Slashdot Mirror
Indiana Bans Driver's License Smiles, For Security
Smelly Jeffrey writes "According to a recent article, Indiana BMV Communications Director Dennis Rosebrough states that applicants for a new or renewed operator's license or state identification card will no longer be allowed to smile and say cheese. Apparently new facial recognition software being employed by the state fails to function when the face is distorted by something as innocuous as smiling. Also on the list of taboos are hats, eyeglasses, and hair that hangs down over the face. The article fails to mention, however, the legality of beards, mustaches, and bushy eyebrows." Similar restrictions are in place for the Enhanced Driver License (which serves as a sort of limited passport) implemented by the state of Washington, among others.
This is a rule in the UK already for passports, driving licenses, immigration applications etc. Also the background can't be pure white, no hair can be covered (except for religious reasons), only one person per picture, and it's quite tightly defined where in the photo the face must be.
And the employee that gives out the passport is not allowed to question your believe. By this reasoning someon managed to gat a official id card dressed as joker. He later fialed to a a drivers license as joker because the employee refused. In that case you also seem to have no rights.
by the way, later his card was taken in because the card is still owned by government..
That's generally a feature of fascist regimes, but not "the basic tenet", and it certainly isn't why we dislike fascism. Many European countries from 1945 to the mid-eighties also "bundled the powers of state and industry", but they were hardly fascist.
Fascism is defined by extreme nationalism and a disregard for basic human rights. That's what sets it apart from other more benign ideologies.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
The law doesn't actually force the states into making the drinking age 21. As is usual, when Congress anticipates the "that's unconstitutional!" outcry, they, rather than mandate it, make some funding conditional upon it. So, federal interstate highway funding in your state is conditional upon the 21 drinking age and the 0.08% legal limit of intoxication. But the federal government didn't "mandate" it. Neat trick, huh?