Slashdot Mirror
National ID Cards Mandated in the US, If You're Under 50
charleste writes "CNN is reporting that the US Homeland Security Department has mandated Real ID for drivers licenses. According to the article, this will not include a 'chip', but a list of options by state. Despite legislation passed in various states and objections by groups such as ACLU, this appears to be a done deal. Without one of the new IDs you will be unable to board a plane after 2014 if you are under 50."
1984 was not supposed to be an instruction manual.
THE BLACK HELICOPTERS ARE GOING TO GET US!
Seriously people, I'm all for civil liberties, but theres nothing wrong with have a solid method of making sure people are who they say they are and verifying they are allowed to get the identification they are allowed to get.
"Give someone a program, frustrate them for a day... Teach someone to program, frustrate them for a lifetime."
So my current license expired in 2015, but thansk to this I have to get a new one a year early....
sheeeesshhhh
What a pain.
Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
Even more reason to get out and vote in November.
And BEFORE THEN. Vote now! Otherwise we usually get stuck with a lesser of two evils thing in the general election.
I'm very much against Real ID for all of the reasons discussed here on Slashdot: the possibility for ID theft, the possibility for inappropriate use of personal information, the possibility of tracking our movements, etc.
But here's what's particularly egregious about this plan: nobody over 50 will have to get a Real ID for nearly 10 years! If Real ID is so unbelievably necessary to our national security, how can we allow this segment to not have an ID? Should we stop scanning older individuals at the airport because they are "less likely to be a terrorist"?
The Bush administration has repeatedly refused to comment on waterboarding because they say they do not want the terrorists to know which interrogation techniques we use. Well, DHS is telegraphing to the world what sort of security techniques we use: Pssst! We only check people less than 50!
Stupid stupid stupid! Hypocritical, hypocritical, hypocritical!
So basically almost all politicians in the legislation will be exempt.
Nice...
1984 was not supposed to be an instruction manual.
Actually, the appendex in "1984" IS an instruction manual.
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
Great idea, but sadly this is probably one of those issues that both parties agree upon.
Even more reason to get out and vote in November."
Why? Which candidate has come out against the Real ID act??
I'm pretty sure Ron Paul would be against it, but, who of the candidates with a realistic chance of being elected has come out against the Real ID act?
Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Under 50 is not a permanent exemption. After 2017, those over 50 will have to have a Real ID license as well. The additional 3 years for them was added so the states would have more time to issue everyone new licenses.
They probably want to wait the extra time so more of the baby boomers will die off, thus saving them the extra expense of equipping them all with a Real ID. I can seriously see someone in the upper echelon of government suggesting that as a way of saving money.
I won't even bother quoting Ben Franklin's line here, you all have seen it too many times already. We're in trouble. That apartment in Canada is starting to look much better now.
And they said zombies weren't real!
No, the US (United States Government) does not need a way to prove who you are. Your friend, the loan shark, gets defrauded for reasons that are his/her own policy.
Liberty is not having to prove who you are, unless faced with a probable-cause affidavit. We have an additional presumption of being not-guilty; having mandatory ID thwarts that presumption based on identity.
Your presumption that the world of liberty is dead because you feel there's a need to finger everyone is fallacious. You deserve what you get.
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither" Ben Franklin. Fie on your suggestion.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
If the tax-leeching baby boomers can figure it out, then the rest of the population will have no problems.
Blar.
Hmmn, it says here your license was issued in
Georgia. What is your business here in Moscow?
--dave
davecb@spamcop.net
Yes actually there is a problem with having that if, it is mandatory. Therein lies the problem. If the government or indeed any twit in a uniform can demand your "RealID" and keep a log of it then your activities can be logged, your participation in, say, an anti-war demonstration can be cataloged and perhaps come back to haunt you. Ditto for your other unpopular views or activities.
The theory of valid ID may perhaps be arguable but the practice of what is done with it is very very different.
Post 9-11 there was a push both for RealID and the idea that "for our protection" police should be able to demand id at all times. The place where this and other activities has been exploited the most is in watching anti-war groups. Google it and you'll find a host of nonviolent noncriminal groups that have been catalogued, followed, identified, simply because they oppose the war. I myself have watched the (not so subtle) undercover cops infiltrate gatherings I was at and have probably been videotaped a few times. Add to this the "right" for them to demand my papers at all times and all of a sudden we have national tracking that does nothing to actually protect us.
This may sound like ranting to you but I assure you that it is not. The simple fact of the matter is that if the information is being gathered then it can be used against us by anyone in power or anyone with access. Leaving aside the fact that the biometric requirements of "RealID" are an invitation to identity theft (all info in one handy place).
Let us not also forget that on 9-11 the hijackers had valid ID. Not forged, not illicit, they had the real thing and they would have easily qualified for RealID. When boarding the planes they took their ID, the made no attempt to hide themselves under false names. They were not on the "no fly" lists. They simply walked through security with real drivers licenses and killed thousands. No "beefed up" card will change that.
Airport Security : Id Sir?
Me: Here you go
Airport Security : This is not a real ID, sir
Me: But I'm over 50.
Airport Security : No, you're not. You look like you are 15, not 50.
Me: But, my Id says I'm 50.
Airport Security : But its not a Real ID, could be a fake we only trust Real IDs.
Me: So I need to get a Real Id saying I'm 50 in order to prove to you that i don't need a Real Id?
Airport Security : Please Sir, step into this room and remove all clothing.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
but of course, why not just have EVERYONE be required to have passports and accept that as ID like the rest of the world? It's not like the rest of the world does that or something.
I honestly don't understand what the problem is. There seems to be a hysterical "Show me your papers! OMG 1984!" knee jerk reaction whenever federal laws about driver's licenses are discussed. Why? Licenses exist in all states already. The set of things that licenses are required for is not changing. The states are just agreeing to make their licenses more similar. What's wrong with that?
I like the associated linked story: "REAL ID In Its Death Throes, Says ACLU"
I know people are going to flame about this, but seriously, on my list of urgent daily concerns...this ranks somewhere below seeing the replies to my slashdot posts.
National ID mandated? (shrug)
My civil rights are being infringed, somehow? (shrug)
I'll get upset when it gets in my way. Getting all frothy and bothered about something before it happens is the luxury of those with too much time on their hands.
-Styopa
First you get an ID.
Then you need that ID to fly.
Then you need that ID to leave the country.
Then you need that ID to get into the country.
Then you need that ID to vote.
Then you need that ID to cross state borders.
Then you need that ID to buy gas.
Then you need that ID to be a legal citizen.
Slowly but surely, it will become a 'Show me your papers' issue. Imagine just walking down the street, a cop sees you, maybe he's having a bad day, maybe you roughly match the description of a wanted criminal, he approaches you and asks for you national ID. You don't have it though, because you were just going for a walk. Next thing you know, you're heading down town, handcuffed in the back of a crown vic. Sure, they'll let you out, once you can get a friend to bring your ID in, or go through the red tape to get the State to produce the paper work, but by that point you've been printed, your arrest has been recorded, and you're out a few hours to a few days getting everything straightened out.
Fear mongers will use it as a tool against illegal immigrants first. By requiring the national ID to be able to do the most mundane of things, they'll push aliens further out of the legal realm. Then all it would take is another attack to spur off a series of knee jerk reactions that lead to certain racial/ethnic groups having their cards pulled, leaving them as 2nd class citizens, virtually outlaws because they have no ID to prove their legitimacy in the US.
Yes, it's a paranoid delusion. But so was the idea that the US would use black site prisons, suspend habeas corpus, and invade a sovereign nation on manufactured intelligence. Given enough time, the system will be abused, and civil liberties will be eroded.
And the whole time, this card will do nothing to make our country more secure.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Besides the fact that the Real ID Act is a clear violation of the 10th amendment, I shouldn't have to prove who I am to board a plane (they aren't required for trains, cars, busses, subways, etc) and the bank should accept any reasonable proof that I am the owner of the account I am attempting to access (except for tax reasons they don't even need to know who I am, as long as they know I own the account).
If Social Security Numbers have tought us anything it is that any national means of identification will be abused until it is required for just about anything.
Plus, I'm not really buying the ACLU's arguments about losing civil liberties. Exactly what "civil liberties" are we losing here, anyway? I seriously doubt that, even with RealID, we're going to take a step back to the days of mid twentieth century Russia where they're going to throw you in the Gulag in Siberia for not being able to produce an ID when they ask you for it. In reality, chances are that they just won't let you on the plane, let you into the IRS building, or let you vote, or something like that,..."
Wow...please tell me you aren't serious on all this??
Instead of asking why should we be concerned...like this is all good and normal, why aren't you asking WHY the govt. NEEDS to do this? Aside from knowing enough about you to collect taxes, what the hell does the govt. really need to know about you? What does anyone need to know about you in most cases? Nothing. Why would the govt. need to track your travels? What happened to the govt. not being able to deny your freedom to travel by any means you wish...without providing identity? It has never been needed in the past really. I remember flying without needing to show my ID at all. I remember not going through a security checkpoint. I remember being able to take people flying to the gate, or meeting them as they got off the plane.
I know there is an increased risk these days, and I don't really mind the security checkpoint. But, if I'm not carrying weapons, why the hell does the govt. need to know who I am or where I'm going? Hell, if a terrorist gets on a plane, with no weapons....what harm is he going to do??
And you example at the end of your post...they should answer your own question. Being barred from a public building where YOU pay taxes?? Not let you fly?
Ok..well, once they get you accepting that...when will you get mad? What will they have to prevent you from doing without a REAL ID before it bothers you?
What happens when this database gets cracked...and the 'definitive' ID system is broken, but, still depended upon? If you're ID gets messed up....you are screwed.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Nowhere does this plan call for citizens to carry ID, nor does it affect anything other than driver's licenses.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
War is Peace,
Freedom is Slavery,
Ignorance is Strength
Well thanks to Mr. Bush the US has managed to achieve 2 out of 3 so I guess now he's working on the 'freedom' angle...
Who else liked internal paper control? Hitler, Stalin, Mao... (and the Neocons/Neolibs now, apparently)
Part of the problem is that NI really is a nice tool in shutting out the undesirables (you can't get a job, you can't travel, you can't use banks, can't rent or even pay a lot of your bills unless the Govt says you can).
So yes, unfortunately National ID really does work against criminals. The question we should be asking is who decides who is a criminal (and can they be trusted).
Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
So, the nose of the camel is already in the tent, so there is no point trying to stop it now? If anything we need to start the push the other direction and start trying to wake people up to the problems of 24/7 monitoring, before it becomes a reality.
Pull your heads out of your asses you fucking Yanks.
Yup, us Yanks have done a pretty good job of planting our heads up our collective asses recently. Sometime back after WWII we just sort of gave up on personal responsibility, we gave up on taking care of ourselves, we gave up on trying to keep our republic. And look where it has gotten us. We decided that we didn't want to be responsible for ourselves anymore, and we asked the government to do it for us. And, as is its nature, the government was willing to do anything to allow itself to expand.
It has been a death spiral ever since. The more bad things which happen, the more we run to the government to fix it; the government expands to try and do so, and fails because the solutions for most of our problems can only come from the people themselves taking responsibility for themselves and their communities. Undeterred by the continuous failure of government to actually solve social problems, the people keep running back to it and screaming, "fix it!" And the government continues to grow. Eventually, this will come back to haunt us. Eventually, the next step in government growth will be a police state and actual tyranny, and the US people will cheer its coming. It will be to later generations to suffer and die to throw it off again, but at least those with their heads up their asses will have a few brief days of serenity, believing that they are safe. Until the jackbooted thugs show up at their door in the night for thinking the wrong things.
We have a chance to stop this, and the time is now. It will be far easier to stop the growth of a police state, and deflate the government and put it back in its little box before it reaches the critical mass of tyranny. Right now, we still have some dregs of liberty left. We can still dissent, we can still speak our minds and we can still try and change things without the jackbooted thugs arriving in the night. How much longer that will last no one rightly knows; but, the time to fight is not when the boot is on your neck, the time to fight is when you are still on your feet and have a chance.
RealID is not, by itself, much of a threat. It is, though, a small piece in a much larger puzzle of out of control government tyranny. We don't resist it, deride it and try to stop it just because of itself. We do so because we can step back and see the much larger picture which is coming together, and it scares us. Stopping RealID won't stop that picture altogether either, but it will make it harder, it will create a disruption and that is good. Keeping our republic is not a matter of winning any one fight, it is a matter of a continuous struggle against anything which threatens any small piece of it. It is exhausting and will only end when we give up and let our republic die.
"Well Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?"
"A republic if you can keep it." --- Benjamin Franklin
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
What is it about being 50+ in 2014 that makes you a security nonrisk? Well... it makes you a Baby Boomer, since you'd have to be born before 1964, and since the life expectancy is about 75, probably dead if you're from the previous generation.
This fake Terror War is really just Baby Boomers attacking the next generation even harder than they did the previous generation when they first started to grab power in the 1960s. Now that they've got all the power, they're the worst tyrants the country has ever had.
If they're so afraid, they should just stay home.
--
make install -not war
Look 9/11 was a frightening day, because 30 minutes later and 50 stories lower and 50,000 people died. For the first time since the War of 1812, the US Mainland was hit in war. We were all generally terrified of becoming like Israel in the early 1990s at the beginning of the upswing that followed Oslo.
It's not the fear of a 3000 casualty hit and loss of buildings... it's the fear of something bigger.
The fact is Al Qaeda is relatively overblown. They may be the only group with a global reach, but their global reach isn't that significant. Think about it, they got 19 guys in to hijack planes when the assumption was don't fight hijackers, they generally let everything go peacefully. They hit two buildings, but before they were supposed to (they obviously wanted to simultaneously hit them after 9 AM to maximize damage), 30 minutes apart, and too high to maximize damage.
The fact is, for all the bluster of Islamic Terrorists, they haven't done anything impressive. The most impressive operation was Hezbollah's holding off of Israel, and even that was a joke. They claimed a military victory, but only in the Arab world can your land be occupied by a foreign power, you hold none of their territory, and your roads and bridges are destroyed yet you are victorious because it took more than a week to wipe you out. That, like 9/11, is overplayed. Israel retooled their military once they had a reminder that "surrounded by enemies" isn't just PR, it's real and requires your military be prepared for an actual war, not just policing malcontents in disputed land, and by the time people heard on the 4th plane that they weren't negotiating, they were blowing things up, the people on the plane took it over and ended the issue.
That said, we should keep an eye on things, because these people do just want to inflict lots of damage... fortunately they aren't that bright. If you haven't noticed, every middle eastern "nuclear weapons program," despite years of effort, somehow is always X years/months away, where X is always longer than the Manhattan project. I have no doubt that the Arab world has it's share of brilliant minds (they were the scientific leaders for centuries), but in the Arab world, decades of oppressive dictatorships have managed to kill or exile every independent thinker, and now they seem incapable of anything impressive, and their government projects are run by total morons.
If Al Qaeda had their act together, 9/11 would have been a start to a wave. Hitting soft targets every week would have caused massive financial collapse in America... if everyone was scared to go to shopping malls because bombs were going off weekly, consumer spending would have contracted and US economic might would have fell apart. Fortunately, the Islamic terrorists aren't that bright, and are more interested in big flashy things to make recruiting videos, not about actually waging war with the US. These movements need a steady supply of naive, bored young teenagers and 20 somethings, so their goal is projects that would be exciting to an upper middle class Arab youth that is bored with life.
Instead of living on daddies money and getting stoned in college while talking up socialism over the pizza put on the Gold Card, like their American counterparts, they can convinced to blow themselves up to fight the US/Israel/Zionism and martyr themselves. The terrorists #1 goal is recruiting more foot soldiers, actually hurting us is a distant second.
...it's perfectly reasonable to set a standard for how id is verified and secured. The only part that is unreasonable is anything that causes the info to get moved up to the federal level. Though even that's really a lost cause: ssn already provides that, and with the requirement to have passports even to go to canada and mexico, the vast majority of us already have our "papers".
I wonder if it would be possible to do a physical equivalent to openid?
According to the current CNN article, 17 US states have either State Constitutions that legally override this non-interstate commerce regulation or have otherwise sued on behalf of the legal State Privacy rights of their citizens.
You can read about the legal suits by 17 states and decide if this is just Big Brother, or a bunch of privacy-hating anti-American bureaucratic incompetents who hate our values.
But it should be noted that the 17 states represent more than 50 percent of the US economy, and most legal jurists agree that it is unlikely that the US Supreme Court will strike down the states legal objections. Unless they want us to activate our state militias - and considering we control most of the armed forces, that might not be such a great concept.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Why would I want to commit criminal acts ? Well, I don't know, *yet*. What is criminal tomorrow may be something that is perfectly legal to do today. Even if it is illegal today, I may find myself in a situation where I am compelled to commit a criminal act, for whatever reason, be it for my own safety or liberty. Laws, after all, are formulated for the masses, they are not suitable for imposing on 100% of the people 100% of the time. That sounds elitist, but every person is an elite of one.
Take drugs for instance. (I don't want to get into specific examples, because they detract from the main principle, but)- If I grow and smoke my own cannabis, who exactly am I harming ? I am not financing terrorists, I am not financing columbian warlords or the Taliban, and as I consume all I grow, I am not corrupting schoolkids, by hanging around the playground trying to push it on others. The only "crime" is that I am not paying tax on my pleasure. But because the law works in respect of the masses, I am penalised for a purely personal action, because you can't trust everybody to be so honest and responsible. Why should I suffer the loss of my freedom because others can't be trusted ? (This is why I don't want to get into examples, there will be loads of posts spouting crap about we all have to give up certain freedoms for the good of society).
To get back to the main point, my ability to break the law. Freedom includes the ability to break the law, if I so choose. If we are to have a moral society, it must be at the choice of that society, not imposed upon it. I don't murder, steal, rape etc, not because they are illegal, but because I have no inner drive compelling me to do so. I don't need a law to tell me not to do these things. The law is not designed to prevent me from doing these things either, it exists to provide a framework in which those who do commit such acts can be punished. Remember that part, it's important - Law provides a framework for punishment.
Now while I may not commit murder, I do quite often break the speed limit, or watch a downloaded movie. These are not unspeakably evil acts, but they are breaking the law. There are other situations in which I could conceive of breaking more serious laws. The point is, until I reach a situation, I have no way of knowing what I might have to do. To voluntarily submit to laws which restrict my freedom of action now, without knowing how that will affect my future freedom would be dumb.
I use Linux. One of the main reason for that choice is, Linux is not Microsoft. If there were a law passed which made the use of unauthorised operating systems illegal, then you can bet MS would be the legal choice. Windows is already one of the most controlling environments available, so if it were influenced by govt. then all sorts of horrible scenarios present themselves. Under such a system, Linux (or another free OS) would be the only sane choice. But of course it would be illegal. Oh dear, I'm a criminal.
Now we come to REAL ID and other such governmental record keeping. This kind of lawmaking serves no purpose other than to make the lives of those in power easier. That is to say, they get to consolidate their power over the rest of us, by closing off all avenues of escape or evasion. Well if you haven't paid taxes for 5 years and the govt. is chasing you, then the law makes sense. But if you just want to remain quietly anonymous, the the law works against you. You are part of the system, whether you are a criminal or not. And don't give me any of that "if you've got nothing to hide" crap. That's a childs argument to trick you into showing your hand. How many people who use that argument walk around naked ?
Maybe I'm getting old, but
That is ridiculous. Guess what? Between 50,000 and 125,000 people left the US for Canada alone because of opposition to the Vietnam War (source). Full-scale protests and majority opposition to the Vietnam War started in 1967, and the US withdrew in 1973. So looks like those protests did a hell of a lot of good.
I apologize in advance for the flame, but I am so sick of this nostalgic backwards-looking bullshit from the baby boomer generation. Just because your generation talked about free love and had some protests while they were in college doesn't mean a goddamn thing. Most of the people gave up trying to change things, took a job with a multinational, became a born-again Christian, voted for Reagan 15 years later, and fucking ruined everything. And now they're buying mutual funds. The only legitimately successful social change that came out of the 60's was the Civil Rights Movement. Everything else is self-congratulatory bullshit.