FBI Bringing Biometric Photo Scanning To North Carolina, Via DMV

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FBI Bringing Biometric Photo Scanning To North Carolina, Via DMV

Posted by timothy on Tuesday October 13, 2009 @03:17AM from the if-you-have-nussink-to-hide dept.

AHuxley writes "The FBI is getting fast new systems to look at local North Carolina license photos via the DMV. As the FBI is not authorized to collect and store the photos, they use the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles. The system takes seconds to look at chin widths and nose sizes. The expanded technology used on millions of motorist could be rolled out across the USA. The FBI's Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System is also getting an upgrade to DNA records, 3-D facial imaging, palm prints and voice scans."

221 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Shakrai · 2009-10-13 03:19 · Score: 5, Insightful

NH gives you the option to have your picture removed from their database after they print your license. Too bad more states aren't that progressive. Why is Government even allowed to use our driver licenses for anything other than driving, anyways? I don't even carry mine unless I'm driving. Why would I?

--
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
1. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 03:24 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  How do you know it's actually removed?
  Governments can't be trusted. Government software systems developed by expensive consultants often can't be trusted to work properly, even for their simplest functionality.
2. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by z4ns4stu · 2009-10-13 03:31 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  In Oklahoma and a few other states (Connecticut for sure) all adults are required by law to have photo identification on them at all times. If you don't qualify for a DL, you can still get a State-issued ID card.
  
  --
  The whole moon and the entire sky are reflected in one dewdrop on the grass. - Dogen
3. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by poetmatt · 2009-10-13 03:32 · Score: 1
  
  that's pretty much standard worldwide, however that has nothing to do with what the OP is saying.
4. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by StikyPad · 2009-10-13 03:39 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  This is a common misconception, but you're only required to identify yourself if asked. Carrying a license is obviously required when engaged in the relevant activity (driving, hunting, selling alcohol, etc.)
  
  --
  https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
5. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by LordAndrewSama · 2009-10-13 03:46 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  That's not the case in Britain. Nor iin South Africa. Although it was for black people during apartheid. I guess I'll start calling your country the land of the less free every day?
6. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by daem0n1x · 2009-10-13 03:48 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I'm so glad private corporations exist, because they are sooooo more reliable. And their consultants are sooooo much cheaper.
7. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by SydShamino · 2009-10-13 03:51 · Score: 2
  
  In Oklahoma and a few other states (Connecticut for sure) all adults are required by law to have photo identification on them at all times.
  [Citation Needed]
  
  --
  It doesn't hurt to be nice.
8. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by daem0n1x · 2009-10-13 03:54 · Score: 1
  
  Why is Government even allowed to use our driver licenses for anything other than driving, anyways? I don't even carry mine unless I'm driving. Why would I?
  Maybe having a national ID card, like most of the world, would help to avoid that.
9. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by spinkham · 2009-10-13 03:55 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Any interaction with police not involving a motor vehicle should involve primarily these phrases:
  "Am I being detained?" "Am I free to go?"
  If you are being detained, stop and identify laws in about 1/2 of the states allow officers to demand identification. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_Identify_statutes#States_with_.E2.80.9Cstop-and-identify.E2.80.9D_statutes Even in most of those states, you are only required to state your name, not provide documents or any further information besides your name.
  You new script is now:
  "I do not consent to a search" "I do not wish to answer questions without a layer present"
  See http://www.flexyourrights.org/street_stop_scenario for the slightly more complicated automobile case.
  Police officers script many of their interactions because of the legal requirements.. You should also.
  Note, much of this advice I've received from police officer friends. Endeavor to be polite, but don't give up your rights voluntarily. If the officer has probable cause to hold you or search your belongings, they will make that clear and won't ask for your permission. If they're asking, not telling, say no.
  
  --
  Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
10. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Shakrai · 2009-10-13 03:56 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Maybe having a national ID card, like most of the world, would help to avoid that.
  
  Maybe if the rest of the world valued liberty over convenience we'd be better off.
  
  --
  I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
  We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
11. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Herkum01 · 2009-10-13 03:59 · Score: 1
  
  Considering the United States has one of the highest, if not the highest, rates of incarceration in the world. I wonder if the USA really values liberty over persecuting people.
12. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by poetmatt · 2009-10-13 04:03 · Score: 0, Offtopic
  
  Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but do you know how many countries require you to have a passport to get in? All of the european union for sure. Not *once* you're in, but to get in for example.
13. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Shakrai · 2009-10-13 04:04 · Score: 1
  
  Most of that is attributable to the so-called War on Drugs. There are a few exceptions but by and large the rest of the world isn't doing any better than the United States on that front. More's the pity.
  
  --
  I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
  We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
14. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 04:07 · Score: 0
  
  Yup, not in Australia, France, New Zealand, Netherlands, Belgium... I could go on and on.
15. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by mcgrew · 2009-10-13 04:10 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  I'm glad Illinois kept my picture.
  The last time I renewed my license, I wouldn't have had to go down to the DMV thanks to a good driving record. However, I'd had eye surgery and for the first time in my life I had a chance to get the "corrective lenses" restriction removed. I was happy as hell when they took my picture, and also for the first time in my life the picture wasn't unflattering.
  Last April my wallet was stolen, and when I had it replaced they used the picture form the database. But it would be nice to have the option.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
16. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by LordAndrewSama · 2009-10-13 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  Sure, totally agree, to get into the UK, I had to wave my passport, and south africa Is the same, but the bloke I was replying to was saying it's required by law to walk around at all times with ID worldwide. which is horribly wrong.
17. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 04:23 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  At least when the Comcast monopoly or other corporations come-round demanding money, I can tell them to "Fuck off; I don't want your service." Try doing that with the U.S. or State government sometime. There are three possibilities: (1) Suck the money directly from your paycheck. (2) Jail. (3) Get shipped to Afghanistan, Vietnam or some other place where we are currently fighting.
  Corporations are bad, evil, et cetera but at least I can ignore them. I can't ignore Congress because they keep pushing their way through my front door, trying to run every piece of my life.
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
18. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 04:28 · Score: 0
  
  In Oklahoma and a few other states (Connecticut for sure) all adults are required by law to have photo identification on them at all times.
  [Citation Needed]
  Considering some of the people I knew when I lived in OK, if its not on the books, it should be.
19. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 04:30 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  you are wrong anonoass.
  
  http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071003114409AAOBi8n/
20. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 04:34 · Score: 1, Offtopic
  
  >>>Governments can't be trusted.
  I'm glad Hitler didn't have this photo-filtering technology in 1935. He would have skipped all the nonsense of registration and yellow armbands, and just gone directly to drivers' licenses to find and round-up all the Jews (and other enemies). This new efficient technology would have allowed him to succeed in his goal virtually overnight. Oh yes I know. Godwin's Theory. I don't care - history is history and those who ignore history are fools.
  Or just read the book Fatherland -
  - "The setting is Berlin, 1964, some 20 years after the Third Reich's victory in World War II. Germany and the U.S. the world's two superpowers, find themselves in a cold war resulting from a nuclear stalemate; but U.S. President Joe Kennedy is soon to visit Berlin for an historic summit meeting with Hitler, clearing the way for detente. Meanwhile, cynical police detective Xavier March finds hard evidence of the wartime extermination of Europe's Jews..."
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
21. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by daem0n1x · 2009-10-13 04:35 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Corporations are bad, evil, et cetera but at least I can ignore them. I can't ignore Congress because they keep pushing their way through my front door, trying to run every piece of my life.
  Have you tried getting out and seeing the world? Corporate abuse and monopolies are all around. You can't ignore them, nobody can. And the worst that can happen is when corporations and the government get together.
22. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by drinkypoo · 2009-10-13 04:36 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Much of the world that is having the hardest time with the "War" on unlicensed drugs is having it because the USA is insisting upon it. Meanwhile the USA is one of the world's largest producers and consumers (import and export, consumption and production, and trafficking as well) of illegal drugs. It's solely about profit; even prisons are often for-profit now, which anyone should be able to see is a form of slavery that can only be self-perpetuating in a capitalist oligarchy.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
23. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 04:38 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  The U.S. Supreme Court over-turned those laws as illegal searches. You're required to provide basic information like your name, address, but not required to show a photo ID. You need not carry anything on your body.
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
24. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 04:41 · Score: 1
  
  Spain has legalized drugs. Now if you're caught rather than being arrested, you may ask for free medical assistance to break the habit. Or continue on your merry way.
  What an enlightened policy. Don't punish people - help them.
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
25. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by daem0n1x · 2009-10-13 04:46 · Score: 1
  
  At least we don't have so many of our population in jail so it's cheaper.
  About the war on drugs, it seems that the rest of the world, while not doing much better, is doing a lot less worse.
  Maybe the "war on drugs" is somewhat of a poor excuse and there are other causes, like, for instance, hum, income inequality?
26. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Shakrai · 2009-10-13 04:52 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  Correlation != causation. In any case, if your argument is "We suck, but you suck more" then I don't think this is going to be a particularly productive dialog :)
  
  --
  I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
  We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
27. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 04:54 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  >>>Any interaction with police not involving a motor vehicle should involve primarily these phrases: "Am I being detained?" "Am I free to go?"
  I think even that's too much. I prefer to give my name, my address (if asked), and then silence. I might say something like "According to my Miranda Rights and the 5th Amendment I'm not required to answer," but most times I just keep silent.
  I've seen too many videos where people repeat "Am I detained" and "Am I free to go" as if they are having a verbal fight with the officer. No good can come of that. It merely escalates the tension of the encounter, whereas silence tends to be calming and de-escalate.
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
28. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Shakrai · 2009-10-13 04:54 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  How are they legalized if you still have to worry about getting "caught"? Perhaps you meant to say decriminalized instead?
  
  --
  I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
  We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
29. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 04:56 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  >>>If the officer has probable cause to hold you or search your belongings, they will make that clear and won't ask for your permission.
  What I hate is when they use a dog. The U.S. Constitution required an oath before a judge, and since dogs cannot take oaths, they shouldn't be able to establish probable cause either.
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
30. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Shakrai · 2009-10-13 04:57 · Score: 1
  
  And the worst that can happen is when corporations and the government get together.
  Sounds like an argument for keeping Government small and limited in the powers it can exercise. Otherwise Government starts to intrude into the marketplace and instead of a free market we wind up with monopolies backed by the power of the state.
  
  --
  I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
  We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
31. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 04:58 · Score: 1
  
  You saying people with glasses are unflattering? Hmph. (walks off)
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
32. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by daem0n1x · 2009-10-13 05:01 · Score: 1
  
  if your argument is "We suck, but you suck more"
  You are right, "Correlation != causation." is a lot more insightful.
33. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Shakrai · 2009-10-13 05:02 · Score: 1
  
  Do you think they should be able to use the dogs once probable cause has been established through other means? I have an issue with them using the dogs to get PC (a trained handler can make a dog "hit" on anything) but I do tend to think they should be able to use them if they already have PC.
  
  --
  I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
  We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
34. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by daem0n1x · 2009-10-13 05:06 · Score: 1
  
  Why not the other way around? Ah OK, it's not compatible with the free-market mantra, that will bring prosperity and happiness to all the universe anytime soon. Thou shall not deny the Dogma!!!
35. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Shakrai · 2009-10-13 05:11 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think of myself as a particularly strong free-market fan. I'm just skeptical of government attempts to "correct" imbalances in the market. Given the choice between the evil of the free market and the evil of government, I'll choose the markets any day of the week.
  
  --
  I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
  We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
36. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 05:14 · Score: 1
  
  Apparently you can not read. Let me repeat - "Corporations are bad, evil, et cetera but at least I can ignore them." I hate corporations; I just hate government more. Even before corporations existed, governments were going-round killing people. Look at Nero and the old Roman Republic.
  Anyone who believes they can trust government, after the thousands of years of history showing you can not, is a fool.
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
37. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by daem0n1x · 2009-10-13 05:15 · Score: 1
  
  Before governments existed, people killed each other for food, shelter or anything. Don't blame it on governments.
38. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 05:19 · Score: 0
  
  In Colorado I guess they can conduct 2 pat downs
  Who do I contact when my law's have typos?
  State senator? State Web Master?
  http://www.dvmen.org/dv-177.htm#16-3-103
  "(1) A peace officer may stop any person who he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime and may require him to give his name and address, identification if available, and an explanation of his actions. A peace officer shall not require any person who is stopped pursuant to this section to produce or divulge such person's social security number. The stopping shall not constitute an arrest.(2) When a peace officer has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this section and reasonably suspects that his personal safety requires it, he may conduct a pat-down search of that person for weapons.
  (2) When a peace officer has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this section and reasonably suspects that his personal safety requires it, he may conduct a pat-down search of that person for weapons."
39. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by TubeSteak · 2009-10-13 05:27 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I'm glad Illinois kept my picture.
  The road to 1984 is paved with convienence.
  What is convienent for you is also convienent for law enforcement & other government agencies to troll through.
  This is why civil libertarians fight against government & private databases at every turn.
  There is a balance between convience and security, but the balancing point is highly individual.
  
  --
  [Fuck Beta]
  o0t!
40. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by cayenne8 · 2009-10-13 05:38 · Score: 1
  
  "Sounds like an argument for keeping Government small and limited in the powers it can exercise. Otherwise Government starts to intrude into the marketplace and instead of a free market we wind up with monopolies backed by the power of the state."
  Hmm...now if only we could come up with a document, that would enumerate the limited powers of said small and limited government.
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
41. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by ubercam · 2009-10-13 05:40 · Score: 1
  
  AFAIK, in Germany the cops can ask for your papers at any time. I think Germans are required to have their National ID Card on them at all times. I've met some hold outs who refuse to get one and would rather spend time in jail. A British friend of mine was just walking down the street one day in Germany and some man popped out of a shop doorway and was like "Hey, hey, you there, hey, hey, stop!" and my friend just kept walking thinking the guy was trying to sell him something or whatever, but the man persisted and he finally turned around and was like "F off man I'm not interested!" and the guy was like "Show me your papers. I'm a cop," and flashed his badge. My friend was like "Uhh, I'm just an exchange student, I left my passport in my flat." I think he said he ended up showing him his bank card from the UK or possibly his National Insurance Number card and eventually the guy let him off with a strict warning to always carry ID.
  Once here in Canada my friend was pulled over for a burnt out headlight and the cop asked us both for ID and whether or not either of us had any outstanding warrants for our arrest. I replied "I hope not!" I know legally as a passenger in a vehicle that I don't have to give them anything but my name and date of birth, but we didn't want to spend half an hour at the side of the road arguing with the power-tripping asshole. Thankfully that particular police force has been dissolved and replaced by the RCMP for intentionally screwing up an investigation of an off drunk duty cop plowing into a car and killing the driver.
  Oh and the whole no-passports-required thing in the EU is called the Schengen Area. For the most part, every other full member country agrees to accept your entry if the first country you enter accepts you. AFAIK the UK is not part of the Schengen Agreement because they want to control and implement their own border policy independent of the EU's directives.
42. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by cayenne8 · 2009-10-13 05:42 · Score: 1
  
  "Before governments existed, people killed each other for food, shelter or anything. Don't blame it on governments."
  I don't think anyone is saying that there aren't a few things that the government is good for.
  Troubles is, aside from law enforcement, infrastructure, and defense...there isn't much left that you need or want govt. for.
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
43. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 05:51 · Score: 0
  
  that's BS.
  I know of no other country than the US with such an insane requirement
  I live in a free country in case you're wondering
44. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by modecx · 2009-10-13 05:52 · Score: 1
  
  You're required to provide basic information like your name, address, but not required to show a photo ID. You need not carry anything on your body.
  Sorry. The Supreme Court has further restricted these "Stop and Identify" state laws, in that you're under no obligation to answer any of those questions unless the officer has a reasonable suspicion that you're committing, have committed, or are about to commit a crime--i.e. you're detained... A simple question (am I free to go?) determines whether or not you've been detained. And if you are, simply giving your name is said to satisfy their demands. If you're arrested they have to inform you of your rights, and it's time to clap the trap and get a lawyer.
  I just wanted to make it clear: police have no right to roll up and detain anyone they see fit, for no reason. Even if you're doing something as shocking as openly carrying a sidearm in a state where it's legal, this does not give police the right to detain and harass you... Yes, even if THEY don't know, or pretend not to know this activity is legal. (guess that sword cuts both ways!)
  The answer to "papiers please!" is that it's time to stop expecting to have our rights trampled on, to start knowing the law and our rights better than big brother--and if they become grossly trod upon, it's our duty to file a lawsuit and collect a handsome settlement for our trouble. The more this happens, the more weary the police will be, and that's good for us.
  
  --
  Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
45. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 05:58 · Score: 0
  
  but most times I just keep silent.
  Just how often are you stopped by the cops? I cry bullshit.
46. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by eleuthero · 2009-10-13 06:01 · Score: 1
  
  The Supreme Court would have to do so in the end. How can an OK law be effectively prosecuted against a resident of Texas? If I go there on vacation, there is not a huge sign telling me that I have to have a driver's license or other ID with me at all times or I am guilty of law-breaking. Common sense would demand one if I were driving, but if I am stepping off a bus (which still does not require an ID for boarding), then I fail to see how another state could blast me for coming from a state that does not have a similar requirement. This is where federal oversight is actually a good thing.
47. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by spinkham · 2009-10-13 06:05 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Yeah, I didn't mean to imply that you were required to say those things over and over, just don't say much else. Most police officers are decent enough people, and just trying to offend them doesn't do anyone much good. Endeavor to be as polite as possible, but don't respond to questions that start with "May I?" in the affirmative. Avoiding saying yes is much harder then you would think as police practice how to get you to say yes without really thinking through what you've done.
  Also, if you do end up saying those things a number of times, by all means rephrase them. "Am I allowed to leave now?" "May I go now?".. Etc.. Don't be a jerk, or the courts might accept your actions as probable cause. But also realize they're trying to manipulate you, and get away as soon as you are allowed.
  Especially with drug enforcement being what it is in some districts, all it takes is an officer planting (or truly accidentally dropping) a single seed on you or your car, and your whole life can be upended. 99% of cops are decent people, but our laws are what they are to protect the abuse by the minority.
  Also, note none of this applies to border crossings or airports. The courts have mostly held that you have pretty much no rights in those places.. But even so, you can still fly without ID, just expect a rigorous search and possible short detention first.
  
  --
  Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
48. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by mcgrew · 2009-10-13 06:09 · Score: 1
  
  No, usually everyone's picture is unflattering with or without glasses, because by the time you get to the camera the bureaucracy has you throughly pissed off. It wasn't the lack of glasses that made it less unflattering (on my previous picture I wore contact lenses), but the fact that it was a light day there and I was in a great mood. And the DMV workers were not bad looking women and were actually NICE. Things sure got better at the DMV since Jessie White was elected.
  I was glad to ditch the specs because wearing glasses is a pain in the ass, as you well know.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
49. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 06:09 · Score: 0
  
  Even if you are not doing anything illegal, and then use the line "am i under arrest or am I free to go" then get ready for some serious harassment and a little stay in the police lockup. Cops HATE IT when people use those lines on them; even if ylu are completely innocent. They're just power hungry assholes who word(s) can and will be used against you for being pricks to them. Trust me I know and was the victime of this with Falmouth MA's finest.
50. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by mcgrew · 2009-10-13 06:17 · Score: 1
  
  That's why I said it should be optional.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
51. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by SBFCOblivion · 2009-10-13 06:22 · Score: 1
  
  That is most certainly false.
  Though, depending on which state you are in you may be required to at least provide your name. According to the linked wikipedia page Oklahoma doesn't even have a 'stop and identify' law let alone a 'papers please' law.
52. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 06:44 · Score: 1
  
  >>>Before governments existed, people killed each other for food, shelter or anything. Don't blame it on governments.
  Yes but when one person killed another person, it was just ONE person that was left dead. When a government official sets-out to kill, he can kill millions thanks to the power he wields. That's why government can not be trusted with any real power, and needs to be restrained with limits (i.e. a constitution of enumerated powers).
  As for corporations they too need to be restrained, by laws.
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
53. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by jamstar7 · 2009-10-13 06:49 · Score: 1
  
  Sounds like an argument for keeping Government small and limited in the powers it can exercise. Otherwise Government starts to intrude into the marketplace and instead of a free market we wind up with monopolies backed by the power of the state.
  Hmm...now if only we could come up with a document, that would enumerate the limited powers of said small and limited government.
  Maybe I'm getting old, but I coulda swore I heard of such a document someplace. From what I understand, though, that particular contract is in disuse at the moment, with no signs of revitilization, mostly due to corporate lobbying...
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
54. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Chees0rz · 2009-10-13 06:50 · Score: 1
  
  beer.
55. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 06:55 · Score: 1
  
  >>>then I fail to see how another state could blast me for coming from a state that does not have a similar requirement.
  "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." - One of the oldest legal precedents, and it basically means you are required to follow the laws of whichever state you're currently in. For example: Non-smoking laws inside a restaurant. Even if that's legal in Texas, it's not legal in most of the Northeast or Pacific states. If you have a kind judge he'll let you go, but he doesn't have to. State law is state law and ignorance of the law is not a defense.
  Sorry.
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
56. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by modecx · 2009-10-13 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  All the more reason that everyone should give that line any time they're harassed by the police. In four part harmony, if at all possible. Like James Madison said: As a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights. If you don't fight the scoundrels, you lose by default. Better to walk away with a bruised ego than never to make an effort. The worst that can happen is you end up on some kind of terrorist watch list. (it seems one man's patriot is always anothers' terrorist)
  
  --
  Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
57. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 07:06 · Score: 1
  
  >>>voiding saying yes is much harder then you would think as police practice how to get you to say yes without really thinking through what you've done.
  Right. Which is why silence is the best policy. You can't make mistakes or accidently volunteer information if you're mouth is closed. Don't Talk To Police video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
  .
  >>>border crossings or airports. The courts have mostly held that you have pretty much no rights in those places.
  You still have rights in airports if your travel was inside the U.S. For example there was a Congressman Ron Paul volunteer flying from St. Louis to Washington D.C. and detailed because the security guards wanted to know why he was carrying several thousand in cash. The guards have no right to ask that question if you have not crossed an international border. Video here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMB6L487LHM (starts at 1 minute)
  In my opinion this guy talked too much. He should have shut his mouth rather than interact with the officers.
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
58. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Shakrai · 2009-10-13 07:13 · Score: 1
  
  If you're arrested they have to inform you of your rights, and it's time to clap the trap and get a lawyer.
  Small matter, but no, they actually don't have to inform you of anything when they arrest you. They have to inform you of your rights before they question you after an arrest.
  
  --
  I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
  We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
59. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 07:13 · Score: 1
  
  >>>Do you think they should be able to use the dogs once probable cause has been established through other means?
  Sure. If an officer SEES a drug, then he has probable cause and can use whatever tools are available to help in his search. But a dog, or anonymous call from a neighbor, or any other non-officer should NOT be used for probable cause. Only the officer's own eyes, as afirmed by oath in front of a judge, can should be used.
  Else you have abuses like the Professor Gates cased (illegal entrance of his home with cause). Or this one (paster gets beaten after dog "smells" drugs that did not exist) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJF5cUWXA_A
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
60. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 07:19 · Score: 1
  
  I didn't mean "caught" as in arrested - I just meant the police will provide information on how to get free help to break the addiction. You don't have to take the help if you don't want it.
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
61. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by modecx · 2009-10-13 07:39 · Score: 1
  
  You're right of course.
  The trick is knowing when detainment becomes arrest, which has its own grey area. The fifth and Miranda do not apply to prearrest chatter or silence. A school of thought, however, says it's generally not advisable to be talkative during either happening, at lest if one values their freedom.
  
  --
  Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
62. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by drsmithy · 2009-10-13 07:41 · Score: 1
  
  At least when the Comcast monopoly or other corporations come-round demanding money, I can tell them to "Fuck off; I don't want your service."
  What do you do when all the companies providing the service you want behave in the same way ?
63. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 07:43 · Score: 0
  
  How many interactions with the police have you had? Or are you just using a hypothetical situation to stroke your anti-cop boner?
64. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Vinegar+Joe · 2009-10-13 07:44 · Score: 1
  
  (3) Get shipped to Afghanistan, Vietnam or some other place where we are currently fighting.
  If you're going to mention Vietnam you might as well add the Third Reich and Imperial Japan. Personally, I'd love to be shipped off to Vietnam........great beer, great food, outstanding beaches and the women are hot.
  
  --
  "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
65. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Gilmoure · 2009-10-13 08:00 · Score: 1
  
  Wooooo! Naked Connecticut hiking this winter!
  
  --
  I drank what? -- Socrates
66. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Gilmoure · 2009-10-13 08:11 · Score: 1
  
  Wait, you're saying that people kill people?
  Wah?
  You make it sound like people are at fault for all the ills of the world. Don' ya know that the sorrows of man are always to be assigned to something nebulous and far away, like the gods, or the devil, or government or corporations?
  
  --
  I drank what? -- Socrates
67. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by relguj9 · 2009-10-13 08:51 · Score: 1
  
  The picture on my license is blurry and the lighting is terrible, there is a fat chance in hell any image recognition software out there could ID me. A person would be hard pressed to positively ID me with the picture there and me standing next to it.
68. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 09:48 · Score: 0
  
  Much of the world that is having the hardest time with the "War" on unlicensed drugs is having it because the USA is insisting upon it. Meanwhile the USA is one of the world's largest producers and consumers (import and export, consumption and production, and trafficking as well) of illegal drugs. It's solely about profit; even prisons are often for-profit now, which anyone should be able to see is a form of slavery that can only be self-perpetuating in a capitalist oligarchy.
  The war on drugs is the very antithesis of capitalism. As are patents, as are copyrights, as are most of the things people complain about (like our state-controlled health insurance system in the US - not a god damned thing about that isn't fucked up or made worse by intervening). Are you a fucking moron?
69. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by eleuthero · 2009-10-13 10:07 · Score: 1
  
  Most cities in Texas do have non-smoking policies for restaurants... and even for public spaces (we're not that backward ;)). This said, it seems like it would be easy to challenge the enforcement of such a law on the basis of the interstate nature of the law. It would effectively require me to have some sort of identification from my state... which might not even offer one apart from a DL. Since not all of us want or need a DL...
70. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by z4ns4stu · 2009-10-13 10:28 · Score: 1
  
  I stand corrected. My belief that Connecticut had such a requirement came from a friend's father getting a ticket for not having proof of ID when we was stopped for carrying an open beer in a public area. Must have been a mitigating circumstance (the consumption of alcohol).
  
  --
  The whole moon and the entire sky are reflected in one dewdrop on the grass. - Dogen
71. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2009-10-13 11:17 · Score: 1
  
  Carrying a license is obviously required when engaged in the relevant activity (driving, hunting, selling alcohol, etc.)
  That is a common misconception too. Owning such a license is required, but in most states (probably all of them) there is no law that requires you to carry your drivers license when actually driving. It makes life harder if you get detained, but it is not a crime.
  
  --
  When information is power, privacy is freedom.
72. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by tompaulco · 2009-10-13 11:53 · Score: 1
  
  Not only that, but they won't give you a driver's license unless you let them scan your thumbprint, which has absolutely nothing to do with driving, and everything to do with them butting into your business.
  The company I work for also required a fingerprint scan and when I asked them how they were going to insure that my prints wouldn't end up in some government database somewhere, they said it was almost certain that they would.
  
  --
  If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
73. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by thejynxed · 2009-10-13 14:23 · Score: 1
  
  In PA it can land you a $500 (before court costs and other assorted backdoor taxes) fine, along with a misdemeanor mark on your record. It depends on if the police officer feels like you deserve to get screwed or not.
  
  --
  @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
74. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2009-10-13 14:55 · Score: 1
  
  Got a cite?
  
  --
  When information is power, privacy is freedom.
75. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by rantingkitten · 2009-10-13 15:57 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not sure that's true. Governments just love to make you present paperwork and documentation, then completely ignore it and look it up on their computers anyway. However they will not look it up on the computer if you don't have the paperwork first. If the paperwork says something in your favor but the computer says something against you, they will believe the computer. If, however, the computer supports you, but something is amiss with the paperwork, they'll tell you that the paperwork is invalid.
  
  That's the government mindset.
  
  With driver's licenses, it is no different. If I give my name and DOB to a cop that's usually enough for him to go back to his car, check the computer, see the photo ID on record, and verify that yes, that really is me. But if I don't actually have my license on me when this happens, he'll ticket me. Whether or not anything happens after that is up to the judge -- a scarce few will just say "Yeah, remember to carry your license next time, now get outta here," but most will throw the book at you.
  
  --
  mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
76. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2009-10-13 16:09 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not sure that's true.
  You are welcome, and in fact encouraged, to cite the relevant statutes that require that you carry your license when driving.
  
  --
  When information is power, privacy is freedom.
77. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by XDirtypunkX · 2009-10-13 19:14 · Score: 1
  
  In some countries the governments do other things well too, like providing affordable healthcare and good education.
78. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 21:29 · Score: 0
  
  I value my liberty so much I refuse to enter the US any more.
  Do you know what liberties must be surrendered at US borders?
  I am fighting the introduction of a national identity card in the UK and will bin my British passport rather than go on their heinous database that proposes to collect biometric data. Thankfully I can still get an Irish passport so I have a get out clause.
79. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Ol+Olsoc · 2009-10-14 00:22 · Score: 1
  
  You were just born too late. The heyday of the free market was the mid to late 1800's, Those were golden years, and people were allowed to get as rich as they deserved to.
  It wasn't quite as good for those children working in the mines and the factories, but we'll just ignore that. I think all those pictures of one armed little boys in factories were just altered using Photoshop beta .01 anyhow.
  
  --
  Why is this even on SlashDot?... Why is this even on Slashdot?...Why is this even on Slashdot?
80. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by cayenne8 · 2009-10-14 01:46 · Score: 1
  
  "In some countries the governments do other things well too, like providing affordable healthcare and good education."
  Hmm..well, so far, the US govt. hasn't done that well in the 'education' arena. Medicare/Medicaid (I get the confused) is in pretty bad financial shape.
  Frankly, I'm wanting to see them get those done right before they start messing with MY health needs.
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
81. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by bill_mcgonigle · 2009-10-14 03:31 · Score: 1
  
  NH gives you the option to have your picture removed from their database after they print your license.
  
  Note that they've recently switched to issuing temporaries on the spot and mailing the real one, so it persists for some period of time. I've had it on my to-do list for a while to check on how their backups are managed to comply with the law.
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
82. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by StikyPad · 2009-10-14 05:36 · Score: 1
  
  http://law.justia.com/idaho/codes/49ftoc/490030016.html
  http://law.justia.com/westvirginia/codes/17b/wvc17b-2-9.html
  http://law.justia.com/maine/codes/title29-ach0sec0/title29-asec1408.html
  http://law.justia.com/virginia/codes/toc4602000/46.2-104.html
  Shall I go on?
  
  --
  https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
83. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by commodore64_love · 2009-10-14 06:13 · Score: 1
  
  >>>In some countries the governments do other things well too, like providing affordable healthcare and good education.
  Not on this planet. There's not a single government on Earth that provides affordable healthcare (it costs ~$10,000 in taxes each year) or good eduction (many high school grads can't even find their own country on a map, or read a book). The belief that a central monopoly would somehow be responsive to customer demands is delusional..... as delusional as thinking the Microsoft monopoly provides a good user experience.
  .
  >>>According to the U.S. Census Bureau, nearly 47 million Americans were without health insurance in 2008
  Yes and that stat is completely-and-totally useless since it was conducted via a *mail-in ballot* (as worthless as an internet survey), and then extrapolated from a few thousands respondents to millions of people. It's flat wrong.
  In addition it was discovered a lot of people who checked "not insured" actually are insured - by the government Medicare, Medicaid, or SCHIP programs - because they didn't realize they were covered by Uncle Sam. Last but not least, you have to subtract ~10 million off that figure because they are not U.S. citizens. Non-citizens will still be uninsured even with universal Hillarycare or Obamacare.
  The estimates coming from actual *science-controlled* studies show the number of uninsured U.S. citizens (keyword) is only 8-9 million.
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
84. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2009-10-14 10:35 · Score: 1
  
  Shall I go on?
  Yes, you REALLY should.
  Every ALL of those statues that you quoted contained almost identical language saying:
  However, no person charged with a violation of the provisions of this section
  shall be convicted if a driver's license issued to the person and valid at the
  time of his arrest is produced in court.
  I mean COME ON dude, it is not a crime if you can't be convicted of it.
  
  --
  When information is power, privacy is freedom.
85. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by XDirtypunkX · 2009-10-14 16:48 · Score: 1
  
  Before making blanket statements about every country, you should check every country in the world. Here in Australia you would have to be earning ~$270,000 of taxable income (and not have any private health cover) to be paying $10,000 dollars for your public healthcare. The federal government maximum levy for health is 2.5% and that provides for 67% of public healthcare spending (and covers citizens, spouses, children and permanent residents).
  Needless to say, your average person pays less than that as do most people earning $270,000 because they have private insurance. I'm sure if a sparsely populated country of ex-cons can manage that, then other countries can and are.
  What you get for this includes free or subsidized trips to a GP (depending on which GP you want to go to, you have full choice) as well as free public hospital care, unless you choose to be a private patient at a public hospital. Being a private patient gives you more choices and allows you to hire any doctor you want (you're still subsidized 75% of the cost up to a cap as a private patient in a public hospital). It also includes subsidized price controlled medication and subsidized/free access to specialist private practice (including mental health professionals). What it doesn't include is full dental cover (although you can be treated by a public dentist, most are private).
  Not only that, we provide reciprocal free health care to citizen of countries we have an agreement with and they provide it to us. So in many countries in Europe, you still have public coverage as an Australian (as they do here).
86. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by thejynxed · 2009-10-15 23:20 · Score: 1
  
  Does the citation I finally paid off last July count? I ran into someone who nailed their brakes in the middle of an intersection and THEN decided to turn on their turn signal. Accident occurred in March.
  A) The accident was automatically my fault due to a stupid law in PA. Didn't matter that the guy was one car length in front of me and then nailed his brakes, while we were going 35mph. In an intersection (as in, literally in the middle).
  B) I got cited for careless driving ($350) and not carrying valid identification ($500). Insurance, registration, and inspection were all valid. I then had to bring valid identification to the local municipal office within five days of receiving the citation or face an arrest warrant. I didn't have my wallet on me, as I generally leave it at home unless I am going shopping or on a trip.
  Now I carry it on me at all times.
  
  --
  @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
87. Re:I wish my state was like New Hampshire.... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2009-10-15 23:50 · Score: 1
  
  No it doesn't count. As you yourself said, all you had to do was prove you were licensed at the time of citation and the charges are dropped.
  Its the same thing others have already cited in this thread - if you are licensed then there is no crime to convict you of, ergo it's not illegal.
  
  --
  When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Mr. Orwell Please Stand Up by kantos · 2009-10-13 03:20 · Score: 1

An interesting work around to the implicit right to privacy in the 9th amendment. The States are authorized to gather and store such information under the 10th amendment, however there is nothing preventing the FBI from asking kindly for access.

--
Any and all content posted above may be ignored, considered irrelevant, or otherwise dismissed.
1. Re:Mr. Orwell Please Stand Up by bconway · 2009-10-13 04:29 · Score: 1
  
  I believe they call it cleanroom reverse engineering around here.
  
  --
  Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
2. Re:Mr. Orwell Please Stand Up by commodore64_love · 2009-10-13 05:08 · Score: 1
  
  >>>there is nothing preventing the FBI from asking kindly for access.
  That's good news. It means the state government can say "no" and shoo the FBI away. My state run by Democrats will probably cooperate, but hopefully my future home in the Free State Project (New Hampshire) will say "frak off" and close the door to Washington D.C.'s intrusions.
  
  --
  "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
3. Re:Mr. Orwell Please Stand Up by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 06:05 · Score: 0
  
  No it is breaking the law either way. You are correct but most states used the constitution as a framework for their own consitutions.
  sec 5 of the north carolina constitution
  - Allegiance to the United States.
  Every citizen of this State owes paramount allegiance to the Constitution and government of the United States, and no law or ordinance of the State in contravention or subversion thereof can have any binding force.
  and (which reads similarly to the US 9th)
  Sec. 36. Other rights of the people.
  The enumeration of rights in this Article shall not be construed to impair or deny others retained by the people.
Anyone Know the Exact Rates by eldavojohn · 2009-10-13 03:29 · Score: 4, Interesting

I think this was tried in Florida (as the article notes) back in 2002 but was killed instantly. It seems the trial run had focused on true positives meaning that they only reported numbers on when a person who was in the database was identified correctly. But overlooked the false positives, especially regarding someone who was not in the database being identified incorrectly as being in the database of criminals. Now, that ate up so much time it was instantly canceled. Of course, the FBI have figured out how to reduce this by combining many biometrics and it's now not okay to smile when you get your license picture taken where I live (planning for the future of biometrics, I suppose).

Does anyone know what the rates are for false positives in this new system? How much time is wasted double checking results?

--
My work here is dung.
1. Re:Anyone Know the Exact Rates by techwrench · 2009-10-13 04:31 · Score: 1
  
  I remember reading Here back in December 08 about Indiana Banning smiling in License photos.
  I believe that rule is still in effect here.
  
  --
  It's You and I against the World... When do we attack?
2. Re:Anyone Know the Exact Rates by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 04:54 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Yet you can still wear a fucking burka.
3. Re:Anyone Know the Exact Rates by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 05:35 · Score: 0
  
  I think this was tried in Florida (as the article notes) back in 2002 but was killed instantly.
  Florida tried to institute counterfeit-proof driver licenses in 1997.
  Headline: Thieves Take Computers Used For Driver Licenses
  Thieves went in and robbed 7 DMVs for their license making equipment.
4. Re:Anyone Know the Exact Rates by BJ_Covert_Action · 2009-10-13 06:07 · Score: 1
  
  now not okay to smile when you get your license picture taken where I live (planning for the future of biometrics, I suppose
  I live in California and, to my knowledge, no such restriction applies on our license pictures. Nonetheless, when I renewed my license recently to have my motorcycle certification added to it the lady at the counter in DMV explained to me (after I flashed a reckless grin for the picture) that they preferred pictures where the person being photographed wasn't smiling. She said it made identification purposes smoother. Now, this young lady was, in my opinion, nowhere near attractive, but, in the most enthusiastic voice I could muster I explained to her that I couldn't help but smile when I laid my eyes on a girl as pretty as her.
  
  She blushed and took a picture of me smiling like a grinning idiot. It's amazing what a little social engineering can do since so many situations occur at a personal level ;)
  
  --
  Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
Now would be a good time to write your officials by Lord+Byron+Eee+PC · 2009-10-13 03:30 · Score: 2, Informative

Write your governor, state representatives, federal representatives, and your DMV to let them know how you feel.
Especially if you are a resident of NC. I for one would be pretty pissed off if I was forced to participate in a (virtual) line-up.
Hmm by ShooterNeo · 2009-10-13 03:31 · Score: 2, Interesting

Ignoring the Big Brother/Police state implications for the moment : how well does this technology actually work? How accurate could the measurement of chin width/nose size be if you only have a single photo to make measurements from? With a large uncertainty in your data, I would imagine that there would be many collisions in the database.
It doesn't seem likely that a camera could be set up somewhere in the state that could recognize any North Carolina resident with a driver's license. More likely than not, there would be thousands of hits for each face that walked by the camera, even if the subject wasn't in the database.
1. Re:Hmm by Thelasko · 2009-10-13 04:53 · Score: 1
  
  how well does this technology actually work?
  Just don't smile.
  
  --
  One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
I wonder what would have happened by GungaDan · 2009-10-13 03:31 · Score: 2, Insightful

had the NC DMV told the FBI to kindly go Cheney itself when issued the request? Seems they are under no obligation to share, but chose to do so. Now I wonder what the NC DMV is getting from the Feds in return...

--
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
1. Re:I wonder what would have happened by psykocrime · 2009-10-14 08:07 · Score: 1
  
  Unfortunately the NC state government are just lap dogs for the Feds. Our DMV has been one of the most aggressive about complying with RealID, and otherwise participating in the feds privacy violating schemes, for years now. Sad for a state with an unofficial state motto of "First In Freedom", huh?
  
  --
  // TODO: Insert Cool Sig
Sounds like by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 03:32 · Score: 0

y'all should start growing full face beards, just to piss them off.
1. Re:Sounds like by Anonymous+Monkey · 2009-10-13 04:01 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Yea, right. I'm half Pacific Islander, I don't think my three facial hairs will do much good.
  
  --
  We are the Borg...
2. Re:Sounds like by Ivan+Mawesome · 2009-10-13 04:06 · Score: 1
  
  Seriously. I have a full beard in my driver's license picture. Are they going to start making people shave? Treachery!
3. Re:Sounds like by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2009-10-13 11:28 · Score: 1
  
  Yea, right. I'm half Pacific Islander, I don't think my three facial hairs will do much good.
  Then try putting cotton balls beneath your lower lip and up each nostril before getting your DMV picture taken.
  That might distort the geometry of your chin and nose enough to make this system totally worthless and not be terribly obvious to the person taking the picture - worst case, just tell them you have a cold.
  
  --
  When information is power, privacy is freedom.
4. Re:Sounds like by Anonymous+Monkey · 2009-10-13 13:12 · Score: 1
  
  Sounds like a something from The Scarlet Pimpernel..."Would you like to see some magic?"
  
  --
  We are the Borg...
They may have my picture... by smitty777 · 2009-10-13 03:34 · Score: 2, Funny

...but they can't see through my tin foil mask!

--
"Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish"
Albert Einstein
I bet by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 03:36 · Score: 0

I bet it won't take long before the DHS adds DNA testing to their procedures too, one more step to humiliate friends of the US who come visiting the country.
Mass lineups by netruner · 2009-10-13 03:37 · Score: 1

I read the article yesterday at Yahoo - the one thing that kept coming to mind was this:
The best way to avoid being the victim of false accusations is to not be in the subset of people eligible to be accused. With a system like this, everyone's inclusion is automatic unless you're willing to be an "unperson".

--

DISCLAIMER: This post was not checked for speling and grammar- if you complain- you're a whiner
The numbers don't work by HangingChad · 2009-10-13 03:39 · Score: 4, Insightful

They have caught a couple people but investigated dozens of innocent people. And the AP reporter picture came back as a possible terrorism suspect. You want to end up in an FBI report associated with a terrorist? Even if they clear you out later?
Hopefully they figure out the mistake before you end up where ever they'll be sending terror suspects after GTMO closes.

--
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
1. Re:The numbers don't work by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 03:54 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  You assume that it's possible to be cleared out at all. This is highly unlikely, and probably impossible
  1-off events don't exist when it comes to criminal investigation. Welcome to the system, CITIZEN!
2. Re:The numbers don't work by ZenDragon · 2009-10-13 04:35 · Score: 1
  
  There was a lawyer (Brandon Mayfield I believe) in Oregon a couple years ago that was prosicuted because his finger prints were a very close match to a known terroriest involved in the Spain bombings. Though the man was released when they found out he was OBVIOUSLY not the same guy, he lost his job and has an federal investigation on his record when he gets a background check. Which pretty much excludes him from any high profile jobs dispite the fact that he was innocent. It does happen!
3. Re:The numbers don't work by westlake · 2009-10-13 04:38 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  They have caught a couple people but investigated dozens of innocent people.
  In the real world, federal criminal investigations don't play out like Columbo.
  There can be hundreds of possibilities at least worth considering.
Same comments, new tyranny. by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 03:39 · Score: 0

The same comments are made again and again each time another brick is added to the wall. When will it be realized that we are collectively being imprisoned and impoverished? Once freedom is eradicated we will be enslaved.
What's worse? by codeAlDente · 2009-10-13 03:52 · Score: 1

Taxi to the dark side, or taxi to the DMV?

--
He once inserted random mutations into his code, just so he could have the experience of debugging.
As a North Carolian, this scares me by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 03:53 · Score: 0

I have nothing to hide...
I'm not part of a terrorist organization...
I have no criminal record...
I don't break the law...
However, this technology and process scares the crap out of me. Just because my face may match 88% with a terrorism suspect that they have a bad picture of, I could be singled out by the government as a suspect?
I will be writing the governor and state representatives about this.
This is the begining of a Police state by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 03:54 · Score: 2, Insightful

I am not normally an alarmist, but the fearmongers of the past 8 years have helped make this happen. This is the beginning of a police state.
As seen above, there is more money and time spent investigating innocent people than actually capturing guilty. This IS guilty until proven innocent.
1. Re:This is the begining of a Police state by jcr · 2009-10-13 04:25 · Score: 1
  
  This is the beginning of a police state.
  No, this is the beginning of a police state. The federal government has always sought to take power not granted to it in the constitution.
  -jcr
  
  --
  The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
2. Re:This is the begining of a Police state by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 07:43 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, because it was so much better when the states were using their own sedition laws, jailing those who agreed with the Federal government.
3. Re:This is the begining of a Police state by jcr · 2009-10-13 11:32 · Score: 1
  
  It does not follow that if I oppose the federal government seizing a power unconstitutionally, that I support a different level of government doing the same thing.
  -jcr
  
  --
  The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
What is the big deal? by Zantac69 · 2009-10-13 03:57 · Score: 1, Interesting

Donning my flame suit here - but what is the big deal here?

Plenty of people are whinging on about Orwell...Big Brother...ad nauseum. Do people not understand the concept of what identification is and why we need it? Your drivers licence has become so much more than just a "drivers licence." Hell - when you buy beer they "ID" you. If the cops want to talk to you, often they do the same thing - check your ID so they know that you are who you say you are. What is the alternative? Everyone running around saying their name is "Nunya Bizness"?

Personally, I am for a national ID system - and a national ID card. Verify social security numbers and biometric data (and even DNA) - and unless govt screws the pooch - identity theft is a thing of the past. Mistaken identity is a thing of the past. Illegal aliens using false ID is a thing of the past. Hell - sequence DNA from a string of serial rapes and crossreference - does not scare me in the least! And dont be so droll as to think that cops are going to be pinning crimes on John Q Innocent because he matches 80%...they are going to investigate just as they would any other crime. Are there going to be some false positives? Of course there will be - just like there is in standard police investigations.

Some people really need to stay off the pipe - makes yah paranoid!

--
1331461 is only semiprime *sigh* Alas - I am just short of 1337.
1. Re:What is the big deal? by WAG24601G · 2009-10-13 04:09 · Score: 1
  
  I think you forgot this.... right??
  
  --
  Everything is easy when you don't understand the problem.
2. Re:What is the big deal? by Red+Flayer · 2009-10-13 04:20 · Score: 1
  
  Move along citizen. Go to work. Go home and watch your TV and play your video games. Here are some sporting competitions for your amusement.
  
  Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
  
  --
  "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
3. Re:What is the big deal? by KillerBob · 2009-10-13 04:30 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Somebody's going to moderate you troll for what you've said, but I don't think that'd be entirely fair... I do, however, feel that I should address what you're saying...
  I don't want the government to have its grubby mitts on my DNA. I don't object to photo identification. I don't even object to having my fingerprints in a national database, even though fingerprints have been shown to be falsifiable, and aren't really all that reliable as a 100% certain way to identify somebody. I do, however, object to the idea of the government taking a sample of my DNA for a very simple reason: it's private. While it is a slippery slope argument, have you ever seen the movie Gattaca? I don't live in the US, but you need to prove your identity to do a great many things, including buying health insurance. If your DNA is part of that identity proof, how long is it going to be before companies start looking through the sequence for markers, and decide that your car insurance rate is going to be 3X as high as mine because you have a marker that indicates you might be slightly more predisposed to narcilepsy?
  Quite aside from that, DNA evidence as a means of identifying somebody has been called into question. The genome as it resides in you changes over time, developping small mutations with cell division. Beyond that, there's 3.2million base pairs in the human genome, which would take an inordinate amount of time to sequence completely. As a result, a DNA test usually only looks at certain indicators, rather than the whole sequence. The possibility for false positives resides in members of your own family... even "distant" relations have the possibility of generating a false positive on a search through a DNA database, with the probability increasing as you reduce the number of comparison points that they store. When you're considering a database with hundreds of millions of data points, with the potential for billions if it's expanded to a global scale, you're going to run into a feasibility issue: if you want to store that many records, you either spend billions of dollars developping and maintaining a computer system that's capable of storing and searching through that many records (and allowing fudging in the search to account for mutations due to aging), or you start making decisions as to which search points to store, and which to drop.
  And in response to your point:
  
  And dont be so droll as to think that cops are going to be pinning crimes on John Q Innocent because he matches 80%...they are going to investigate just as they would any other crime. Are there going to be some false positives? Of course there will be - just like there is in standard police investigations.
  Have you ever heard of police tunnel vision? We've got a match from the DNA database. Sure it's only 80%, but clearly it must be them! The police have been known on many many occasions to ignore evidence that proves the innocence of their suspect because they've decided that the suspect must be guilty. Often, it's only come to light after the suspect has been convicted, and sometimes it's not until after that wrongly accused suspect has been executed. (one such case is actually why capital punishment is illegal in Canada)
  So no. You're not going to get your hands on my DNA for national identification. There's other ways to ID me, thanks.
  
  --
  If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
4. Re:What is the big deal? by venom85 · 2009-10-13 04:35 · Score: 1
  
  What you're obviously not realizing is that the only reason identity theft exists in the first place is that there's a national ID number. Your SSN is a de facto national ID, and it makes it really, really easy to perform identity theft. If you create an even more formal national ID system, you actually make identity theft even easier since it's just a single document or number you have to steal.
  And, I'm sorry, I couldn't care less about catching criminals with a system like this. If you have even 1 false positive, you've got too many. False positives are absolutely unacceptable under any circumstances, and our current judicial system is way past unacceptable at this point. I want no part of giving my DNA or fingerprints or anything else to the FBI for their databases, and I want no part of a system that can "accidentally" throw me in prison for something I never did.
5. Re:What is the big deal? by xednieht · 2009-10-13 04:49 · Score: 1
  
  There is no big deal at all really, America stopped being the world leader. The only way America can influence other people is by pointing guns at them.
  
  America is ghost, dead, kaput. The principles America used to stand for will always live on though. You might have to move someplace else to realize them, but sometimes a change of scenery is nice.
  
  Had this conversation the other day actually... when my family first arrived in this country the pilots invited my little brother and I into the cockpit for a view, today we're lucky to get on a plane.
  
  America has gone in the direction of the country we ran away from, now it seems time to run away from America.
  
  --
  
  Hope is the currency of fools
6. Re:What is the big deal? by cellurl · 2009-10-13 04:57 · Score: 1
  
  I have been on slashdot for 5 years and I still don't know or understand how to "mod" comments? I +/- the firehose, but thats it....
  Lost
7. Re:What is the big deal? by SmurfButcher+Bob · 2009-10-13 05:20 · Score: 1
  
  I think the error is that your premise requires both competence and good faith on the part of the (very sociopathic) establishments.
  Case and point... "The FBI is not supposed to collect / use a national db of faces et al". The spirit and intent of that is rather obvious... so how can you claim "good faith" when they end-run it, and how can you claim "competence" when others collaborate with them to make it happen. This is not one of those "slippery slope" issues - this is waaaay past that little hump. Complete authority, complete invisibility, with zero accountability.
  "If you've done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to hide."
  "...if I've done nothing wrong, then you have no reason to look. Period."
  
  --
  
  help me i've cloned myself and can't remember which one I am
8. Re:What is the big deal? by CharlyFoxtrot · 2009-10-13 05:32 · Score: 1
  
  I've never understood the anglo (commonwealth + former parts of the british empire) paranoia about ID cards. The rest of the world uses them and abuse is very rare. You could make the argument that in this technological age data is more easily found and correlated to your identity with such a scheme. I look at it from another point of view though. The technology is going in that direction anyway and identity is going to be established by some authority regardless, I'd rather it be controlled by the government than some corporation. At least citizens exert some form of direct control over government as long as we stay vigilant.
  
  --
  If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
9. Re:What is the big deal? by nhytefall · 2009-10-13 05:45 · Score: 1
  
  About your DNA... Ever served in the military? Been arrested, even for a minor offense you were later cleared of? Served the federal government in any capacity? Served in law enforcement as a security officer, parole officer, police officer, correctional officer, etc? Bought a gun?
  
  If the answer is yes... then the following is true:
  1. The federal government already has your DNA.
  2. The federal government already has your fingerprints.
  3. You already have an FBI file.
  
  I am a veteran of the US Army. I have been a corrections officer. I have bought guns. My DNA, fingerprints, dental records, and every concievable method of identification are already on file with the FBI. There is no way I can opt out of this.
  
  It is no longer a question of when, or how... it is a question of if the citizens of this country will actually stand up for the Constitutional rights, suspended since the Civil War, and fight to have the power of ownership of their governance returned to them.
  
  Sadly, I doubt it will happen. After all, "I'm not worried, I have nothing to hide" seems to be the recurrent chorus.
  
  As Franklin said, "Those that give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither."
  
  /crawls back in to basement apartment with 14 locks, and a tin foil hat.
  
  --
  0100010001101001011001 0100100000011010010110 1110001000000110000100 1000000110011001101001 0111001001100101
10. Re:What is the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 05:58 · Score: 0
  
  you are an ignorant man who knows nothing about the role of government and liberty. please move to N.Korea or some other great place where you will be free to do as your told.
11. Re:What is the big deal? by cayenne8 · 2009-10-13 06:17 · Score: 1
  
  "About your DNA... Ever served in the military? Been arrested, even for a minor offense you were later cleared of? Served the federal government in any capacity? Served in law enforcement as a security officer, parole officer, police officer, correctional officer, etc? Bought a gun?
  If the answer is yes... then the following is true:
  1. The federal government already has your DNA.
  2. The federal government already has your fingerprints.
  3. You already have an FBI file.
  "
  Hmm...well, they have my fingerprints, but only for some federal jobs I've had in the past.
  But, where do you live where you have to give fingerprints and/or DNA just to buy a fucking gun??
  Granted, I've bought most of my guns from private individuals...so, neither the state nor federal govt. has knowledge of the weapons, nor do they need to.
  I can see a few areas where they may fingerprint people...but, DNA? Unless you've been charged with a crime, I've never heard of any state or federal taking of DNA from an individual???
  Heck, most people I know have never had reason to be fingerprinted, unless it was for clearance checking or arrest for a crime.
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
12. Re:What is the big deal? by DarthVain · 2009-10-13 06:43 · Score: 1
  
  From Canada, never heard of this case you mentioned, would be interested in more information on the case you are talking about.
  This is all I can find: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Canada#Reasons_for_banning_the_death_penalty
  The last case was 1962 and the one above 1958, both far too early for DNA testing. Unless you just mean that someone was found innocent after they were already put to death? Because even without a case that is always a possibility. There are plenty of examples of people convicted and then later exonerated, which is the main reason state executions are tricky. In the the Canadian case the Canadian Government went "Oops our bad, here is 6.5 million bucks!" 50 years after the event in 2008. Which is funny because I am not sure if that was big news up here as I don't remember hearing about it...
13. Re:What is the big deal? by KillerBob · 2009-10-13 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  The case in question was cited as an example of police ignoring contradictory evidence because it didn't support their case, and that decision to ignore evidence leading to the death of an innocent man.
  So you're right. It wasn't intended as evidence of DNA evidence being found wrong. For that, you'd have to look at much more recent events. There are, however, still cases of DNA being used to wrongly convict an innocent person. :)
  
  --
  If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
14. Re:What is the big deal? by Shakrai · 2009-10-13 07:19 · Score: 1
  
  But, where do you live where you have to give fingerprints and/or DNA just to buy a fucking gun??
  In the People's Republic of New York State you can't even legally hold a handgun without a pistol permit. The process of applying for that permit requires your fingerprints. If you are unlucky enough to live in New York City this requirement is also extended to rifles and shotguns.
  
  --
  I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
  We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
15. Re:What is the big deal? by coaxial · 2009-10-13 07:26 · Score: 1
  
  And dont be so droll as to think that cops are going to be pinning crimes on John Q Innocent because he matches 80%...they are going to investigate just as they would any other crime. Are there going to be some false positives? Of course there will be - just like there is in standard police investigations.
  Yeah, that's exactly what happens.
16. Re:What is the big deal? by JesseMcDonald · 2009-10-13 07:41 · Score: 1
  
  If your DNA is part of that identity proof, how long is it going to be before companies start looking through the sequence for markers, and decide that your car insurance rate is going to be 3X as high as mine because you have a marker that indicates you might be slightly more predisposed to narcilepsy?
  Insurance is not meant to subsidize high-risk individuals; programs that are intended to do so are known as charities. Both have their rightful place. If I was expected to carry 3X the risk which you present, then I would certainly expect to pay 3X the premiums you do, and whether my higher risk is by choice or by circumstances out of my control is entirely irrelevant. No one can force you to provide the information or material required to develop precise, personalized risk estimates, of course, but refusal to do so should be taken as evidence that you already consider yourself to be high-risk, justifying accordingly high premiums.
  
  --
  "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
17. Re:What is the big deal? by Posting=!Working · 2009-10-13 09:14 · Score: 1
  
  As someone who has not only purchased guns from a dealer, but has sold guns and was the manager of a store with an Federal Firearms License, this is complete bullshit. I did get fingerprinted when I became the manager, but as assistant manager I was never fingerprinted and still had full authority to sell guns. As for DNA, nope, never happened, never was suggested, and is a ridiculous suggestion in the first place.
  The only things that are reported to the NCIS when purchasing the gun are personal information (name, DOB, ID # and state, etc.) and if it's a handgun or long gun. No model numbers, serial numbers or anything else that describes the gun are reported. It's all put on the form and in the gun log, but the forms and gun logs stay at the store, unless you close the store, surrender your FFL, or have a serious incident. Occasionally they audit, but I don't recall them doing anything but comparing the forms and the guns in inventory to the logs. Fingerprints are not taken for purchases, DNA would be silly to require dealers to take anyway, and most (if not all) people have an FBI file anyway. Approval is usually immediate, but if the NCIS delays and it takes more than three days to call back, the gun can be legally (from the dealers standpoint) be sold. Every once in a while they'd delay, the call back in a few hours with a denial and ask for the current address.
  BTW, answering any of the questions wrong on the form is an instant denial, no call to the NCIS even happens.
  Purchasing multiple handguns did require more info, but you can buy rifles all day long without the government knowing exactly what you bought.
  That's federal law, some states are more restrictive. We had a book of all the states laws, California's ran 70+ pages, Wyoming's was less than half a page.
  
  --
  This sentence no verb.
18. Re:What is the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 10:34 · Score: 0
  
  "one such case is actually why capital punishment is illegal in Canada"
  From an Anonymous Canadian Coward:
  It's not actually "illegal", but has been removed from all statutes, even for high treason in uniform. It was not one such case, but after our last execution (a double in 1962) we have had David Milgaard, Steven Truscott, Donald Marshall, Thomas Sophenow and Guy-Paul Morin, that I know of, all eventually exonerated of murder charges, Truscott after fifty and Milgaard after over thirty years. Truscott was sentenced to hang when he was fourteen. Canada's abolition was a gradual process, and was not due to any specific case: politicians in all parties opposed the death penalty.
  In the UK, however, the hanging in the early 1950s of a retarded teenager who did not even pull the trigger (when the triggerman got life instead) did much to discredit the death penalty.
  The real problem in criminal justice is officials who push for any answer that works instead of the right answer. Elected prosecutors are at great risk of corrupting the process.
19. Re:What is the big deal? by nhytefall · 2009-10-13 10:36 · Score: 1
  
  As I stated above... I have done all three, in addition to holding a TS security clearance. Fingerprints, yes, in some states, are required when purchasing firearms (especially pistols) from a dealer.
  
  In my case, the government already had my DNA (DoD process to provide for identification of remains), fingerprints (DoD, Commonwealth of Kentucky, State of Indiana, State of Illinois - law enforcement jobs), and an FBI file (see above granted security clearance). There is no opt out for me. I cannot petition the government to give me those records.
  
  That was the extent of what I am saying. Obviously, state laws do vary, but with the increases in government oversight of state policies, TFA is only the beginning.
  
  --
  0100010001101001011001 0100100000011010010110 1110001000000110000100 1000000110011001101001 0111001001100101
20. Re:What is the big deal? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2009-10-13 11:44 · Score: 1
  
  And dont be so droll as to think that cops are going to be pinning crimes on John Q Innocent because he matches 80%...they are going to investigate just as they would any other crime.
  Drollin...
  Drollin...
  Drollin down the rivah
  
  Personally, I am for a national ID system - and a national ID card. Verify social security numbers and biometric data (and even DNA) - and unless govt screws the pooch - identity theft is a thing of the past. Mistaken identity is a thing of the past. Illegal aliens using false ID is a thing of the past.
  That's the same kind of thing people say all the time about new, unimplemented technologies - but real life never works out that way. At the very best, all that will be accomplished is that most peope who circumvent the current system will figure out a way to circumvent the new system.
  Think of the logistics of what you are proposing and all of the places in the chain where it can be compromised - at the point of scanning you to put into the database, at the point of scanning you to compare to the database, etc. You have seen GATTACA right? Even their system wasn't fool-proof and it was uber-big-brother - if this country ever gets to that level of big-brother, national-id or not, we are all kinds of screwed - so you can count on any such system being even more flawed than the one in GATTACA.
  
  --
  When information is power, privacy is freedom.
21. Re:What is the big deal? by KillerBob · 2009-10-13 22:45 · Score: 1
  
  As I stated above, I don't live in the US. I've served in the Canadian military, and held TS clearance.... I worked in signals, and needed the clearance to be able to read anything that I might hear or transmit.
  In the Canadian military, they didn't take my DNA. They took fingerprint samples, and they have access to my dental records, but they never took my DNA. I currently hold a government job, and they never took my fingerprints... they took my photo for the building's photo ID, but DNA? No frigging way.
  As for buying a weapon, I swore when I left the military that I would never again own or use a firearm. What weapons I do have, I never needed to provide fingerprints, let alone DNA to purchase. They've all been acquired legally, and parts of my collection are on the restricted weapons list (or would be, if they were classed as weapons and not antiques). I understand that for something like a Possession-Acquisition License for firearms in this country, I'd need to provide fingerprints. But DNA? Not on your life.
  You and I both know that serving in the military, there's a completely different set of rules in play. Your privacy doesn't really exist, and things that wouldn't get you in trouble at all as a civilian could get you confined to barracks in the military. Seeing as a comparatively small proportion of the population ever serves in the military, though, I'd say that it's a bad example of how they are collecting a DNA database.
  
  --
  If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
22. Re:What is the big deal? by nhytefall · 2009-10-14 05:21 · Score: 1
  
  Valid point, KillerBob. Too often I forget that not all of /.'s commenters are from the US.
  
  My apologies.
  
  --
  0100010001101001011001 0100100000011010010110 1110001000000110000100 1000000110011001101001 0111001001100101
23. Re:What is the big deal? by psykocrime · 2009-10-14 08:14 · Score: 1
  
  > Do people not understand the concept of what identification is and why we need it?
  I'm wondering if *you* understand the concept of identification and why we need it, to be frank. But more to the point...
  > Your drivers licence has become so much more than just a "drivers licence."
  Why should a government issued "drivers license" be the gold standard for identification, and why should anybody be bound to require the presence of such an ID for a private transaction (like opening a bank account, purchasing alcohol, buying a gun, boarding an airplane, etc.)? The government can't do anything else right, why would we trust them with our identities? And even more to the point still is this.. it's just not a proper role for government to mandate anything about how we identify ourselves. The only proper roles of government are to provide rule-of-law, protect private property rights, and - arguably - to enforce contracts.
  Now if the government wants to say "fine, if you expect us to enforce your contract, then identify yourself to our standards" then ok... but they have no basis to tell another private person/entity that they must - in turn - require a government sanctioned ID in order to conduct business with me.
  
  --
  // TODO: Insert Cool Sig
With a patented algorithm by Ukab+the+Great · 2009-10-13 04:01 · Score: 3, Funny

It will recognize threats to society like terrorists, illegal aliens, and UNC fans.
1. Re:With a patented algorithm by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 05:57 · Score: 0
  
  As a UNC graduate currently working in Chapel Hill, I protest sir!
  It's paranoid witch hunts like this that--brb, somebody is banging the door down.
Wanted By The F.B.I : by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 04:07 · Score: 0

If you see this person, do not approach.
Call this phone number: 1-800-CAL-LFBI
and report your information.
Yours In Minsk,
Kilgore Trout
nose sizes by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 04:07 · Score: 0

>>nose sizes
so we can finally identify all the jews at record speeds?
But then the Feds would have to pay for it. by qwerty+shrdlu · 2009-10-13 04:13 · Score: 1

If they can fob the program off on the states, they can duck the expense, too.
Big assumption by LockeOnLogic · 2009-10-13 04:15 · Score: 4, Insightful

Personally, I am for a national ID system - and a national ID card. Verify social security numbers and biometric data (and even DNA) - and unless govt screws the pooch - identity theft is a thing of the past.
I suggest you listen to your own arguments, might change your mind.
1. Re:Big assumption by AvenueOfLight · 2009-10-17 04:51 · Score: 1
  
  they "LOVE" sheeple like you.... who never question anything....go with the flo.... go along just to get along.... Whatever "THEY" deem right and good is swallowed and never questioned.
  "MY" people ARE destroyed for LACK OF KNOWLEDGE!
  This is the precursor to the chip(mark) and it seems YOU have already taken it. Too bad because MOST shall fall into the same pit and receive eternal death. This denies Christ's payment for your soul! They will be able to track you anywhere you go!!!!!!!! Don't you get it?
  Come out of her "MY" people!
  you might want to look at my site? doubtful but, in case you might:
  www.Avenue-Of-Light.com
  www.xanga.com/avenueoflight
  I suggest that everone watch the movie 2012 coming out Nov. 13....it is prophecy fulfillment they are showing you what they are about to pull of and NONE are the wiser. It depicts Revelation 6, 8, 9, & 16 perfectly... They will blame God! It is the jesuits behind this great hoax! WAKE UP!
Such a piece of shit state... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 04:25 · Score: 0

The state of North Carolina is such a piece of shit. I know, because I spent 12 years of my adult life there. I'm not surprised that they're in bed with the FBI and trampling all over people's rights and freedom with shit like this.
This is the same state that penalizes you $50 if you accidentally let your auto insurance lapse for a DAY.
Fuck you, North Carolina. Fuck you.
1. Re:Such a piece of shit state... by rantingkitten · 2009-10-13 16:21 · Score: 1
  
  Hey, in Georgia, they suspend your tag if your insurance lapses for a day. I didn't even know such a thing was possible -- suspended license, sure, for various reasons -- but a suspended tag?
  
  That happened to me in, like, 2005. They didn't bother informing me of this, mind you, and I'd renewed my tag, in person, at the tag office, several times over the next few years, with nary a mention.
  
  One fine day in 2008 I was pulled over and the cop informed me that my tag was expired, and ticketed me. I had to drive all around the state to various out-of-the-way offices collecting paperwork (somehow they expect you to be able to do this without driving), paying fines, renewal fees, surcharges, and other crap, and then show up to court to explain all of this.
  
  I learned that they will also do this if you fail to pay child support. Why child support is in any way related to your ability to drive is beyond me, but I've come to realise that the state loves to yank driving privileges for any absurd reason it can find. The cynic in me believes this is because they know that it wont' actually stop anyone from driving, especially in the urban sprawl with no public transit that is Atlanta and the surrounding metro area... rather, they want you to keep driving, so they can nail you for even more fines.
  
  --
  mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
Keeping the pictures by qwerty+shrdlu · 2009-10-13 04:26 · Score: 2, Informative

Keeping the pictures on hand does help to prove identity theft. Back in the 90's I sold a couple of cell phones to a guy who'd actually gotten some one else's nfo by rooting through his gym bag. The ID looked like a genuine ID from the DMV because it was. But being the criminal mastermind he was, he didn't realize the DMV would have a copy of the ID with his picture and the other fellows name. Awkward. By not keeping the photos, you'd make it much harder to prove it wasn't you.
1. Re:Keeping the pictures by Shakrai · 2009-10-13 04:34 · Score: 1
  
  By not keeping the photos, you'd make it much harder to prove it wasn't you.
  And you also keep your picture from being used for projects like the one described in TFA. I'll take the added "risk" that someone uses my ID to defraud a cell phone company.
  
  --
  I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
  We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
2. Re:Keeping the pictures by cayenne8 · 2009-10-13 05:47 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  "Keeping the pictures on hand does help to prove identity theft. Back in the 90's I sold a couple of cell phones to a guy who'd actually gotten some one else's nfo by rooting through his gym bag. "
  Err...a more basic question is...WHY would you need someones picture ID just to buy a cell phone? I never knew that was a requirement?!?!
  I certainly didn't give an ID, or a SSN for my recent iPhone purchase. Why would you need an picture id?
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Re:Now would be a good time to write your official by loki.TJ · 2009-10-13 04:26 · Score: 1

I am in NC and I'm writing everyone I can find right now.
disturbing... by ZenDragon · 2009-10-13 04:29 · Score: 3, Informative

All this information collection as of late is getting a bit disturbing. I work for a bank and I had managed to go 28 years without being fingerprinted, until this year. I have nothing to hide nor fear but I definately do not like having my biometric information floating around out there. I could care less about my social security number and all that, its just inforamtion that can not be directly tied to me. However as a law abiding citizen I take issue with ALL of my information being documented. Part of the patriot act required that every employee working for a bank get finger printed, background checked, photographed, etc. Thanks GWB Lets just make it easier for somebody to steal identities. Seems like the cold war all over again except this time its the government ploting a war against its own citizens.
1. Re:disturbing... by drinkypoo · 2009-10-13 04:58 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Seems like the cold war all over again except this time its the government ploting a war against its own citizens.
  Those who do not understand the lessons of history... The cold war was a war waged by the industrial capitalists of the US and the USSR against the citizens of both nations. The people who benefited most were the robber barons of the military-industrial complex. Some of the workers therein benefited as well, except that the resulting damage to both economies (the extent of which is not yet fully accounted for in this nation) is harmful to them as well in the long run.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
2. Re:disturbing... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 06:35 · Score: 0
  
  "The cold war was a war waged by the industrial capitalists of the US and the USSR"
  I had no idea that Russian capitalist businessmen existed in the USSR at that time, much less that they spent their money pointing nuclear rockets at the US from cuba. /shrug
  guess you learn something new every day
3. Re:disturbing... by smackmywhammy · 2009-10-13 07:54 · Score: 1
  
  The nasty detail that seems to just whiz past most folks about biometrics: they are not revocable, unless you're willing to cut off your finger(s), or disfigure yourself in some other way. There are procedures for getting new SSNs, driver's license numbers, and so forth, revoking or rendering useless the old information as part of the process.
4. Re:disturbing... by ZenDragon · 2009-10-16 08:20 · Score: 1
  
  I was thinking more about the information gathering that followed not so much the cold war itself. In trying to weed out "communists" and spies during the cold war, the government got exceptionally paranoid about spying and collecting on its own citizens. This primarily where all the rumors come from about the government logging everything we do, because it was partially true. Although such a thing is nearly impossible these days, they seem to be desperately trying anyway.
mustaches and beards by taniwha · 2009-10-13 04:37 · Score: 1

So nose size and chin widths - isn't this just going to be screwed up for those with mustaches and beards - sort of good for catching almost everyone but Osama binLaden?
NC DMV are a bunch of shitheads by cats-paw · 2009-10-13 04:45 · Score: 1, Informative

I received a speeding ticket in NC WHICH I PAID - it was $100.
5 years later I'm trying to get a driver's license in ANOTHER STATE and can't because of my "ticket" in NC.
I have to call NC and I find out I have to send them another $25. The stupid DMV shithead on the other end of the phone won't tell me why exactly it is I need to do this considering I had already paid the ticket.
This is why cooperation between various government agencies is not a good thing.
Fuckers. And yes, I am still bitter about it, why do you ask ?
I'd rather take my chances with Al-Qaeda than the government trying to "protect" me.

--
Absolute statements are never true
The FBI is not allowed to collect and store by edrobinson · 2009-10-13 04:53 · Score: 1

our pictures. This is a bit of a scam as they, in essence, are storing them with this latest invasion.
Corporations vs. government by mi · 2009-10-13 04:58 · Score: 3, Interesting

You can't ignore them, nobody can.
I lived the past 9 years without TV — watching it only in gym sometimes. Yes, we do have a TV-set — but no cable (our Internet comes via DSL). I think, I've ignored Timewarner/Comcast/whoever it is, whom the government gave my part of town as a monopoly.
The GP's point is valid — ignoring corporations is far easier, than the government.
The government's only acceptable role is ensuring, various corporations compete in providing a service or making goods, rather than collude. When the government attempts to provide the same service themselves (having declared the oxymoronic "market failure"), you get the worst of both worlds — government's inefficiency and a monopoly's arrogance.
I do hope, we don't get to experience this ourselves again in health care. Public schools, USPS, and highways are enough...

And the worst that can happen is when corporations and the government get together.
Yes, that's called Fascism. Some people ascribe this to Obama administration, as it aims to take over corporations. Calling him "Hitler" over this misses the point, though, (and triggers Godwin's Law) — Nazism is an aberration of Fascism and Obama does not deserve the mustaches printed on his portraits (although they do make me glee, because Bush deserved it even less).
Things sucked in Mussolini's Italy and in Franco's Spain, without the death camps. One need not be genocidal to destroy economy...

--
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
1. Re:Corporations vs. government by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 05:12 · Score: 0
  
  Looks like somebody's Econ 100 course didn't cover natural monopolies and network effects.
2. Re:Corporations vs. government by dorque_wrench · 2009-10-13 05:24 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Public schools, USPS, and highways are enough...
  
  You were giving positive examples here, right?
3. Re:Corporations vs. government by eleuthero · 2009-10-13 05:56 · Score: 1
  
  um... no--the USPS is nearly bankrupt, public schools tend to be good only in suburban areas (schools in NYC itself versus the 'burbs tend to be ... less than good, and the same can be said of Dallas and its suburbs if not other cities), and the highway system is increasingly being taken over by independent toll companies (who, after a bit of digging, all seem to be owned by three companies across the entire country).
4. Re:Corporations vs. government by mi · 2009-10-13 05:59 · Score: 1
  
  Public schools, USPS, and highways are enough...
  
  You were giving positive examples here, right?
  You really think so? Our public schools are constantly derided by all — left and right — for producing rather mediocre results. A particular example:
  
  In international comparisons, American 12th-graders rank in the 14th percentile in math and the 29th percentile in science. The U.S. outperformed only Cyprus and South Africa in general math and science knowledge. Worse, Asian countries didn't participate in the last 12th-grade assessment tests.
  
  Next. USPS sucks and can't pay for itself — needs billions of "bailouts" every once in a while — including right now. Had it not been for the government support, and the government-mandated monopoly (private companies aren't allowed to compete with the "First Class" mail) they would've gone bankrupt long ago.
  And highways? Are you really proud of them? Despite insane amounts of money put into them (thanks to the inflated union contracts), an average American spends a week waiting in traffic. For Los Angeles (and, other big cities) the time is two weeks...
  Is this — the mediocre results, the constant cost overruns, and pathetic wait times, what you think are "positive examples"? Something you want to see in health care?
  
  --
  In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
5. Re:Corporations vs. government by jollespm · 2009-10-13 06:41 · Score: 1
  
  What are we to do about health care then? The free market and corporations have no interest in serving the entire population, as seen by the number of people who don't have, or can't afford health insurance. Case in point, a friend has 3 income sources and makes a reasonable $40-50k a year. Independent health care plans would cost her over $1000 a month! Where can someone like that go to get coverage?
6. Re:Corporations vs. government by dwiget001 · 2009-10-13 06:54 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, but this is very "in the box" thinking.
  Affording health *insurance* is not the problem.
  Affording health care services *is* the problem.
  Government intrusion into health care is what has and is causing the price of health care to go up.
  Get government completely out of the health care business, except for what they need for our military personnel.
  And, while we are at it, fix unfunded mandated benefits of Social Security and Medicaid, which are currently 58 TRILLION in the hole. Even if we taxed the income of everyone in the in U.S. 100 percent of their income, it wouldn't even be enough to pay the interest on what we owe in Social Security and Medicaid benefits within a few years.
  The government *must* not ever be put into a situation where promised benefits are mandated to the point of bankrupting the country. This country is being run by a bunch of irresponsible a__holes (Obama, Reid, Pelosi and the like, but again, recent past Republican leaders I also hold in this category). They would rather bankrupt the country, killing any value the dollar has, creating mass unemployment and economic ruin to devastate people of the U.S., than to do some effective to handle it. Their mind numbing stupidity is now legendary in the annuls of "The Late Great United States".
7. Re:Corporations vs. government by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 07:39 · Score: 0
  
  I guess we better disband the military then. Govt will fuck it up. Lets ask att and newscorp to run it for us.
8. Re:Corporations vs. government by coaxial · 2009-10-13 07:51 · Score: 1, Troll
  
  Affording health care services *is* the problem.
  Absolutely. How health care is paid for is irrelevant compared to that it is paid for.
  
  Government intrusion into health care is what has and is causing the price of health care to go up.
  That's odd. I thought it was monopolies, and the bizarre situation where everyone along the chain passes the buck.
  Doctors get paid for service, meaning the more tests and operations they perform, the more money they make. These charges get passed on the health insurer that either drops the patient, or passes the costs onto the person paying the patient's insurance premiums, typically the patient's employer. Alternately, the doctor and/or the patient's insurer pass the charges on to medicare, which picks up the tab, because its the government. The patient never gets a bill, and so demands more and more services since according his/her perspective they are free.
  Bonus Round: Medicare is BY LAW forbidden to negotiate lower prices for the services it pays for because it would be "a government price control." (Funny. When I took economics, this was called "a volume discount.")
  You really need to actually learn how healthcare is paid for in this country, and how it's paid for in other countries with their "damn socialist medicine" before deciding on a cause. The fact that the US spends multiples what other OCED countries spend (16% GDP versus 10% GDP) with increases greatly outstripping inflation, while the US is 15th in life expectancy the only metric for effectiveness of healthcare that we should care about. After all, it's about living longer, healthier lives.
  Clearly government involvement isn't the problem. In fact, evidence indicates that the lack of government involvement is the problem. Since everyone else has lower costs, and better health, than the US, and that's the common factor between the rest of the OCED that's lacking in the US.
  
  And, while we are at it, fix unfunded mandated benefits of Social Security and Medicaid, which are currently 58 TRILLION in the hole.
  [...]
  
  The government *must* not ever be put into a situation where promised benefits are mandated to the point of bankrupting the country.
  Wait. I thought you wanted to stop the government from paying anything. Make up your mind!
9. Re:Corporations vs. government by locallyunscene · 2009-10-13 08:26 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Ideologically Bush is much closer than Obama with respect to Fascism. Neither are really comparable to Hitler or Mussolini though, of course.
  
  Also, I hope you don't actually think anything on that site you linked is true. It's claims are the same type of scare-mongering as William Ayers, and Obama's birth certificate(implying Obama is a Black Panther and/or Muslim in disguise respectively, same as your link).
10. Re:Corporations vs. government by daem0n1x · 2009-10-13 09:00 · Score: 1
  
  If you keep exempting the rich from paying taxes and spend all your public money in useless defence contracts, guess what. You get shitty public services.
  For the aforementioned rich it's not so big of a problem, they only care about public services when they're bidding for a good public contract. They can afford private education, private healthcare, private security, etc.
  For the vast majority of the people, it's a disgrace. You can't realise that, either because you're a millionaire or you're brainwashed by the media and lobbies (owned by the aforementioned rich).
11. Re:Corporations vs. government by Shotgun · 2009-10-13 09:01 · Score: 1
  
  Health care or health insurance? They are not the same thing. One is health care, the other is a way to pay for health care.
  Here insurance costs $1000 a month, because that is what it costs to deliver the care. It costs that much to deliver the care for a variety of reasons:
  -we all demand very expensive tests and procedures
  -we all demand very expensive one-on-one attention as we're receiving the very expensive tests and procedures
  -we all reserve the right to sue the pants off the doctor if we die of our illness anyway
  You can't expect the insurance company to pay all that without passing the cost on to you, and the government, which is totally parasitic by nature, has no choice but to pass those costs on to you.
  The only way to reduce the cost of health care is to, you know, reduce the cost of health care. Having "the rich" pay for your health care will not reduce its cost. In fact, it is more likely to drive up the costs, as it continue to separate the person receiving the goods from the person who pays for it.
  
  --
  Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
  Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
12. Re:Corporations vs. government by daem0n1x · 2009-10-13 09:06 · Score: 1
  
  You have to be completely blind to defend a system that costs twice as much as a public one would and doesn't provide full coverage for everyone. Not mentioning the 40 millions with no coverage at all. Corporate media bullshit in effect. Come on, all developed countries, and many underdeveloped have a public healthcare system. They can afford it and it works. Are you Americans so incompetent you can't do the same? I don't believe it.
13. Re:Corporations vs. government by daem0n1x · 2009-10-13 09:35 · Score: 1
  
  Please take it slowly. It's too much reality for their lobby-tomised brains to handle. You can't just shatter someone's deepest religious beliefs with merciless attacks of logic and facts. It just ain't right.
  I though that this whole free-market, no state bullshit had come to a definitive end after the subprime bubble flushed the world's economy down the toilet. But they seem to be coming even stronger than before. This is happening here in Europe also (the approval of the hideous Lisbon Treaty is one of the major signs). I guess it's called "the swan song".
14. Re:Corporations vs. government by eleuthero · 2009-10-13 10:11 · Score: 1
  
  From my own experience in the education sector, I would have to say that one of the main reasons for its failure in urban areas is a tendency to have too little oversight and too quick a tenure time / over-powered unions. Unions themselves recently got me an 800$ raise (not much where I am) rejecting a possible increase of 1 teacher per school as "not what the teachers want" - perhaps more than any other thing, teachers tend to want smaller class sizes and support from administration for discipline / training issues. We seem to have most of that in my current situation (though economically, they too are hit by tax dollars dropping and we, and all other schools, have a chronic need for more staff/pupil).
15. Re:Corporations vs. government by mi · 2009-10-13 12:52 · Score: 1
  
  If you keep exempting the rich from paying taxes ...
  The top 50% of tax-payers pay 91.11% of the income tax. The riches 1% pays 40.42%.
  
  ... and spend all your public money in useless defence contracts
  The federal government's total spending in 2008 was at 2.9 trillion dollars. Of that, the entire Department of Defense's budget plus "The Global War on Terror" constituted $626.6 billions — or merely 21.6 percent, and even the rosiest pacifist would not claim, that all of that went to "useless defense contracts". For comparison, Social Security alone was $608bln, and the Medicare and Medicaid combined for another $595bln.
  You were saying?..
  
  --
  In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
16. Re:Corporations vs. government by mi · 2009-10-13 13:06 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  You have to be completely blind to defend a system that costs twice as much as a public one
  Citation needed.
  
  Not mentioning the 40 millions with no coverage at all.
  Citation needed.
  Dear, Slashdot is not a Progressives' gathering — even if it feels like that some times. You need to substantiate your figures.
  That said, even if your numbers were true, it wouldn't have changed a thing. Government providing health care is broadly against the Constitution, and past violations (such as Medicaid) don't justify new ones.
  
  "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents..." -James Madison
  
  --
  In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
17. Re:Corporations vs. government by XDirtypunkX · 2009-10-13 19:29 · Score: 1
  
  To the faithful any catastrophe appears to be caused by a lack of faith (particularly in other people).
18. Re:Corporations vs. government by dwiget001 · 2009-10-13 22:14 · Score: 1
  
  You didn't even address the TRILLIONS of dollars that Social Security and Medicaid are in the red, which is very interesting.
  "The government *must* not ever be put into a situation where promised benefits are mandated to the point of bankrupting the country.
  Wait. I thought you wanted to stop the government from paying anything. Make up your mind!"
  You obviously have a reading comprehension problem. So, to clarify: The government should not be paying for anything that is not proscribed by the U.S. Constitution, period. Medicaid is broke, it is only being kept afloat by almost endless printing of money, further devaluing the U.S. dollar. Last year, the amount of money paid to doctors for reimbursement was lowered and there is talk about further lowering it, to the point where many doctors are already quitting their participation in the program. This is just going to escalate.
  I could really care less *how* it is paid for, as long as "the government", i.e. U.S. citizen tax money, is not used to pay for it. I want the government out of Medicaid/care, Social Security and any and all subsidies, period.
  My own and sole interest is, getting the U.S. government scaled back to it's constitutionally mandated actions, spending, etc. with the result of greatly reducing the tax burden on all citizens and less government intrusion in the lives of individual citizens.
  Put money back into people's pockets where they can contribute to, as they see fit, money for charities that help those in need.
  I am in charge of quality assurance in a computer aided design software company. I have no horse in this race, other than I am a strict constitutionalist and see that the future prosperity of this country, for all concerned, requires severe cuts in what the government is spending, severe cuts in what we are being taxed as a result, and something (probably amendments) to keep our House, Senate and Administration from making promises in regards to U.S. tax payer money, which they have proven for decades, they cannot keep.
19. Re:Corporations vs. government by dorque_wrench · 2009-10-14 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  A particular example [anncoulter.com]:
  
  You expect me to take something posted on Ann Coulter's website as fact???
  
  (Why does my keyboard spontaneously ignite every time I type her name?)
  
  Next. USPS sucks and can't pay for itself — needs billions of "bailouts" every [dmnews.com] once in a while — including right now [federaltimes.com].
  
  Who hasn't received a bailout in the last year?
20. Re:Corporations vs. government by dorque_wrench · 2009-10-14 03:00 · Score: 1
  
  Not mentioning the 40 millions with no coverage at all.
  Citation needed.
  Several studies estimate the number of uninsured Americans. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, nearly 47 million Americans, or 20 percent of the population under the age of 65, were without health insurance in 2008, their latest data available.
21. Re:Corporations vs. government by daem0n1x · 2009-10-14 03:02 · Score: 1
  
  I was saying that since the income inequality is so big, it's only fair that tax inequality is also big. And quoting the National Tax Payers Union about social justice is like quoting Adolf Hitler about racial justice.
  Your next issue is about military spending versus social spending. 21.6 percent spent on defense is completely crazy. And it's money sent down the toilet. Social spending brings an important return but you talk of it like it's nonsense.
  Also, if your Medicare and Medicaid are so expensive, you must be doing something wrong. Maybe your private health care companies are using them as cash cows. Then the problem is not the government, but plain old capitalism gone wild.
22. Re:Corporations vs. government by mi · 2009-10-14 03:52 · Score: 1
  
  That's odd. I thought it was monopolies, and the bizarre situation where everyone along the chain passes the buck
  It is monopolies — the government-created ones. Why is our health-insurance tied to our employer by the tax-policies — the employers do get to deduct insurance costs from their revenue, but individuals don't? Why are insurance companies barred from selling policies across State-lines — thus limiting competition?
  Why did 0bama mock (and grossly misrepresent) McCain's plan to put an end to both of these issues — by a) ending tax-deduction for employers, b) providing tax-deduction for individuals instead, c) ending limits on insurance-selling across State-lines — last year? Because he wanted the government to keep and expand its control — in a, perhaps sincere, belief, that the government can do a better job (at anything), than the free market.
  
  The fact that the US spends multiples what other OCED countries spend (16% GDP versus 10% GDP)
  16% vs. 10% is hardly "multiples"...
  
  while the US is 15th in life expectancy the only metric for effectiveness of healthcare
  Not only is life expectancy not "the only" metric of effectiveness of healthcare, it is not a metric of it at all. Here is from the source, sure to delight you:
  
  The life expectancy argument is so stupid even The New York Times hasn't made it -- except in news stories quoting others or in the ramblings of the Times' more gullible op-ed columnists. You mostly hear the life expectancy argument from Hollywood actresses and profoundly dumb Democrats, such as Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland.
  [...]
  For example, more Americans are murdered with guns than in any other industrialized country. (And it would be even more without concealed-carry laws! See John Lott, "More Guns, Less Crime.") According to a 1997 report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the homicide rate with firearms alone was 16 times higher in the U.S. than in 25 other industrialized countries combined.
  That will tend to reduce the U.S.'s "life expectancy" numbers, while telling us absolutely nothing about the country's medical care. (I promise that if you make it to a hospital alive, you are more likely to survive a gunshot wound in the U.S. than any place else in the world.)
  It's comparing apples and oranges to talk about life expectancy as if it tracks with a country's health care system. What matters is the survival rate from the same starting line, to wit, the same medical condition. [emphasis mine -mi] Not surprisingly, in the apples-to-apples comparisons, the U.S. medical system crushes the welfare-state countries.
  
  --
  In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
23. Re:Corporations vs. government by mi · 2009-10-14 04:23 · Score: 1
  Ideologically Bush is much closer than Obama with respect to Fascism.
  None of the links you provided mention "Fascism". But by interpreting them to mean, what you wrote, you reveal, that you are one of those, who consider Fascism as somehow opposite of Socialism. This is an illusion, carefully created by Leftists (beginning with Stalin himself) trying to distance themselves from the horrors of Nazism. It worked for decades — infamously for the prominent Leftists such as Gore Vidal calling his Republican opponent a Nazi.
  These meme must've originated from USSR's war with Nazi Germany — which made simpler minds accept, that, since the two are fighting, they must be opposite (never mind the two regimes' earlier collusion in carving up Europe and singing praises for each other)... It is simply not true at all — Fascism is a kind of Socialism, and Hitler's Party very name — National Socialists — reminds us of it.
  For actual proof, consider Hitler's programme for NSDAP:
  
  THE COMMON INTEREST BEFORE SELF-INTEREST - THAT IS THE SPIRIT OF THE PROGRAM. BREAKING OF THE THRALDOM OF INTEREST - THAT IS THE KERNEL OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM.
  
  We demand that the State shall make it its primary duty to provide a livelihood for its citizens. [...]
  All citizens shall have equal rights and duties.
  It must be the first duty of every citizen to perform physical or mental work. The activities of the individual must not clash with the general interest, but must proceed within the framework of the community and be for the general good.
  We demand therefore:
  
  The abolition of incomes unearned by work.
  The breaking of the slavery of interest
  In view of the enormous sacrifices of life and property demanded of a nation by any war, personal enrichment from war must be regarded as a crime against the nation. We demand therefore the ruthless confiscation of all war profits.
  We demand the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations (trusts).
  We demand profit-sharing in large industrial enterprises.
  We demand the extensive development of insurance for old age.
  We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, the immediate communalizing of big department stores, and their lease at a cheap rate to small traders, and that the utmost consideration shall be shown to all small traders in the placing of State and municiple orders.
  We demand a land reform suitable to our national requirements, the passing of a law for the expropriation of land for communal purposes without compensation; the abolition of ground rent, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.
  We demand the ruthless prosecution of those whose activities are injurious to the common interest. Common criminals, usurers, profiteers, etc., must be punished with death, whatever their creed or race.
  The State must consider a thorough reconstruction of our national system of education (with the aim of opening up to every able and hard-working German the possibility of higher education and of thus obtaining advancement). The curricula of all educational establishments must be brought into line with the requirements of practical life. The aim of the school must be to give the pupil, beginning with the first sign of intelligence, a grasp of the nation of the State (through the study of civic affairs). We demand the education of gifted children of poor parents, whatever their class or occupation, at the expense of the State.
  The State must ensure that the nation's health standards are raised by protecting mothers and infants
  We demand the abolition of the mercenary army and the foundation of a people's army.
  To put the whole o
  --
  In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
24. Re:Corporations vs. government by locallyunscene · 2009-10-14 06:21 · Score: 1
  
  Ideologically Bush is much closer than Obama with respect to Fascism.
  None of the links you provided mention "Fascism". But by interpreting them to mean, what you wrote, you reveal, that you are one of those, who consider Fascism as somehow opposite of Socialism.
  angry troll rant
  So you are just a troll. If you had gone to the link for "Fascism" you would have seen that Fascism aka authoritarianism is opposite social anarchy. Similarly, communism is opposite economic libertarianism. Stalin was a communist fascist aka socialist(your word not mine). Hitler was a fascist economic libertarian, although less of a libertarian than either Bush or Obama, and more of a fascist than either. The point was, Bush is more of a fascist than Obama.
25. Re:Corporations vs. government by jollespm · 2009-10-14 10:59 · Score: 1
  
  So how is it that my company only pays ~$850 a year for my basic medical coverage (dental and vision is not included in that) yet someone who doesn't work for a big company has to pay 10x more? I completely agree that the costs of health care need to be reduced, but until they are, any major illness for anyone not independently wealthy is likely to end in bankruptcy. All that money that isn't collected? Those costs are passed onto those of us who have insurance, which is just one part of the bigger problem.
26. Re:Corporations vs. government by mi · 2009-10-14 12:45 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  So you are just a troll.
  ???? I don't think, the word "troll" means, what you think, it means...
  
  The point was, Bush is more of a fascist than Obama.
  This does not at all follow from anything you've said — not that I can pretend to understand your passionate word-juggling (Hitler a Libertarian? Wow!) I stand by my allegation, that the Left are (not so crypto-) Fascist — and my evidence to that is in the similarity of their stated goals to those of NSDAP...
  
  --
  In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
27. Re:Corporations vs. government by locallyunscene · 2009-10-15 05:14 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  If you're not a troll then I suggest you read the links I provided for comprehension rather than just skimming. You have to distinguish social policy from economic policy(hence my choice of words above). Meaning I don't see socialist, republican, democrat, fascist as different points on a single line, but different points on a grid. One can favor free market capitalism while also favoring social authoritarianism. Similarly, one can favor social freedom while also favoring market regulation.
28. Re:Corporations vs. government by mi · 2009-10-16 04:42 · Score: 1
  
  You have to distinguish social policy from economic policy(hence my choice of words above).
  And yet, you consider Hitler a Libertarian (even if only on economic policies). Despite his obviously Statist inclinations from that very program I quoted, and the actual implementations of government-sponsored banks, a car manufacturer (yes, the VolksWagen — or "people's wagon"), etc.
  Something is very wrong with your opinion...
  We don't need some other web-site to help us figure out, who of the two Presidents is more of a Fascist.
  I presented over a dozen points, that Obama himself and/or the people most strongly supporting him share with NSDAP. I challenge you to find six, that can be attributed to Bush and his main supporters.
  
  --
  In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Re:Now would be a good time to write your official by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 05:07 · Score: 0

I'm in NC too and this is unbelievable. I'm going to start typing up those letters right now.
Asheville NC has thet worst police in the state by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 05:08 · Score: 0

I also live in NC. After meeting some of the police here, in different cities, in quite innocent situations where they went very far out of their way to get me to incriminate myself, and tried to bring me up on false charges twice now, the thought of them having one more tool to lord over us in the typical power-down dynamic here, is completely awful.

PS. Police in Asheville NC are the WORST in the state. They are filthy liars and con artists. They will do anything possible to get you in the clink, since then they know that the state will be getting $$$ out of you somehow during the process.
Keeping a database without actually keeping one by Adrian+Lopez · 2009-10-13 05:20 · Score: 1

How long until the FBI does the same kind of end-run around the law by tapping into DMV biometric data? Right now the government can only obtain a person's fingerprints upon being arrested for some reason, but if the FBI adopts the same policy for DMV biometrics as for DMV pictures it could end up with a database of every licensed driver's biometric data without actually keeping such a database itself.
It seems to me they shouldn't get away with such a thing on a mere technicality of the law.

--
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
Re:Now would be a good time to write your official by jDeepbeep · 2009-10-13 05:30 · Score: 1

I am in NC and I'm writing everyone I can find right now.
Same here.

*waits for someone to mod me redundant... rolls eyes*

--
Reply to That ||
That was then. This is now. by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 05:38 · Score: 0

But surrendering our rights to the government is good now, you racist.
Re:Now would be a good time to write your official by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 05:45 · Score: 0

That doesnt work. I've tried (often) to write my representatives in the few states I have lived in. Every time, without fail, I get a canned response based on key words located in my letter. My favorite was Tom Harkin of Iowa, when I wrote to him opposing the loss of freedoms due to the so-called "Patriot Act".
My canned response was "We welcome your support of the Patriot Act and will keep fighting to extend its deadline in congress". So much for reading any of that letter.
Re:Now would be a good time to write your official by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 06:02 · Score: 0

I live in NC and it really pisses me off that when I renew my license I will now be subject to a virtual lineup. I am a "fairly" law abiding citizen, and for any governmental agency to be able to flip to my picture with no probable cause or verification of need completely outrages me. I am sending emails to my so-called representatives to protest this invasion of my privacy as I type this. Big Brother is coming to predominate in our society and it is turning into prove you're innocent instead of them proving you're guilty. I vote in EVERY election, and reserve my right to bitch about anything and everything our so-called representatives do "for our own good". If you don't vote, STFU.. you have given up your right to complain, you get what you "don't" vote for.
Here is what they get by jDeepbeep · 2009-10-13 06:08 · Score: 1

Now I wonder what the NC DMV is getting from the Feds in return..
Easy answer. New toys.

--
Reply to That ||
Circumvention is the shadiest way of law by LockeOnLogic · 2009-10-13 06:09 · Score: 1

Although this is within the letter of the law, it is very clearly against it's spirit. The amendment exists for a very valid reason, and finding a loophole sure as hell doens't mean you can ignore the constitution. This is even worse than ignoring really, they are fully aware of the limitations placed upon them. Their intent from that point is to find a way to defeat an aspect of the constitution. A law enforcement department that purposefully acts to ignore the law. As the coordination of govt agencies continues this will become commonplace. It will happen by increments, so nobody will notice. Too bad I can't copywrite the constituion and start DCMA'ing them once they try and circumvent it.
You're missing the point by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 06:12 · Score: 0

As someone born in a communist country (where carrying your ID was mandatory at all times), there are other issues with National ID cards you people are not even beginning to consider (I don't blame you - you've never experienced anything like it).
Let's say you're invited to a dissident's house, and you work for the government. The government is perfectly capable and willing to station a police officer the person's door and demand identification. You thus provide your identity, and soon the report ends up in your permanent dossier. This dossier follows you around for the rest of your life. Are you scheduled for a promotion? Let's check the dossier to see if the person can be trusted. You want to visit a foreign country? Let's check to see if he's a potential spying risk. These are extreme cases of course, but they have all happened before and are the logical extension of these very policies.
There is nothing scarier than a government with your personal information who is willing to use it (and in general, they are). Government having less information on you, is not important due to some silly privacy concerns (no one really cares at which restaurants you eat at), it's a safe-guard against mis-use which steals liberties by it simply not being possible for anyone to have that kind of control. Or do you want a government ID card that has to be swiped with every purchase and denies you the chocolate chip cookie purchase, because you have exceeded your sugar quota for the month (a law that could easily be passed "to curb health care costs")?
At some point, it really is best if you draw a line and tell the government it's none of your business. They work for you - you're not owned by them.
Perfect example... by Anachragnome · 2009-10-13 07:51 · Score: 1

" As the FBI is not authorized to collect and store the photos, they use the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles. "
Perfect example of a government entity CIRCUMVENTING checks and balances installed for a REASON.
Maybe this reason needs to be reiterated in such terms that the fucking FBI can understand it...then close the loophole that allows this circumvention.
Shock G's alter ego by X86Daddy · 2009-10-13 08:48 · Score: 1

Shock G's alter ego Humpty will never get caught by this system. Perhaps we all need to adopt these
Alberta Canada does the same thing by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 09:34 · Score: 0

This isn't new, since around 2003 this has been going on. In Canada where I'm living the province of Alberta has a FR System as well. I know that they have had a number of convictions as they been publicized on the daily news.
Another way of saying this... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 10:27 · Score: 0

So you're saying you were fine with all the private information gathering by the police and government and corporations until they came for you?
Not "Could Be" by DynaSoar · 2009-10-13 10:49 · Score: 1

"The expanded technology used on millions of motorist could be rolled out across the USA."
But rather "will be". Some states are already requiring that people do not smile for their driver's license photos. They're constraining what the (still fairly crippled; see section 4.2 at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facial_recognition_system ) software has to contend with. Smiles, and the mouth in general, is far more mobile than most other facial components.
It's going to happen and it's going to happen badly. But just like polygraphs and torture, it's not that they work but rather the threat of them work. So they say.

--
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
Just Put Your Tongue Between Your Teeth by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-13 11:10 · Score: 0

Then slide your lower teeth forward and tilt your head back slightly. That'll increase the size of your jaw relative to the width of your eyes enough to fuck with the system.
Plus you'll get a really bizarre-looking driver's license photo, and who doesn't want that!
I wonder by BCW2 · 2009-10-13 11:55 · Score: 1

If having a Birthday in Nov. (when the pic is taken) when I have my winter beard screws up their calculations?
NC resident.

--
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
You're a little confused by celtic_hackr · 2009-10-13 12:12 · Score: 1

I do hope, we don't get to experience this ourselves again in health care. Public schools, USPS, and highways are enough...
Oh, yes, the postal system is such a dismal failure. I have such a hard time mailing anything or getting mail. Highways are mostly maintained by states, and hence the varying quality of roads. Also, I believe the public schools are also state controlled. Things would be very different for roads and schools if they were controlled on a National level. Not necessarily what I'd like to see, but the Feds could harldy do worse than some states. Although, some states do really great.

Yes, that's called Fascism. Some people ascribe this to Obama administration, as it aims to take over corporations. Calling him "Hitler" over this misses the point, though, (and triggers Godwin's Law) — Nazism is an aberration of Fascism and Obama does not deserve the mustaches
I think you mean Socialism here. Fascism is about total domination and control without any input from the people. Although, in a Fascist world, you could conceivably have such a power structure, but it wouldn't be a pure Fascist state then.
Re:Now would be a good time to write your official by loki.TJ · 2009-10-14 02:51 · Score: 1

Me to DMV:
"I saw an article today that disturbed me deeply.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iCDKSGZjGw3GMFUml4LQLlWzNOuQD9B9O5B80

What gives DMV the right to store my photo used when obtaining a North Caroline drivers license? Under what law is NC DMV then allowed to give away my information to federal authorities?

Please explain to me why NC DMV is providing my personal information to the FBI so that they can place me in a "digital lineup"."

DMV to me:
"North Carolina law (General Statute 20-43) states that "...A photographic image or signature recorded in any format by the Division for a drivers license or a special identification card is confidential and shall not be released except for law enforcement purposes." "

Me to DMV:
"So for my next license can I refuse to have my picture and signiture placed on my drivers license?

How is releasing my photo along with every other resident of NC deemed to be "for law enforcement purposes"? I'm not a criminal, suspect, or even remotely involved with anything to do with law enforcement, yet my photo is being placed in digital lineups."
Capitalism vs. socialism by mi · 2009-10-14 03:26 · Score: 1

I was saying that since the income inequality is so big, it's only fair that tax inequality is also big.
I did not state, that it is "unfair". I was simply proving, beyond shadow of doubt, that "rich" are not "exempted" from taxes — and that you were wrong alleging, that they were.

And quoting the National Tax Payers Union about social justice
I did not quote them "about social justice" — but I believe their figures accurate. You don't? What figures do you have?

like quoting Adolf Hitler about racial justice.
Visiting this page may prove enlightening...

Your next issue is about military spending versus social spending. 21.6 percent spent on defense is completely crazy.
Crazy or not, these are the facts. The combined spending on defense and "war on terror" is about the same as Social Security or Medicaid/Medicair alone. Even if 50% of the defense spending were "waste", you'd only save about 10% of the federal budget by ending it — nothing to sneeze at, but no magic bullet either.
You put a smug comment, that all budget troubles could be solved, if only we could a) stop exempting the rich from paying taxes; and b) stop wasting money and defense contracts. The facts I was able to find with 30 seconds of Googling disprove both of your contentions: a) the rich already carry the vast share of tax burden (whether that's fair or not is off-topic); and b) the entire defense spending is only 21% of the federal budget and thus even if you halved it, you wouldn't save very much.
Your argument completely defeated you dare coming back?.. Wow...

And it [defense spending -mi] is money sent down the toilet.
Is it your contention, that the United States needs no military at all? Please, state for the record...

Also, if your Medicare and Medicaid are so expensive, you must be doing something wrong.
Of course! The first thing wrong, was establishing these programs in the first place. Instead of fixing this, you and yours propose even more of the same — why don't we expand Medicare to all — that's what you are asking...

Then the problem is not the government, but plain old capitalism gone wild.
Capitalism's record at providing immense economic benefits even to the least fortunate of its participants is well established and beyond doubt.
Socialism, on the other hand, has little to show economically wherever practiced, and slides into horrible tyranny (Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Kim, Pol Pot, Castro, Mugabe) from a slightest push-over. Having tried both, I'll choose capitalism over and over again — the "wilder" the better. Thank you very much.

--
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
1. Re:Capitalism vs. socialism by daem0n1x · 2009-10-14 04:03 · Score: 1
  
  Also, if your Medicare and Medicaid are so expensive, you must be doing something wrong.
  Of course! The first thing wrong, was establishing these programs in the first place. Instead of fixing this, you and yours propose even more of the same — why don't we expand Medicare to all — that's what you are asking...
  So how do you propose to solve the US healthcare problem? The way that all other developed countries use, that works very well, or something else? How do you provide health care to those who can't pay for it directly?
  
  Capitalism's record at providing immense economic benefits even to the least fortunate of its participants is well established and beyond doubt. Socialism, on the other hand, has little to show economically wherever practiced, and slides into horrible tyranny (Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Kim, Pol Pot, Castro, Mugabe) from a slightest push-over. Having tried both, I'll choose capitalism over and over again — the "wilder" the better. Thank you very much.
  How you can include Hitler in the Socialist field is beyond understanding. Maybe it's because his party was called National-Socialist, but that's just too simpleton. All the capitalist corporations that employed slave labor during Nazism, including a few American ones were very happy with the "socialism" of Hitler.
  All other capitalist developed countries have socialised medicine. So, what have socialism and tiranny have to do with the subject?
  Since we're talking about horrible tiranny, let's go a little further and talk about Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Salazar and their beloved corporations. While we're at it ,we could move on to others like the Bothas, Mobutu, Batista, Somoza, Pinochet, Noriega, Reza Pahlevi, Saddam Hussein, the Saud dinnasty, etc. etc. etc. all very pro-capitalism and all very horribly tyrannic (Some even became enemies of the US but that's it, if you play with snakes, you eventually get bitten).
  And Pol Pot was helped by the Americans to power to help fight the Vietcong. As usual, the US screwed up big time and created a monster way beyond their wildest dreams.
Oh, can you feel it? by ThatsNotPudding · 2009-10-14 05:29 · Score: 1

Just feel all that freedom! Thanks for knowing what's best for me, Ghost of J Edgar Hoover!!