    Yeah. Sounds plausible to me.

  27. Genital-based identification scheme. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well, we're already working on it.

    The way you can tell that you're interacting with a government agency is the distinct feeling that you're being fucked.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  28. In Soviet America by starX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The government terrorizes YOU.

  29. Re:So ... Basically... by freeweed · · Score: 4, Funny

    When Tom Clancy begins to be insightful, you know your country is fucked.

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  30. Individuals vs systems. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think it's "trusting people" vs "trusting systems."

    This is obviously going to be making a lot of broad generalizations, but I think that conservatives tend to be suspicious of systems (e.g. "the Government" as an entity, or its bureaucracy) but trust individual people that they agree with or find agreeable, ignoring that even a seemingly decent person might be warped by power.

    Many liberals seem to take the opposite view; they distrust individuals and emphasize the inherent corrupting nature of power, but seem to trust (sometimes a little more blindly than I find comfortable) complex systems that lack a particular face or human qualities.

    I think you see the same dichotomy in the liberal and conservative readings of history: conservatives seem to favor "great man" theories that emphasize individual leadership and the influence of small numbers of people on historical outcomes, while many liberal scholars seem to downplay the role of the individual and instead look at the progression of abstract systems (the progress of 'society', etc.).

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  31. Re:Just so you know by zoney_ie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wah wah wah. Here in Ireland the income tax rates are (for a single person), 20% on the first €34,000 and 40% on the balance. Admittedly there are tax allowances (everyone gets them automatically but you need to inform the tax people if you're eligible for greater allowances) which reduce the tax payable and also there are various other tax reliefs for having a mortgage, paying rent, etc. - though these calculations aren't automatically used on your tax payment, even though your payments are automatic (taken directly from your wages).

    In addition, our default sales tax is 21% (yes, you read that correctly). The vast majority of the price of petrol (gasoline) is tax. Oh - and did I mention that retail prices are higher here than in the US too?

    You'd think these taxes would pay for lots, but our kids don't have enough classrooms, we don't have enough teachers, nurses or police, an entire city doesn't have clean water, our hospitals are inadequate and A&E patients are left on trolleys in corridors, we're only now getting some decent roads in the country, our public transport is the worst in Europe - people drive more km per person in Ireland than the US. Also, this performance gets a government re-elected for the third time.

    Admittedly most people have jobs (~4% unemployment, that includes people who can't work or are between jobs). Still, it feels like we've almost got the social injustices of American-style capitalism with the tax burden of European social democracy.

    --
    -- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
  32. Re:Just so you know by isorox · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Same in the UK, 32% above $10K, 41% above $75K, 17.5% on purchases, 310% tax on petrol (yes, over 3 fold, works out to be about 20/mile for a small car).

    In the UK public transport is great on commuter routes in and out of london (aside from the cost -- 35/mile), however long distance (>150 miles) costs a fortune, over $1/mile in some cases, and takes forever aside from city to city). Hospitals are collapsing, Education is a free-for-all, average house prices are 8x average earnings.

    However we don't have Bush as a leader, so we're better off than America anyway.

  33. Military officers obey orders & procedures by nido · · Score: 3, Informative

    Most the military takes what it does very seriously. Then there are the political officers. In the months before 9/11, the Cheney administration changed the procedure so that NORAD had to get permission from the Secretary of Defense before they could intercept an off-course airplane. Before the civilian air traffic controllers & NORAD did the intercept thing on a regular basis.

    But wait, we don't believe in conspiracies here. Hmm.

    --
    Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
    www.teslabox.com
  34. Operation Enduring Yodel by StikyPad · · Score: 4, Funny

    Bah passports.. I'll just show my military ID. If they question it, I'll just say I'm bringing democracy to Yosemite.

  35. Eco 101 for the numerically challenged by Brickwall · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Last time I checked inflation has been consistently the lowest it's been the last twenty years than in any other time in our nation's history.

    You don't get out much, do you? Check out http://www.westegg.com/inflation/, and try the US from 1800-1850, and 1850-1900. Looking at the latter case first, what cost $100 US in 1850 cost $100.10 in 1900 - virtual price stability over half a century! In the former case, what cost $100 in 1800 cost less than $49 in 1850. Now read that last sentence over slowly for maximum comprehension - prices actually fell by half in the years 1800-1850.

    From 1900-1950, prices roughly tripled. From 1950-2000, prices roughly went up by a factor of 7. So if you're trying to say that recent inflation has been less than it was in, say, the 1970's, I'll agree with you, but your original statement is pure nonsense.

    Now maybe you mean cost of living. Yes that has gone up, but not so much do to increase costs, those have been steadily dropping as well in terms of real dollars, but in terms of people's expectations.

    Now, this is truly hilarious. What is the substantive difference between "cost of living" and "inflation"? Here's the Statistics Canada definition of cost of living:

    A cost-of-living adjustment is used to offset a change (usually a decrease) in the purchasing power of income. Cost-of-living adjustments modify future benefits, typically on an annual basis, to keep pace with inflation. These adjustments are usually linked to changes as measured by an index of movements in prices; the most widely used is the Consumer Price Index (CPI).

    I'll be the first to admit that there are many different ways to measure inflation, although the CPI is often the most common. The "GDP deflator" is another popular measure; it is usually very close to the CPI figure.

    Now, since you're clearly economically illiterate, let me fill you in a couple of not so widely hidden secrets. 1) Since both the US and Canadian governments are on the hook for huge entitlement programs, such as welfare, pensions, etc., all of which are subject to annual COLA changes, both governments have a vested interest in the keeping that COLA number as low as possible. Now, in 2003-2004, the average US household spent 34% of its net income on housing, 18% on transportation, and 13% on food; that's 65% of total disposable income. Doesn't leave a whole lot for those "wants" you rant on about, especially when you consider that health care and insurance/pensions eat up another 15% of income. (http://www.bls.gov/ro6/fax/cex_hou.htm) However, whenever you see "core CPI", it's usually accompanied by the phrase "not including volatile food and energy components". Meanwhile, housing expenses have been adjusted down to reflect the low rates people are paying on "teaser" mortgages that offered low initial rates, no down payment, no principal repayment, "overmortgaging" (i.e. providing a mortgage worth $130,000 on a $100,000 house - sweet, you've got $30k to buy a new car!), etc. Now, when those mortgages get reset this year and next (you have been reading about the sub-prime crisis, haven't you?), what do you want to bet that "volatile housing costs" will also be excluded from the government stats?

    And that's not even discussing the "hedonic" adjustments, where beauraucrats attempt to divine how much recent improvements in processor speeds, lower RAM and disk costs, etc. have lowered the "real" cost of computing resources. (I'll be the first to admit that the 512k RAM, 10MB disk Mac that I bought for $3,000 Cdn in 1985 was far more expensive in real terms than the Dell Pentium4 running at 2.8 Ghz with 512 MB RAM, and an 80 GB hard disk for $800 Cdn paid two years ago.) However, how do you compute the decrease in the cost of living from having 4 blades on your razor instead of 2? From having 4 or 6 airbags in your car instead of 2? In short, the official statistics are giggered to produce a consistently

    --
    What was once true, is no longer so