Terror Arrest Used As Fodder To Fund Real ID Act

BeatTheChip writes "There's been a lot of buzz in recent days concerning the deadline to deliver on the federal Real ID Act. Congress is looking for corners to cut. One tactic is to attach emergency policy to the Real ID in order to sustain funding for its development by authoring members in Congress. In an effort to link the two, Rep. Lamar Smith and others asked DHS to increase enforcement of the Real ID Act over a terror suspect apprehended by lawful means."

Comments

As a US citizen

[g0bshiTe]

I wonder what kind of judicial punishment I would get for refusing this if it went into law.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

It almost seems more convenient to just use a national ID.

I mean, if I could replace my driver's license and passport with this card, and it could act as an oAuth for any other service ( meaning complaint companies wouldn't need to issue their own magic cards anymore ), and especially if this card erased the need for multiple proofs of ID I'd be fine with having it. I'm not normally a convenience over security guy, but I really don't get why people flip shit over this when you already have a local nation id in the form of a driver's license / state issued photo id and your passport.

captcha: infringe

Re:As a US citizen

[C_amiga_fan]

Cling to your 9th and 10th amendment rights (right to privacy is one of those non-enumerated rights). It appears that's what the Member States of the Union are doing: "Half the states in the country have affirmatively barred themselves from implementing REAL ID or they have passed resolutions objecting to the national ID law." (Congress shall exercise no power reserved to the States.)

BTW does the European Union have a single ID that all europeans must carry? If the EU tried to force the adoption of such an ID, how would the citizens or states react?

Re:As a US citizen

[BJ_Covert_Action]

Excommunication.

Re:As a US citizen

[genghisjahn]

Of course you got modded down. You asked, "Hey, what's the big deal? Maybe it could be a good thing..."

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

You won't have any trouble refusing it. The trouble will come when you're pulled over and a cop arrests you for driving without a license; Home Depot won't let you return products without a receipt; you can't drive into Canada or take a flight anywhere without a passport; you're harassed for not carrying ID; you can't enter a federal courtroom to fight the law.

Re:As a US citizen

[MemoryDragon]

Every EU country has a law which enforces to carry an ID it always has been like it and I am 40. If people really do is another issue.
It has been about 24 years since a policement stopped me and controlled my id on the streets, and that was because I was drinking and just turned 16 (which is the legal age for drinking here)
So the chances of being controlled just for the sake of having to show your id is pretty slim here unless you dont have the average european caucasian look and even if they catch you then the worst which can happen is a small fine.

Re:As a US citizen

[Kell Bengal]

I can decline to get a driver's license, and I can decline to get a passport. I don't have to have any id at all if I don't want. The implication is that I don't need identification or special permission to move freely about the country of which I am a citizen.

With a national ID card scheme, I don't have a choice to opt out. Such a card exists solely for "papers please" moments. The implication is that I am not free to move about the country of which I am a citizen.

Re:As a US citizen

[interkin3tic]

I really don't get why people flip shit over this when you already have a local nation id in the form of a driver's license / state issued photo id and your passport

Slippery slope for one. If this passes, the issue could become "Basically everyone already has these ID cards, why not make them mandatory" then "You already all have ID cards issued, there's no reason you shouldn't have them on you at all times. To prevent terrorism." Then "We had to shut down that protest: there were people breaking the law by not having national ID cards" or "Suspect was obeying the law, and had an ID card, but we suspected it was fake and incarcerated him until we could determine it was legitimate, at which time he had missed his speech 'when did we submit to totalitarian rule."

And while each of those steps are a long shot and maybe unrealistic, but it's a pointless risk to take: we get no increased security in return. None. This won't prevent terrorism.

Re:As a US citizen

[Hope Thelps]

Every EU country has a law which enforces to carry an ID it always has been like it and I am 40. If people really do is another issue.

There's no legal requirement to carry ID in the UK. You don't even have to carry a driving license when driving, though if stopped you may be required to present it at a police station within a few days.

Don't know about other EU countries. When abroad I generally keep my passport handy so that might cover me if such is a requirement? It's never been an issue.

Re:As a US citizen

[cayenne8]

Also, it is NOT a national ID. It is issued by my state...other states and the federal govt, for the most part..do not have the information from my DL immediately upon query. There isn't a national drivers license database.

And most important...where the fuck is it in the constitution for the Federal Govt. to issues national id??

Re:As a US citizen

[countertrolling]

State, national, what's the difference? Only in scale. Sometimes you need the feds to protect you from the state. Authority is authority. All you're choosing is whose foot you want up your ass. The natural birthright is to be able to move about without being tagged like cattle.

Re:As a US citizen

[Draek]

I'm not an US citizen, but can you also decline to get a Social Security number? and, if you can, are you able to conduct a normal life (ie, keep a job, buy a home, etc) without one?

It seems to me your SS number serves the same role as other countries' national IDs, except with none of the safety checks they usually have.

Re:As a US citizen

[angel'o'sphere]

BTW does the European Union have a single ID that all europeans must carry? If the EU tried to force the adoption of such an ID, how would the citizens or states react?

Not every country of the EU has that. But most have. As we have this since nearly hundreds of years, depending on country, no one complains.
Afaik only the UK has no requirement for an ID card.

(We have no EU wide unique id, though, they are country specific)

angel'o'sphere

Re:As a US citizen

[gay358]

Every EU country has a law which enforces to carry an ID it always has been like it and I am 40.

While this might be true in some countries, it is certainly not true in all EU countries. I live in Finland and and there isn't any legal oblication to carry or even own any kind of ID card here. However, in practice doing some things, like opening bank account, might be difficult or impossible without some kind of proof of your identity because of current laws against money laundering laws etc.

Re:As a US citizen

[PPH]

You'll be cited for mopery with intent to gawk.

Re:As a US citizen

[causality]

State, national, what's the difference? Only in scale. Sometimes you need the feds to protect you from the state. Authority is authority. All you're choosing is whose foot you want up your ass. The natural birthright is to be able to move about without being tagged like cattle.

In terms of abuses of power ... the states are saintly figures of altruism who walk on water, heal the sick, feed the poor, and keep your cereal from getting soggy in milk when compared to the federal government. It's different when the people running things are not so damned far removed from being neighbors in or near your own community. State governments also don't receive nearly the sort of "attention" and dollars from lobbyists and special interests that the feds do. It does happen, but not nearly as much.

You as a taxpaying citizen are far better represented in your state government than you could ever dream of knowing at the federal level. And if all else fails, you can vote with your feet and take yourself and your tax dollars to another state that's more sane.

I heard a fable once about a particular culture's ancient rulers. When a man was to become a local king, the way his territory was determined was simple. He would stand on the very tallest hilltop he could find. Everything he could see was his to rule and not one acre more. The belief was that it's very dangerous to allow a man to rule more than he can see. Smaller and more local is how you lessen the pitfalls that come with political power. Compared to the lumbering gigantic monster that is the U.S. Federal Government, the state governments are quite close to this ideal.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, yes. Fuck the PCs, and long live the non-PCs that dare say the truth.

Only, what you're saying actually isn't true. All of America's woes doesn't come from "young, adult, Islamic, males of Middle Eastern descent."

Some terrorist-attacks done by white people in America:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Terrorism#United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski

Also, serial killers seems to be mostly white in America:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_country#United_States_of_America

Face it. You're not a guy who dares tell it like it is. You're just a garden variety racist. Man up to it, or shut the fuck up.

Re:As a US citizen

[Ravon Rodriguez]

Do you have a driver's license? Have you ever declined to show it when asked? If so, you know it causes more trouble than it's worth. Not having one is even more of a hassle. It's great to have principles, but at the end of the day you have to pick your fights; it's easier to just comply and move on with your life. We no longer live in a society where people can be anonymous; Accept it and move on.

Re:As a US citizen

[NoSig]

It's not about terrorism, it's about not having 10 different IDs in your wallet. Combine them into one, make it harder to fake now that you only need to make 1/10 as many and use it for everything. If you don't like your grocer talking to your shoe shop about what you are buying, have the card present a different id to everyone who asks, and have it so it takes a court order/similar process to access the information necessary to track that information back to you. So you wouldn't have a single card number, you'd have as many numbers associated to the card as there are people who want you in their particular system. It wouldn't be the same number they've all got so no tracking problem. This would be better security than giving your name has now.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

That's exactly wrong. The government has only the powers granted by the constitution, and everything else is reserved to the states or the people. That's explicitly stated.
 

Your comment was SO wrong, I suspect you're being sarcastic and I missed it.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Every EU country has a law which enforces to carry an ID it always has been like it and I am 40.

Could you please list the EU countries where you positively know of such a law?

I am asking because it is certainly not "every EU country". No such law exists in Denmark. Other postings say the same for Finland and UK.

Re:As a US citizen

[Zan Lynx]

Yes you can. You need a lawyer to front for you and you need to play some games with the corporation laws so that you pay your taxes through your corporation's tax ID. If you work at it you can manage to be legal and make money without a SSN. You cannot be an employee of anyone though. Best you can do is be a contractor.

Re:As a US citizen

[tirefire]

but can you also decline to get a Social Security number?

No.

are you able to conduct a normal life (ie, keep a job, buy a home, etc) without one?

No.

It seems to me your SS number serves the same role as other countries' national IDs, except with none of the safety checks they usually have.

This is 100% correct right now, however, it is a recent development. People these days use SSNs excessively; they were only designed 80 years ago to be used for income/social security tax collection and for receiving social security benefits. Nowadays you're asked for your SSN if you try to order cable TV. *facepalm*

Re:As a US citizen

[Mr. Freeman]

"Thus, if something is not in the Constitution, the government can do it."

The STATE government can, NOT the federal government. You apparently missed the 10th amendment "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Re:As a US citizen

[SydShamino]

Someone hasn't read the 10th amendment.

Re:As a US citizen

[Redlazer]

Well said, but I think you're putting too much faith in the local government. I would be curious what a nation would look like with most of it's power deliberated at the State level (or province, as I'm in Canada).

And what's to stop someone from leaving the country, rather than just the state?

Re:As a US citizen

[Jane Q. Public]

"The U.S. Constitution limits government powers. It does not grant them. Thus, if something is not in the Constitution, the government can do it."

Actually, the Constitution does both, and no it can't.

It limits federal government power to the 16 (some say 17) powers granted by Article 1, Section 8, and a scant few other places in the document. Powers not specifically granted by the Constitution to the Federal government are reserved to the states, or to the people (10th Amendment).

So if it's not in the Constitution, the Federal government can't legally do it. It's strictly State business. Also, contrary to popular opinion, the "necessary and proper" clause is a restrictive, not permissive, clause. And the "supremacy clause" only applies to laws that are "in pursuance of" the aforementioned specifically delegated powers.

So no. If it's not something specifically delegated to the Federal government by the Constitution, or something "necessary and proper" to carry out those delegated duties, the Federal government has no business trying to do it. Any such law is nulll and void.

Re:As a US citizen

[causality]

Well said, but I think you're putting too much faith in the local government. I would be curious what a nation would look like with most of it's power deliberated at the State level (or province, as I'm in Canada).

And what's to stop someone from leaving the country, rather than just the state?

It's far easier for a U.S. citizen to move from one U.S. state to another U.S. state than it would be to emigrate to another country.

Just off the top of my head ... another country would almost certainly mean changing your money to a different currency. For an American, it would likely mean getting used to the metric system. It would mean learning a whole different set of laws. It may mean learning a new language. It is possible but far less likely that you could remain with the same employer (than if you were moving from one U.S. state to another).

Then there is the culture shock. For example, in many countries bribing police officers is considered a standard practice. It's just the way things are done. For an American that would be quite a surprise, since in the USA that's a really great way to end up in jail (the way to do that in the USA is to bribe, err I mean make contributions of course, to the politicians who direct the police).

Not to mention that you'd have to obey the immigration laws of the country. They might or might not let you move there, something that's not a concern for moving from one U.S. state to another. They might let you move there, but only if you have a certain amount of money. You may have to perform military service. You may have restrictions about what kind of property you may own and similar things (for example, in Mexico, foreign nationals may be denied ownership of the highly sought-after oceanfront properties).

It's definitely harder to move to a foreign country and become a naturalized citizen there.

Re:As a US citizen

[Jane Q. Public]

"... they were only designed 80 years ago to be used for income/social security tax collection and for receiving social security benefits."

Not even that, really. When this was proposed, people were concerned that it would be used as a national ID. So the people were guaranteed, in so many words, that the SSN would never be used as an ID card. Up until just a few years ago, the cards said right on them that they were not to be used as ID.

But then the government started making exceptions, and allowed banks and credit reporting agencies to use it as ID. Now, it's a big mess.

But it demonstrates one thing clearly: don't trust government guarantees, when they try something like that. It might last for a few years, then "bye, bye."

Re:As a US citizen

[Zarim]

Apparently you can decline to get a SSN, but I couldn't find out if you can actually disassociate yourself from it if you already have one. Also while you can legally open a bank account without a SSN, it seems to make the whole process a lot more complicated. My guess is that it's like that for most things; legally allowed, but five times the hassle.

Re:As a US citizen

[Jane Q. Public]

"More trouble than it's worth" is a matter of perspective. It might cause you inconvenience to refuse, but if you do, your children might just grow up in a society that still can't require IDs just to walk down the street. If you consistently cave, they might not.

You choose which you think is more "worth it".

Re:As a US citizen

[Jane Q. Public]

I didn't see your last sentence at first, but I have now, so I will go further: your attitude is precisely what caused us to be in a situation where anonymity is in danger.

The ability to speak and transact business anonymously is essential to a free society. If you do not understand why, maybe you should read a few history books.

Re:As a US citizen

[NeutronCowboy]

Just out of curiosity. If you don't have an ID, how does anyone know that you're a citizen of this country? If you are never required to produce it, how would anyone distinguish you from an illegal alien? ESP?

Re:As a US citizen

[digitig]

I would be curious what a nation would look like with most of it's power deliberated at the State level (or province, as I'm in Canada).

Probably much like the EU did a few years ago. Ok, it wasn't -- still isn't -- a nation, but the point is moot if power isn't centralised. Nowadays there's probably too much centralised power for the EU to be a model of that any more, although it's probably still a pretty good model of the way things would be bound to go.

Re:As a US citizen

[orient]

If the EU tried to force the adoption of such an ID, how would the citizens or states react?

EU is a group of sovereign states. Nobody can impose such a decision on a sovereign state. The governments of the member states will react before the citizens will even hear about such an idea.

Re:As a US citizen

[countertrolling]

Yeah, I understand the guy in the field should be the guy in charge, but it's still just a numbers game. If you kill 100 people or a million, I'm still going to treat you the same. Besides, if a state wants more authority, it might unite with other states. Next thing you know when 40 or 50 get together, you got a pretty big "trade federation" which will always evolve into a galactic empire. Then where are you gonna run? Best to nip the whole thing in the bud, before one's authority extends beyond himself.

Re:As a US citizen

[muindaur]

Yeah, my state is now fully controlled by Dems, all of whom seem to think raising taxes, and not cutting services is the answer. Even though their continued raising of said taxes is driving the very young, young, and now middle aged people out of the state: that can afford to move.

It's really sad that my parents,who can't afford to move yet, have to drive over the state line in order to get groceries at an affordable rate: filling up their gas tank with the lower taxed gas. Yes, even with the added driving distance, they still save money.

Once they finishing paying off their mortgage in a few years they will be able to save enough to move out of the state.

On the town level: We almost had a Walmart. It would not have saved local businesses because it doesn't compete with them. Jobs and products townsfolk need to drive thirty minutes for would have been within ten minutes. No, Walmart is an "evil" corp: something I don't believe. So now that all the mills and factories are full on employees we have squat left. I can get my major medical still, and it *shock* would cost the same. People forget that medical benefits are payed for largely by the employee. So that's the dumbest reason for Walmart to be evil. Oh noes! They don't provide something someone can get privately, and often at lower price!

More traffic? Sure thing! It would be right on the main state highway running through the town; that just so happens to be the same one all the towns businesses that would BENEFIT from it are.

So you are right. Stupid decisions can happen on the state and local levels. At least there is some ability to move.

Re:As a US citizen

[Redlazer]

Interesting, but I think you're off the mark ultimately.

Things like changing currency, a new (better) measurement system, different laws - those are easy. A hassle, to be certain, but far from a real prevention from moving.

Learning a new language should not stop people from moving there either - but that's a personal opinion, and I've also never done it myself. A challenge, but I think it would be a good challenge - the kind you'd like to defeat.

Changing employers does suck, but can be a great thing.

Culture shock - eh. I think your example is a poor one - an American in Djibouti or Iran would be a much more extreme culture shock than Canada or most of Europe. And in that case, just like your state scenario: don't go there, go somewhere else.

In Canada, I can assure you we do not bribe our police. We also have many of the same laws, our currency is practically identical in value, and so on and so forth.

Immigration laws are definitely a problem. But, again: there's tons of other countries, just don't go there. Canada, too, has rather relaxed immigration laws.

And, as for state to state, many of the same rules still apply, just to a lesser degree. Culture shock can certainly occur from city to city and state to state - and that includes the bribing of police officers.

In all, I think you are right, but the reality of the situation is much less severe than you think. It's true that getting into a new country is a challenge - but it is in no way an unacceptable option.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, in a word, no. In the 70s it was unthinkable that ID cards even existed in some states, because of parallels with South Africa's ID card laws. In other countries it's been different. I'm told that (Algerian descent) youth in Paris suburbs tend to get checked just about every street corner, ment and experienced as police harassment.

The first thing plod here ask nowadays is for your ID too, regardless of what the matter at hand is. Including in situations where EMT attention ought to be the first order of the day (happened to me, down to obstructing by the police officers involved). And they wonder why aggression and violence against police is on the rise.

So, "it depends", but they've become a lot less tolerant in the last five or so years. Like now that they have the framework in place, they're putting the thumb screws on.

Re:As a US citizen

[causality]

But it demonstrates one thing clearly: don't trust government guarantees, when they try something like that. It might last for a few years, then "bye, bye."

There is such a mountain of evidence for this that it's really very simple: anyone who doesn't understand that simply doesn't want to. It definitely isn't because the facts leave any room for interpretation.

The income tax was "a temporary (WWII) war-time measure".

Re:As a US citizen

[causality]

Just out of curiosity. If you don't have an ID, how does anyone know that you're a citizen of this country? If you are never required to produce it, how would anyone distinguish you from an illegal alien? ESP?

Simple. If you claim someone is an illegal alien, you are accusing them of breaking a law.

The burden of proof is on the accuser.

You either prove that they have in fact broken immigration law ... or else they are presumed innocent and assume to be a legal citizen.

Really, it's easy as pie.

Re:As a US citizen

[rtb61]

However once you are arrested and are unable to prove your identity that does leave you in a bit of a pickle. As the police should not let you go until they can establish who you are under existing immigration laws. The logic being if it can not be proved that you are a citizen then be default you become an illegal immigrant.subject to deportation once they can prove which country you belong to and they must accept you.

A voluntary ID card is reasonable as long as there are server penalties in place for privacy abuse, enabling the citizen to add medical records etc. for their personal benefit.

Re:As a US citizen

[pwizard2]

I've noticed that state and local (especially county/municipal) governments tend to be the worst offenders in regards to establishing forms of petty tyranny. I hear stuff all the time about how $city wants to ban trans-fat/salt or how $local_politician wants to get rid of all free parking city-wide to generate more revenue. (I heard about how they actually tried that in Long Beach, CA last year... fortunately for the people who live there it didn't happen)

Re:As a US citizen

[icebike]

and the federal govt, for the most part..do not have the information from my DL immediately upon query.

You, sir, are delusional.

There is not one federal police agency that can not get your DL info from any state in under 12 seconds flat.

Re:As a US citizen

[element-o.p.]

Not to mention that, IIRC, when Social Security was first rolled out, it was to be an optional program. How did that work out for us Yanks?

Re:As a US citizen

[ncgnu08]

I completely agree with you on this. This is one issue that I clearly identify with libertarian, and small government conservatives (as opposed to social "we want a government big enough to enforce our no abortion, no gays ideals; ie a HUGE government" conservatives). I would think this would be right down the alley for the tea party, so my question is where are those people on this issue. This is an issue that exposes the tea party, Freedom Works, and their ilk as the complete hypocrites they are. If they truly believed in small government and no encroachment on personal liberties those "town halls" would already be starting to make sure this never happens. Unfortunately, since social conservatives "astro turfed" the whole tea party movement, there is no/will be no "town halls" or breaking Fox News over this; the national ID is not a threat to corporations and the ruling wealthy so therefore no need to even talk about the issue. This will only affect the unimportant 95-98% of citizens; that is those of us that don't have enough money to do anything that we please. Maybe if I could just get on my private plane and travel anywhere without worry, I would probably feel different. Since I am part of the middle class, or what is left of it (barely hanging on), my freedoms are important to me; my freedoms and personal liberties are some of the few things I can still afford to have and enjoy!

So back on point, where is the outrage and the "town halls" to protest this? Where is the media coverage? Oh, that's right; it isn't about forcing religious views on every other citizen so those groups don't care (I'm looking at you tea party, Freedom Works, Fox Noise)!!!

I only hope there are enough in the tea party with the intelligence to see this for the threat it is without Sarah and Glenn and Hannity telling them to get mad and protest. I fear that I already know the answer to that, but I would love to be proved wrong.

Re:As a US citizen

[Faerunner]

I suspect it would look similar to Europe under the EU, albeit still more homogeneous because of our shared history.

We are, after all, the United States. Even the name indicates that the power ought to lie in state governments; that the federal government should be little more than a depot for inter-state commerce and other such wide-ranging affairs. If a state wanted, it could break off relations with the other 49 and get on with life as an independent territory, however unlikely that might seem (people always seem to forget South Carolina's attempted secession from the union).

Leaving one state for another is relatively easy because the states have all kinds of reciprocity. You can hire a moving van in one state and drive it to the next and drop it off there for a small fee; you can change addresses using a simple form from the post office; the culture and language and side of the road that you drive on are pretty much the same no matter where you go in the US. Leaving the country requires a passport, and all kinds of tangles with immigration/emigration forms and requirements, potentially new vaccinations, new laws to learn and follow, and occasionally a new side of the road to drive on. All of that change is a pretty good motivator to avoid moving outside the states if one can mitigate one's suffering under gov't simply by moving across state lines.

Re:As a US citizen

[element-o.p.]

Give it a try in Arizona, and let me know how well that works for you...

Re:As a US citizen

[causality]

I think I did leave out one very important point.

Saying "things here are hopeless" and moving to a foreign nation in the hopes of finding something resembling a free country ... that means finally giving up on your own country. It means abandoning what is ultimately your homeland, leaving it to the forces of tyranny which have finally succeeded in taking it over. It means surrendering all hope and cutting your losses. It's not an easy thing to do for anyone with a conscience.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm all for a single ID card, on the proviso that I can have ten different IDs on it, and even within one ID can have hard guarantees that one "verifier" cannot see what I show others, and that I can always verify just who's asking for my ID again. And by hard guarantees I don't mean pansy army-and-a-navy the-law-says-so hard guarantees, but mathematically proven impossible or at least "it is exactly $this hard" hard guarantees. And then backed by an army and a navy.

On top of that, minimal information transfer, minimised information requirements, and so on, and so forth. Basically the whole panacea of things we need but haven't managed to invent, nevermind deploy, yet. No government is going to like it but tough kekse mit ohrensand, they're there for us, not the other way around.

Re:As a US citizen

[Hylandr]

Here you are wrong. We have had a national ID for several years now. In the form of your drivers license. Think about that next time you get on an airplane, and they shine that special light on your Drivers License or ID card when you're getting in line for your complimentary molestation.

They made all Drivers license status reciprocal in all states, where a suspension in Arizona will result in a suspension everywhere else, so they are linked. This means law enforcement in Florida has access to Law enforcement in Arizona with the speed of a call, or query.

Don't believe me still? Then why would airports across the nation be shining that light on your DL or ID, regardless of the state of issue?

Something to think about.

 
- Dan.

Re:As a US citizen

[The AtomicPunk]

Why, you can't use 10th amendment rights. States rights are only for racists, the democrats told me so!

Re:As a US citizen

[peragrin]

The trade federation didn't become the empire though.

The trade federation was setup to become terrorists, to raise the alert and fear levels enough in the republic for the republic to willing throw away their freedoms in the same of security creating the empire from a republic. Not unlike how the Romans did it.

What remains to be seen is whether or not the same can happen to the USA. We do have on major advantage over the Romans. Our presidents are term limited. Even afraid of the outside, 50% of the population won't let someone stay in office a day longer without using weapons.

Re:As a US citizen

[peragrin]

Just to point out depending on where you move to in the USA there can be quite a culture shock too.

Re:As a US citizen

[C_amiga_fan]

>>>EU is a group of sovereign states. Nobody can impose such a decision on a sovereign state.

Funny. The US imposes its rule on the sovereign states all the time. And I've heard the EU has over-ruled several of its governments, like Italy. So how can states claim to be truly "sovereign" if the EU can use its Court to force compliance?

Re:As a US citizen

[NeutronCowboy]

The problem is that breaking of the law is defined by the paper. Being an illegal immigrant is defined by not having papers. Otherwise, do you know how easy it would be to accuse someone of being an illegal alien? "Sorry, we couldn't find your identification papers back at HQ, please come with us."

You have two choices: you open yourself up to arbitrarily being labeled an illegal immigrant by government officials, or you open yourself up having to ID yourself at specific points.

An ID card is there to protect you, not to protect the government.

Re:As a US citizen

[c0lo]

And most important...where the fuck is it in the constitution for the Federal Govt. to issues national id??

Devil's advocate: where in the constitution is something to forbid Feds imposing a national ID?

Re:As a US citizen

[countertrolling]

Our presidents are term limited.

But the party isn't, though changing faces every few years does provide a persistent illusion. The president is a mannequin..

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

have it so it takes a court order/similar process to access the information

I find your naivete refreshing.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Thomas Jefferson - “A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither.”

That is where the slippery slope leads, if you put any stock in old, dead patriots.

Re:As a US citizen

[cayenne8]

Basically...because the Constitution grants limited, specifically enumerated powers to the Federal govt....anything not listed there...is reserved for the states.

So basically, if it ain't in the constitution, the Feds aren't supposed to be able to do it....

Re:As a US citizen

[fonos]

Light to make the hologram (something I assume is on all state licenses) show up easier?

Re:As a US citizen

[Mister Whirly]

Nowhere - it isn't explicitly mentioned so therefore the federal government does not have the power to do so. The Constitution grants the federal government rights and any not listed are up to the states or "the people" as per the 10th Amendment.

Re:As a US citizen

[cayenne8]

But that's the point.

If a local city or state passes a stupid law you don't like...you can easily move to a city or state that has laws more to your liking....and you have a more important vote and chance to voice your opposition to such laws on a local level.

On the federal level....you're fucked....notice how today the Feds seem to listen very little to anyone in the country as to what they want...

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

I completely agree with you on this. This is one issue that I clearly identify with libertarian, and small government conservatives (as opposed to social "we want a government big enough to enforce our no abortion, no gays ideals; ie a HUGE government" conservatives). I would think this would be right down the alley for the tea party, so my question is where are those people on this issue. This is an issue that exposes the tea party, Freedom Works, and their ilk as the complete hypocrites they are. If they truly believed in small government and no encroachment on personal liberties those "town halls" would already be starting to make sure this never happens.

The TEA Party objects to the RealID.

Took 3 seconds of searching to find. But, hey, don't let facts get in the way of your delusional and hate-filled rhetoric.

Re:As a US citizen

[Kakari]

Of course... the light they're shining on your DL is UV and is used to light-up the UV-reactive inks on your DL. There's also some fun stuff on your credit cards (Amex, MC, Visa at least) - but I suspect you were using that as a synecdoche.

That aside - the status of a driver's license is not necessarily automatic in all states. An easy example is state's with particularly young driving ages (or possible driving age if you're living on a farm or the like). If you then move to another state, you may be able to drive there while not a resident - but once you become a resident you'll typically have to get the license of the state that you're in. If you aren't of age - then no dice.

I believe you're conflating either the National Driver Register or Driver License Compact or even the Non-Resident Violator Compact with the TSA's policy to accept government issued IDs. The NRVC is notably not reciprocal between all states.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

So create a private single-ID solution. Why do you need it to be a state-issued ID, and force it on everyone?

Re:As a US citizen

[shutdown -p now]

I would be curious what a nation would look like with most of it's power deliberated at the State level (or province, as I'm in Canada).

Since you're a Canadian, here's one example - health care in Canada got started locally by provinces, and is still in fact run at provincial level, with feds only redistributing money around (but any province can opt out of that). That seemed to work out quite well - certainly much better than the recent US attempt to introduce national health care on federal level.

Re:As a US citizen

[shutdown -p now]

And what's to stop someone from leaving the country, rather than just the state?

You can only leave a country for another country. And countries, as it happens, don't make it particularly easy for non-residents - you'd need to get a visa, and then eventually go through naturalization process, and there are no guarantees that you would even be allowed to do either at any point.

In contrast, in US the states are required to do certain basic things (through the Constitution): they cannot have laws in certain areas that are discriminatory to out-of-state visitors, most importantly freedom of movement. This ensures that changing one's place of residence is always possible, and not unduly hard.

Re:As a US citizen

[shutdown -p now]

I've went through the hoops of getting an SSN and opening bank account just recently after relocating to the US. Opening a bank account without SSN is actually not that much more complicated, but it limits your choices - some banks insist that they need it, others are okay without it and don't hassle you about it, and the trick is to find the latter. Sadly, the local credit unions seemed to be particularly unhappy about me not having it, which is a pity - I really wanted to go with one rather than a commercial bank.

That said, you will need an SSN for them to do credit checks for you. No SSN, no credit checks, no credit (card or otherwise).

What was really fucked up is when I went to a mobile provider to get a cell phone, and when they found out I have no SSN, they demanded a "security deposit" in case I later want to terminate the contract with them prematurely, and will owe them money in termination fees.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

So... your argument is.. "it could be a great idea, if only they'd do this and this and this!"

Yet, you seem to support real id/pass id, despite it not doing anything at all like you suggest would be nice. It would replace .. what .. 2 cards in your wallet? Your driver's license and your social security card. It could ideally, but won't actually, replace your employee id, store loyalty cards, or credit/debit cards. Not part of the requirements, and almost certainly not worth the trouble and bother for the states to extend its capabilities beyond requirements.

But at least you acknowledge that its not about security, which it has no hope of improving.

Re:As a US citizen

[Hecatonchires]

I personally prefer the option of fembot

Re:As a US citizen

[countertrolling]

Yeah, there's a chance she might run a challenge... wait 'n see..

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually you can be an employee. There just aren't many companies that are going to bother upsetting the IRS. But they are not required to have an SSN for every employee, they only have to ask for it and try to get it. They do not have to succeed. They can be fined for not having it, but it's a tiny fine.

I suppose you could pay taxes via a personal corporation. Sucks to start out at 35% income tax though. :) You can also pay taxes as an individual (and be easily employed) if you can wrangle yourself a Tax ID, though they are not intended for people who are eligible for an SSN.

If you do make money individually and have neither a Tax ID or an SSN, you can still fill out and file a personal tax return on paper. While the IRS wouldn't like it, if you remitted any money owed I don't think they would bother you, nor would a court likely sustain their complaint if they did. Why? No damages. The IRS is very mercenary, and the courts are fairly practical. Lots of people submit technically invalid tax returns every year - as long as the IRS gets their money, they don't really care. You'd just be like one of the hundred thousand (at least) that simply forget to put their SSN on the form every year.

My son has no SSN, because I want him to experience first-hand how ridiculous and unjust it is that he can't bank, work or drive like a normal person unless he joins the nation's "voluntary" retirement system. Oh, and for a special level of injustice and ridiculousness, he would of course still be forced to pay the same amount of money into the system even while not a part of it. He'll probably just go apply for an SSN himself when he wants his first job, and that's fine. At least it will be up to him, as it should be. In the meantime I don't get a tax credit for him, because the IRS won't recognize his existence.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Saying "things here are hopeless" and moving to a foreign nation in the hopes of finding something resembling a free country ... that means finally giving up on your own country. It means abandoning what is ultimately your homeland, leaving it to the forces of tyranny which have finally succeeded in taking it over. It means surrendering all hope and cutting your losses.

I dunno; "my" country was founded by people who "left" while the majority stayed home and didn't think things were worth fighting for. There's more, but you seem to think leaving is inherently "unpatriotic" or something.

"I am not an Athenian, or a Greek, but a citizen of the world."

It's not an easy thing to do for anyone with a conscience.

You've got it backwards. If 10 people have no conscience, and 1 does, isn't that 1 better served by finding others instead of sticking around?

It means surrendering all hope and cutting your losses.

Staying in a lousy situation is surrendering. If someone is moving, presumably they have (perhaps false) hope that the other country is better. You almost sound like a battered spouse.

The ability to move is a *very* important thing.

Be weary of anyone who tells you you "can't do that" and you have to stay in place.

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." Mahatma Gandhi

And (can't find the exact quote):

Anything done to an animal WILL be done to a human.

If people where you're at are apathetic, why not go somewhere where you have a chance?

If the majority don't care for your cause, fuck 'em, find some people who do care instead of wasting your time.

Re:As a US citizen

[dargaud]

The implication is that I don't need identification or special permission to move freely about the country of which I am a citizen.

Sooo... how do they know you are a citizen if you don't have identification ?!? The logic fails me. Note: I'm from a country with customary identification papers, and I've never been asked to show them EVER on the street. But when conducting business with the state (voting, going through customs, getting a speeding ticket, etc) sure, that's what they are for. I don't see what the big deal is.

The implication is that I am not free to move about the country of which I am a citizen.

I fail to see the connection. You can be harassed by police whether you have a piece of paper in your pocket or not.

Re:As a US citizen

[dargaud]

Up until just a few years ago, the cards said right on them that they were not to be used as ID. [...] But it demonstrates one thing clearly: don't trust government guarantees

No, it demonstrates simply the need for an official identification method. SSN simply filled the need.

Re:As a US citizen

[redcaboodle]

Germany - you have to own one, but not carry it on you. Technically you need to report a change of address within 2 weeks and get the address on the card changed. (just a sticker - no charge). I managed to live for almost 20 years without bothering to report my changes of address though the official one was still fine if anybody wanted to contact me. Mainly I did this so I could vote in the community I grew up in, instead of where I currently lived. The state didn't bother smoking me out until a disgruntled in-law reported me. Got off with a small administrative fine due to a) being broke b) official on the case didn't like the squealer either c) having always had at least a valid contact address.

You have to carry the licence when driving but forgetting it is just a small fine and you need to present it at the station within the next few days. Driving without one is very costly.

The ID cards are issued by the municipality, so the country government has no direct access to the data so far. They have tried to make a central DB of all registration data two years or so ago and have met with loud resistance from concerned terrorists^w citizens.

The cards are well accepted by citizens as a form of photo id but are very rarely demanded for anything. The last time I absolutely had to present mine was to change my car registration. The last time I voluntarily showed it was when donating blood as my donors card still has no photo.

Actually - we have no 'papers, please' as every official who has the right to demand such things needs to specify exactly what he wants. Usually: licence and vehicle registration, please. Happens about once every 5 years and I do drive a lot.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

He was paraphrasing Franklin, who said "essential liberty" for "temporary safety".

If the mutual distrust between your country's citizens and its police force runs deep enough to make not having to identify yourself to public officials an essential liberty, then I suspect your society has worse problems than ID cards.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

This will sure get those with something to hide going full tilt , the i want to do shit without any body else knowing i am planning to blow the fuck out of them clan will be gathering forces to get the idea stomped down big time .

My constitution says this that and other well get this your fabled `Constitution is fuck knows how many years OUT OF DATE` and in need of serious updating just because you are a Yankee Doodle Dandy dont give you the right to do what the fuck you like , Shit happens there are consequences of said shit it is landing with you dont like it as certain Large bike building americans would say SUCK IT IN

   

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

I can decline to get a driver's license, and I can decline to get a passport. I don't have to have any id at all if I don't want. The implication is that I don't need identification or special permission to move freely about the country of which I am a citizen.

With a national ID card scheme, I don't have a choice to opt out. Such a card exists solely for "papers please" moments. The implication is that I am not free to move about the country of which I am a citizen.

Actually, in some states it is a crime not to have some form of identification on your person when stopped by police. Currently there are 23 states that have this law. So I hope you don't live in one of them.

Re:As a US citizen

[greap]

Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, and Washington have legislation barring adoption of RealID. As the standard can't be mandatory (fedgov has no authority to force states to adopt a particular ID standard) there is little they can do other then try and bribe the stategov’s and make life difficult for the citizens in those states.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

An ID card is there to protect you, not to protect the government.

That's not what people thought the last time we had one over here. Which would be why it was abolished after the Germans were kicked out.

Why would the Germans require ID to protect us, and how is being required to show id to move around an improvement over being able to move around freely?

Re:As a US citizen

[berberine]

I used to be in law enforcement and as far back as 1992 your Driver's license was in a database and could be accessed in nearly every state. States had reciprocal policies with other states. While not all states did back in 1992, we had reciprocal policies with 32 states at the time. So, yes other states do, did, and will continue to have access to this.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

You have two choices: you open yourself up to arbitrarily being labeled an illegal immigrant by government officials, or you open yourself up having to ID yourself at specific points.

That's one hell of a strawman you've set-up - they are your only choices if you think your government should value the process of finding every last 'illegal' over the rights and liberties of their own citizens. Considering the values that the US was apparently founded on, I'd always believed that this wasn't, and never would be, the case.

Re:As a US citizen

[CrimsonAvenger]

The Constitution grants the federal government rights and any not listed are up to the states or "the people" as per the 10th Amendment.

A quibble:

The Constitution grants the Federal Government "powers". "Rights" are held by people, not governments in our system.

But yes, the 10th Amendment restricts the Powers of the Federal government to only those specifically mentioned in the Constitution. The State governments have exclusive access to powers not specifically granted to the Feds. And the People are the only ones with Rights at all.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Which states are those?

Re:As a US citizen

[tehcyder]

And most important...where the fuck is it in the constitution for the Federal Govt. to issues national id??

The same place where it authorised your government to invade Iraq?

Re:As a US citizen

[tehcyder]

Then there is the culture shock. For example, in many countries bribing police officers is considered a standard practice.

Whereas in the US you don't need to bribe police officers as they get plenty of extra cash from issuing on the spot fines for fucking jaywalking or looking at them in a funny way.

Re:As a US citizen

[tehcyder]

We almost had a Walmart. It would not have saved local businesses because it doesn't compete with them.

Are you fucking stupid? Where do you think Walmart gets its customers from? People who never used to do any shoipping?

Re:As a US citizen

[kingramon0]

I would be curious what a nation would look like with most of it's power deliberated at the State level (or province, as I'm in Canada).

That is exactly the form of government that was created by the US Constitution. Over time, the Federal government has continually grabbed more and more power such that it is less true today, but some States are starting to assert their sovereignty a little more.

With the ratification of the Constitution, the States delegated certain specific powers to the general government, they retained any and all remaining powers.

Re:As a US citizen

[kingramon0]

I know of a California law that requires you to provide ID when stopped by the police that was struck down by the Supreme Court. That would make all other such laws invalid as well.

Re:As a US citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

It's possible to become "unenumerated", i.e., refuse to have an SS# associated with you, though AFAIK the only accepted reason is religious belief, specifically the idea that the SS# is the "Mark of the Beast" from the book of Revelation. I can only imagine that it causes no end of headaches, though. (There was a blog a few years back by a guy who had "given back" his number, chronicling his headaches with various organizations, esp. his state government who wouldn't give him a driver's license. It was called "Life Among the Unenumerated", I think.)

Strictly speaking, private companies aren't supposed to use your SS# unless they have some interaction with you regarding your federal taxes, and they are not allowed to compel you to give them your SS#. However they're also perfectly within their rights to refuse to deal with you if you won't give them your SS#, so they all use it even though they're not supposed to. You have little choice but to hand it out to everyone, even individuals like landlords, because it's also used for credit checks (which is a whole other ridiculous leviathan (in the Biblical sense) of a system, don't even get me started. . .)

Re:As a US citizen

[Shompol]

This was best said by Victor Tsoy, leader of rock band Kino. Despite being insanely popular, his music was never published by the Soviet Union state-controlled music industry. He died in a car accident at age 28, under suspicious circumstances.

Victor Tsoy (leader of the rock band Kino), Peaceful Night

Re:As a US citizen

[MemoryDragon]

Actually I live in Austria and we have had this law as long as I can remember... dunno about the other countries, I suspected it was the same everywhere in western europe. Not that people really bother to carry an id around.

Re:As a US citizen

[hicksw]

There might be a Native American somewhere who could have told you that.

Re:As a US citizen

[airdweller]

"My son has no SSN, because I want him to experience first-hand how ridiculous and unjust it is that... "
I guess you also named him Sue? Way to go in building his character :)

*gasp* Noooooo waaaaay!

[Seumas]

Are you telling me that the government manufactures or manipulates events to frighten people into providing funding and release their liberties? Why, I've never heard of such a thing!

Re:*gasp* Noooooo waaaaay!

[interkin3tic]

Are you implying that somehow makes it less important to pay attention to?

Interesting outlook.

"Jimmy murdered someone? So what? OLD NEWS! He murders people all the time?"

I've been thinking about moving..

[Anonymous Coward]

Just give me a reason to solidify my decision..

Re:I've been thinking about moving..

[c0lo]

Just give me a reason to solidify my decision..

Antarctica will welcome you and help you solidify your decision quite swiftly (as long as you keep your decision on your - frozen - self).

Wow.

[Anonymous Coward]

I... am not sure I understand what the summary means. There is something wrong with those sentences. They give me a headache.

Re:Wow.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well I've come to chew bubblegum and kick arse and I am all out of bubblegum....

Didn't we catch him?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do we need to change the laws when they worked?

We don't need no steenking real-id

[Plugh]

Not in New Hampshire. We rejected Real-ID, and any de facto national identification card system.

Re:We don't need no steenking real-id

[Anonymous Coward]

So a state can reject the Real ID act but not the (so called) affordable care act?

Re:We don't need no steenking real-id

[Anonymous Coward]

There are plenty of functioning democracies with state-issued ID. This is not the last bulwark against gov't takeover. Protection of our rights is not built on lack of ID standardization, or personal firearms ownership. But those are great distractions for people to focus on while more important rights are restricted.

Re:We don't need no steenking real-id

[Plugh]

I always find it amusing when someone declares that "focusing on Right X is just a distraction; you should REALLY focus on Right Y!

See, the whole idea of personal rights, individuality, and self-ownership is predicated on the notion that different people have different values and different priorities. Me personally, I hate mandatory seat-belt laws, and I fought hard to make sure NH didn't adopt such a law (it came real close in 2008, but we did defeat it, NH remains "free to choose" on seat belts)

For some people it's taxation. For some people it's guns. For some people it's marijuana. For some people it's education choice. And on and on and on...

We are gathering a critical mass of people who agree in principle that the government should back away from all these things. Different people work harder or less hard on different issues. At the end of the day, all these freedoms are being defended by those who feel most passionately about them, and all of us who have made the move to New Hampshire feel the benefit.

Re:We don't need no steenking real-id

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, until it gets passed into federal law (like the drug laws, health care, etc).

Then what? It will be a fight like CA has regarding drugs versus the feds. No so clear cut at all.

Re:We don't need no steenking real-id

[Anonymous Coward]

Just like a bunch of states reject Obamacare. The unfortunate reality is that neither of these are likely to hold up in court.

Re:We don't need no steenking real-id

[scurvyj]

Excellent work! And isn't it true that when any govt project - Evil like this one or Good otherwise - gets to this point of funding fighting, it is doooooomed anyway?

California

[BJ_Covert_Action]

It's funny, for all our talk about being a forward looking state, and about being one of the strongest states in The Union, California sure likes to bend over and take it from the Federal Government regarding issues like this. Maybe we should start a rumor that the Real ID will allow the Federal Government to put homosexuals in concentration camps. That might get folks in this state thinking about privacy some....

Re:California

[Nefarious Wheel]

Your papers, please. I must see your papers.

Ahh, I see you have recently been to New York. Please step this way, this gentleman will escort you.

Re:California

[Anonymous Coward]

It's funny, for all our talk about being a forward looking state, and about being one of the strongest states in The Union, California sure likes to bend over and take it from the Federal Government regarding issues like this. Maybe we should start a rumor that the Real ID will allow the Federal Government to put homosexuals in concentration camps. That might get folks in this state thinking about privacy some....

Well, that'd get some of them thinking about it. The other half would be trying to figure out how they can speed up the process, unless you tell *them* that it's actually going to be the Mark of the Beast or something.

Re:California

[Amouth]

Your papers, please. I must see your papers.

*pulls out scissors*

Re:California

[Anonymous Coward]

So I am to assume from your post that half of California is Gay and the other half is Fundamentalist Christian? Weird, it never seemed that way. Though if you were speaking about their lawmakers, you would be closer to being right.

Re:California

[0123456]

The other half would be trying to figure out how they can speed up the process, unless you tell *them* that it's actually going to be the Mark of the Beast or something.

The fundies I used to know already considered 'national ID' proposals to be the 'Mark of the Beast'. Some of them opposed it on that basis while others supported it because it means the End Times are coming and they're about to be Raptured.

Re:California

[Anonymous Coward]

When all you do is look forward, you tend to forget the past. Seriously, though, I see at least as many hardcore progressives support stuff like this as hardcore conservatives (as in libertarian conservative, not GOP party liner).

Re:California

[Takichi]

They already put their Japanese citizens in concentration camps for "national security", so I'm not convinced your plan will work.

Re:California

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, Takichi, wasn't the US's conduct during WWII apalling?
Oops, wrong link.

Re:California

[BJ_Covert_Action]

More appropriately, about half of the state supports the rights of the homosexual community, and about half of the state opposes the notion of homosexuals having equal rights. Now, whether someone supports homosexual rights because they, themselves are homosexuals or whether someone opposes equal rights for the homosexual community as a matter of faith may vary from case to case. But the state is very nearly evenly divided on the issue for whatever reason.

I don't get it at all

[guyminuslife]

I don't understand why there's a want or a need for a national ID system. If you're a citizen, you already have Social Security documentation, and probably a passport/driver's license. If you're a legal resident, you have a visa of some sort. If you're not a legal resident, you're not going to get an ID anyway.

I don't understand why people panic over a national ID system. They already have Social Security documentation, driver's licenses, and passports. It's not like nobody knows you exist, or you can't be tracked in the same way from some government database. I mean, I don't really need another card in my wallet, and it seems like a lot of bureaucratic hoopla with nontrivial administrative costs, but it doesn't make me afraid for my civil liberties.

I'm really, truly apathetic on this, and I don't understand why anyone cares at all.

Re:I don't get it at all

[0123456]

I don't understand why people panic over a national ID system.

Because they've studied some history?

As you say, there's no legitimate need for a 'national ID' system and there are a bazillion ways to abuse it to harm people. So everyone should panic when their government is trying to force it through.

Re:I don't get it at all

[idontgno]

Two words:

"internal passport"

Re:I don't get it at all

[DanTheStone]

I'm really, truly apathetic on this, and I don't understand why anyone cares at all.

It's a huge waste of money. We pay that money with our taxes or with fees associated with the IDs.

Re:I don't get it at all

[angel'o'sphere]

Perhaps you should take your time to look for the videos on youtube.com of www.thezeitgeistmovement.com

And take the time to watch one of them, yes takes 2h ... so scroll back and forth if you want.

But it will give you an idea what your government and the men behind it are doing since 60 - 80 years ;D

Regards

angel'o'sphere

Re:I don't get it at all

[Anonymous Coward]

Because the feds (lawmakers) can never leave well enough alone. In 20 years, it will probably carry every bit of data ever associated with you on it and be able to be read from a distance (for safety, you see). In addition there will likely be jailtime / huge fines levied for failing to carry it on you at all times (also for safety, you see). You may even be required to present it to make a purchase of anything deemed 'potentially dangerous' (decided by policy makers and lobbyists), and it will be permanently associated with both your bank account numbers and your genetic profile (safety).
 
*Dons tinfoil hat, for safety*

Re:I don't get it at all

[Rivalz]

I think they need real id's soon because they are going to bankrupt the social security system and have to have something in place when it collapses.

Re:I don't get it at all

[interkin3tic]

I don't understand why there's a want or a need for a national ID system.

Probably slightly less paperwork for law enforcement, so they like it. And some government contracts would probably be awarded for the manufacture and tracking of the ID, so there's that economic interest to hire lobbyists. Plus, homeland security's primary job is to fool the public into thinking they're safe, big intrusive programs are some of the most effective placebos in that aspect. So there's plenty of want and need for it.

Oh, did you mean legitimate reasons why this is good for the nation? Well, none, obviously.

Re:I don't get it at all

[Anonymous Coward]

To my knowledge, Real ID isn't about adding an additional ID card. It is more about providing requirements for State ID (driver's license) to be valid with federal organizations. The implication is that if the Real ID program fails, we'll have to use passports to fly domestically (or do anything else where we have to identify ourselves to a federal organization).

While there are valid concerns today about the increasing power and scope of government influence in Americans' lives, Real ID doesn't seem to be large concern (at least posed against issues surrounding DHS, TSA, recording police actions, etc.) The real argument is actually around money, in the form of the federal government is requiring the changes but the state government must pay for it.

Re:I don't get it at all

[Em Adespoton]

First: Social Security doesn't have biometric data tied to it, or anything else other than Federal information. Driver's Licenses are only tied to State activities, and Passports are only tied to International activities. The Federal government wants access to ALL that information, without having to ask those who currently control it to provide it. They want to be able to cross-reference those PII markers.

Second: Illegal Immigrants can still get identity cards. Strange, yes... but true. The government wants to be able to ID illegal immigrants just as easily as they can ID citizens.

People care because they know that any government will misuse information if given the chance. One branch of government has access to your PII for a specific purpose, another branch has access to other pieces of PII for another specific purpose. When the government as a whole has de-facto access to ALL your PII, they truly own you, and have significantly more power over you than was originally granted. The assumption (which is time and again proven to be correct) is that this will breed misuse of information and corruption in government.

This mindset holds true more in republics which stand on limited government of a free people. Socialist leaning countries (most of the western world) place government in a different role with different safeguards designed to match the assigned role. In a (modern) socialist government, the government having de-facto access to all PII isn't as big of an issue, as there are other mechanisms in place to prevent at least casual abuse.

This is a simplistic explanation, but I hope it gets the point across. If you don't mind the government running your life, then don't worry about it.

Re:I don't get it at all

[Geodesy99]

I don't understand why there's a want or a need for a national ID system. If you're a citizen, you already have Social Security documentation, and probably a passport/driver's license. ...

A national ID is a Single Point of Failure. I have had several cops / security folks tell me that a collection of documentation greatly increases the difficulty of forgery, because they have to be mutually consistent over space and time. A variety of documents provides a multitude of entry points and traversals for even a cursory on the spot casual interrogation. For example, some of the digits of the SSN associate with certain states at certain times, so even if the SSN Card isn't produced as ID, a question to tell the SSN orally, Followed by a remark like "Do you parents still live in State X" can trip someone up. Also, some states have had difficulties with corruption and counterfeiting in DL bureaus, but perhaps not all states at all times. Relative wear, like marks and de-lamination, also are giveaways, along with other seemingly innocuous contents of a wallet. Collections of anything will exhibit patterns of differences and similarities from individual to individual, and will be characteristic of a given 'locale', and these will alert an experienced observer. A national ID would tend to be adopted by any and all agencies as proof o person, if just as a cost and complexity saving measure. But it's that same complexity which trips the impostors.

Re:I don't get it at all

[cdrguru]

Maybe you missed the part about some states deciding that it was better for illegal immigrants (or undocumented workers, if you prefer) to have driver's licenses than not. As part of this decision the rules controlling how you got a driver's license were relaxed. No longer is there a need for a certified copy of a birth certificate or any other government document that offers a proof of identity. All that is needed is a note from somewhere (most often cited is the local Mexican consulate) that says this person might be who they say they are and no documents are available which prove otherwise.

End result of this is that if you are even somewhat clever you can get an official document issued by any number of US state governments which says precisely whatever they heck you want it to. Want a driver's license that says you are William Jefferson Clinton age 64? Not a problem. Take that and go rent car, run over some nice old lady and see the fur fly when Hillary tries to explain just what seems to have happened there. All this is possible because the standards for issuing state-backed IDs got thrown out and replaced with essentially no standard at all.

Re:I don't get it at all

[bugi]

Along with the various ways it can be abused against citizens directly, there's the slow lobster-cook method of stripping away rights. Recall the old "First they came" statement. In addition to the direct effects on citizens, it is an excuse to further consolidate power into a national government. Thus the actions by those states that are paying attention, to hopefully prevent their rights from being further eroded.

Re:I don't get it at all

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see why anyone would take someone who signs his posts seriously. It makes you a tool automatically.

Re:I don't get it at all

[Anonymous Coward]

Well for one thing, there are several States that are so "undocumented alien" friendly that they will issue a driver's license to anyone who applies. If you are aware that several hundred thousand "undocumented aliens" are from Countries that don't use Spanish as their language, or that Hamas is known to be working with Mexican drug cartels you'll see the rational paranoia. Be that as it may, there will be no National ID.

Re:I don't get it at all

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree.

Cheers,
Anonymous Coward

Re:I don't get it at all

[c6gunner]

Because they've studied some history?

Doubtful. The average person I see beaking off on the topic tends to be they type who thinks that Caesar was a famous Italian cook.

As you say, there's no legitimate need for a 'national ID' system and there are a bazillion ways to abuse it to harm people.

Yeah. Paper-cuts really suck. A bazillion of them would really REALLY suck.

If your government plans to oppress you, they're going to do it with guns, not with cards.

Re:I don't get it at all

[c6gunner]

If you take those movies seriously, you're either credulous, delusional, or an idiot. Most of the fans fall into the first category - they're naive and ignorant, and tend to believe anyone with an authoritative voice and a movie camera. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you fall into the same category. Please let me know if I'm mistaken.

Re:I don't get it at all

[guyminuslife]

How the fuck does this get modded insightful?

Step 1: Government hands you a plastic card
Step 2: ???
Step 3: 1984!

Re:I don't get it at all

[lamber45]

"For example, some of the digits of the SSN associate with certain states at certain times"

That will no longer be true for new SSNs issued after this summer ... that is, for kids old enough to drive or get a job in 2015 or so.

More relevant to the main question, I still use my college student ID card sometimes when asked to "show ID" for transactions (even though I also have a drivers' license hidden in my wallet)... I've even used it with my voter registration card to vote. I've been out of school for several years now, but it has my name, an issue date, and a still-recognizable picture, so I believe it ought to authenticate me (it helps that I still live in the same town where I went to school). I haven't tried using it to board a plane, though - I have a current passport for that purpose.

Re:I don't get it at all

[Anonymous Coward]

If your government plans to oppress you, they're going to do it with guns, not with cards.

Or, you know, yellow stars. They might just use those in addition to the guns.

Re:I don't get it at all

[Anonymous Coward]

I can think of a few legitimate reasons to want it:
1. We already have "papers please" situations (present a photo ID to board a plane for example) We maw as well have a standardized set of "papers" for that purpose. It would mean less that citizens have to carry around, and would mean less training is required to validate the IDs (most people think any divers licence from a state other than their own looks fake).

2. Currently Social Security numbers do exactly this (uniquely identify an individual) but SS cards are trivial to counterfeit, and bad security policy has resulted in people thinking your social security number is a password. it would be nice to replace that system with one that isn't as idiotic.

3. There are people who can't have a divers licences what do they do for photo ID?

4. Make slightly less paperwork for law enforcement (we citizens pay for the waist paperwork with out taxes after all)

Creating an national ID card system is not inherently bad. We just need ti make sure we draw the line when they try tio make carrying the ID mandatory. That's when it starts becoming a dangerous game.

Re:I don't get it at all

[misexistentialist]

Since mandatory identification means you have no right to exist without government permission, it does in fact mean 1984, more or less. Just because such a state of affairs is normal in many countries, and is almost normal in even the freest of countries, doesn't mean those people aren't living in a hell they made themselves.

As a EU citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Some states have national ID cards, some require you to always carry one on pain of arrest and a fine. The UK is a notable exception in that it actually implemented such a thing and then repealed it. Still has biometric passports though, and they'll take your fingerprints AND DNA swab if you're arrested --regardless of reason-- and will keep the profile indefinitely, "just in case". Getting out if proven innocent is unreasonably hard to the point of being almost impossible.

My government insists on fingerprints, storing them in the RFIDed passport, and storing them on local computers at the municipality (there's a plan to network all those things but not in effect yet) run by some foreign (AAMOF French) company. All passports are in the EU are RFIDed, none come with built-in shielding like in US passports. EG Germany just added RFID to national ID cards, having added fingerprints first.

It's a bit of a jumble, as this sort of thing is regulated through EU directive that then gets implemented more or less zealously byt the state, generally more. All states have a national standard ID card that's valid in the entire EU plus some extras (like Switzerland), and many more people have passports. More biometrics, less privacy.

And yes, that all really got pushed through when the US started requiring it for the so-called visa waiver programme, though the extra zeal was "our" own invention. There's some eurocrats that like that a lot, sneaking through as many loopholes as possible to get out from the built-in oversight mechanisms.

It's also then that I decided not to travel to the USoA while the security circus was still in effect, but it's come home: My passport and ID card are about to expire (last 5 years only) and I won't be able to get new ones without handing over my fingerprints. Well, if I'm to be a criminal then so be it. Bye bye legal identity.

Re:As a EU citizen

[Em Adespoton]

Bye bye legal identity.

Are you planning on going off-grid, or the sneakier method of using faked fingerprints for registration?

(if #2, just remember to keep your fakes on hand when you need them)

Seems to me it should be fairly easy to take a print mold of your own prints, modify them, then keep those inverted moulds. When you want to change prints, take some quick drying glue (Krazy Glue over here) and apply to finger tips, then press into your print mould.

As the prints will only last a few days and aren't your default ones, they act as "something you have" instead of "something you are", thus protecting your identity while giving you expected freedoms.

I wonder if countries have requirements on the state of your fingers when you get fingerprinted?

Re:As a EU citizen

[Attila Dimedici]

How do some states (Germany, France, etc) have national (EU) ID cards while others don't? If the EU has a national ID card wouldn't that apply to every state in the EU?

Re:As a EU citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

The EU isn't a nation. It doesn't have "national" anything.

It has directives that are implemented by its member states, and it has courts that enforce rules at a trans-national level. But a German ID card is German, not EU; if other member states choose to recognise it, that's at their discretion subject to bilateral agreements (the Schengen Agreement) with Germany.

Re:As a EU citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

The EU isn't a state. How it works is that states become members by ratifying shedloads of international treaties --sort-of like the UN-- to the point that EU directives have to be poured into law by member states within $this_many years after passing of the directive, and so on. So lots of laws end up "harmonised" meaning that all the states have implemented laws pertaining to the directives that basically mean the same across the EU. But it's still the individual states that pass them (using a rubber stamp, often as not).

Given how very few people even know who their own nation's and party's Members of the European Parliament are, and how shady commitees and bunches of ministers have this habit of circumventing EU parliament oversight (like what happened with the first "data sharing deal"), well, you might guess the rest. Should a state deviate it might end up getting slapped by the EU, which may or may not have an effect.

Passports and ID cards are issued in the name of the member states. Laws on whether and where to carry also vary. But basically every state issues passports anyway, and most issue ID cards "because it's easier to carry".

There's no directive (yet, afaik) mandating a card, but there are directives defining baselines of what passports must minimally have (RFID, some biometric, IIRC at least two fingerprints on the chip. IIRC my state stores four, and takes the opportunity to make yet another national privacy invading database.) The results vary a bit. The bottom line is generally spun to look like it's in the favour of all the citizens, but depressingly often it turns out to be not quite that.

Like how the "Schengen" treaty was to open EU-internal borders and removing customs checks and such, that directly resulting in many countries passing "always carry ID" laws. No, it wasn't because of the terrorists. It was because the border checks were removed. This in turn caused many, many more places to demand ID checks, because you have to have the darn thing on you anyway. So yes, that slope indeed is slippery, and it goes down quicker than you tend to notice.

Re:As a EU citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh I haven't decided yet. My first thought was starting a different country and buggering off to there, so that I could be minister of privacy (in addition to head of state and so on) and get it right. But that's not a very practical approach, is it? We'll have to see.

The thing that galls most about the whole thing is that it trades my privacy for no gain. And it's easy to see how, if only those in charge had the wherewithal to rub their collective few braincells together: While fingerprints are fine for determining which well-known-perp broke into your house (criminal identification), they're not so fine for "casual" identification. The differences are in how much scrutiny is applied, and where the incentive pressure lies.

My house keys "authorize" me to enter my house. What if the keys get lost? Why, I replace lock and keys, done. My credit card "authorizes" me to spend loaned money which I'll pay back at the end of the month. If that authorization gets stolen, I bitch at the cc company and they'll block the card and I get a new one, new number and so on.

Now, my passport and/or ID card have become more important than I am. So if the fingerprints get stolen and faked by someone else, I've become my own lost key and the most expedient way of fixing it is killing the citizen and replacing him.

On top of that it turns out to be dead easy for fingerprints to be faked --Australian kids managed with gummi bears, but it's been known since at least 2002 that it's dead easy to do-- but even if it was as hard as say faking an iris scan --try a custom-print marble-- it would still be much, much easier than replacing which so far is just about impossible, causing a liability of unfixable damage in the case of third party abuse, and RFID chips have already been cloned too, making the passport actually weaker than before. Why are we doing this again?

Re:As a EU citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

In the US, the Federal Gov't started asking for fingerprints from all citizens who wanted to work with kids. They did this under the guise of Act 114, the Federal Criminal History Background Check.
[quote]
Act 114 of 2006 specifies that all applicants for employment in public and private schools including employees of independent contractors, but excluding employees who do not have direct contact with students undergo background checks. In addition, Act 114 extends the background check requirements to include student teacher candidates. [/quote]

  I was in a teacher training program in college at the time and stupidly complied to the check so that I could continue my student teaching (I quit the program for unrelated reasons a year later). They now have a full set of my prints on file; if I -ever- commit a crime (real or imagined) and leave a (real or faked) print behind they will be able to identify that print in the database despite the fact that I have never been tried or convicted for any crime previously. I do not relish the idea, nor the implications.

Re:As a EU citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

While you're reading the helpful replies to your question, bear in mind that you've now wasted the time of three people*. All you had to do was search Wikipedia for "EU." Searching Google for "Is the EU a country?" will work too. Try to find the answer to your questions yourself before asking, I promise that it only hurts the first time.

*Luckily, nothing of value was lost as all of us were reading Slashdot at the time.

Re:As a EU citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

Could you please mention a state that "require you to always carry one on pain of arrest and a fine"?

I'm having trouble finding any, and to me this sounds like a completely unfounded statement, as I've never heard of anything like it.

Re:As a EU citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

No, since every country is free to create its individual laws.

For example, in The Netherlands we have a national ID card you are forced to always carry around with you, if you dont you get a fine. Which is rather silly, since they told us it would be for ID purposes, so tell me, how do you fine someone if you dont know where he lives? Most of the times I just keep it in my wallet to avoid losing it, and my wallet is most of the times in my laptop bag which I dont always carry with me. They can suck it up all they want since we live in wiretap country anyway.

Re:As a EU citizen

[Arancaytar]

Germany and the Netherlands.

They won't necessarily arrest you, but being unable to show ID when asked to is a petty infraction with possible fines.

Re:As a EU citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

How do some states (Germany, France, etc) have national (EU) ID cards while others don't? If the EU has a national ID card wouldn't that apply to every state in the EU?

That's just a troll. EU is not a country.

There are national ID cards within the member countries of the union.

Re:As a EU citizen

[Anonymous Coward]

EU does not have its own ID card, though most of the members states do.

seriously stop trying to complicate shit

[Rivalz]

If they think having real id's will protect infrastructure they are wrong.
If they think having real id's would save more lives or fight crime/terrorism more than just dumping the money into police / safety / intelligence measures wrong again.

What we need to do is think further ahead after the real id comes out. We will need a really real id.
Then we can lay the ground work for a Real DNA id.
Then maybe we can have Really real secure dna id by 2020.
It'll only set us back 10 trillion and another 2 trillion each year after that.
The idea is to make the USA so poor no one would care to launch terror attacks on it.
Kind of like Africa but with real id's.

Re:seriously stop trying to complicate shit

[sconeu]

Then we can lay the ground work for a Real DNA id.

Oh crap. My DNA is synthetic!

Re:seriously stop trying to complicate shit

[bugi]

DNA-based IDs -- the better with which to discriminate against the growing population of non-biological sentients.

Re:seriously stop trying to complicate shit

[Anonymous Coward]

DNA-based IDs -- the better with which to discriminate against the growing population of non-biological sentients.

When you say "non-biological sentients" I immediately think of large corporations... because you know, Clarance Thomas says according to the Constitution they are real people.

Re:I actually welcome mandatory ID cards

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahhh aren't you making the exact point of why we shouldn't have a national ID or any ID for that matter? Drivers licenses are a poor excuse for needing ID. We don't need drivers licenses. If you are driving dangerously you should be arrested- not ticketed. It wouldn't be as bad as it sounds either. When you have to take someone to jail to safeguard society it is allot less likely to harm society at large without merit. Merely driving at unsanctioned speeds is not a good reason to fine or imprison a person. On the other hand driving impaired might be or driving so excessively as to endanger other drivers. Nothing would prevent police officers from pulling people over and issuing "warnings". Those warnings might in practice be baseless given the speed. However we don't really need to go after people at the low end of the spectrum anyway or those who aren't really driving recklessly- just fast.

Wait, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

America doesn't have passports yet?

Re:Wait, what?

[cayenne8]

America doesn't have passports yet?

Sure we have them...but no one is ever required to register and get one...unless perhaps they were going to travel outside the country. Heck, its only been in the last few years that you needed anything more than a birth certificate copy, or a drivers license to go back and forth on vacation to Mexico from the US.

Re:I actually welcome mandatory ID cards

[Kiralan]

Heads up! Goatse link!!

some animals are more equal than others

[Thud457]

"A man with a watch knows what time it is.
A man with two watches is never sure."
-- Segal's Law

who did OKC ?

[Anonymous Coward]

I seem to recall the UK having problems with the bloody micks not that long ago.

We could ...

[PPH]

... set fire to the Reichstag building.

On second thought, that's been done already. Never mind.

Re:We could ...

[Anonymous Coward]

I've had nightmares that the WI Capitol building caught fire.

Re:We could ...

[L4t3r4lu5]

I don't know if my sarcasm filter is off today, but that's a really terrible idea. The Reichstag building being attacked by an arsonist was a turning point in bring the National Socialist German Worker's Party into power. Civil liberties were suspended, communists were arrested en masse, and the "Ihre papiere, bitte" state was born.

Re:We could ...

[Sinn3d]

What worked for one facist state might not work for another one.

Still, might be worth putting it into the black-flag-suggestion box!

Over six dozen right wing attacks since 1995

[spun]

No foreigners are as big a threat as the right wing. Little Timmy McVeigh was only the most well known of the bunch.
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/publications/terror-from-the-right

Re:Over six dozen right wing attacks since 1995

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? Give it up. Just because the terror attacks of the left are not as 'well known' doesn't somehow make it better.

http://markhumphrys.com/left.right.violence.html

Re:Over six dozen right wing attacks since 1995

[spun]

Uh huh. Just read that page, took all of thirty seconds. It is very short, short on facts, and even based on the facts presented, does not make a case for present day leftism terrorism. It claims leftist terrorism was once a problem . Cherry picking the dates 2000-2005, hmm, what happened during those years that might skew things? It also leaves out many, many right wing attacks. My source, and the FBI page linked to from your cherry-picker page, both list more. I guess he has his own criteria for what constitutes a right wing attack?

Was this really the best you could do?

Re:I actually welcome mandatory ID cards

[Kozar_The_Malignant]

I think you're confusing this with the Cheech Marin film, Born in East L.A., .

States exchanging drivers license info ...

[perpenso]

Also, it is NOT a national ID. It is issued by my state...other states and the federal govt, for the most part..do not have the information from my DL immediately upon query.

From 2008: "The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) has teamed up with law enforcement agencies in four states in a pilot project to transmit driver’s license photographs across state lines and deliver the photos to an officer’s computer within seconds of a request." http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/topics/law-enforcement/strategies/information-led-policing/photo-sharing.htm

There isn't a national drivers license database.

"The computerized system uses the Global Justice XML Data Model (Global JXDM), an information-exchange standard designed specifically for criminal justice agencies that has been widely, but not universally, adopted."

And most important...where the fuck is it in the constitution for the Federal Govt. to issues national id??

It is where it always is, the commerce clause.

Re:States exchanging drivers license info ...

[C_amiga_fan]

>>>It is where it always is, the commerce clause.

James Madison, author of the Constitution, says this: "It grew out of the abuse of the power by the importing States in taxing the nonimporting, and was intended as a negative and preventive provision against injustice among the States themselves. Not as a power to be used for the positive purposes of the General Government, in which alone, however, the remedial power could be lodged." - Letter to Cabell, February 13, 1829.

Far from granting Congress the power to create the massive regulatory, central economic planning, nearly limitless government in which we live today..... the Commerce Clause was intended to be a restriction on States. The federal government has the power to resolve trade disputes among the states and essentially provide for free trade among the states, not to regulate INTRAstate affairs.

"With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character of unlimited power, which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." --James Madison

Re:States exchanging drivers license info ...

[Hecatonchires]

"The computerized system uses the Global Justice XML Data Model (Global JXDM), an information-exchange standard designed specifically for criminal justice agencies that has been widely, but not universally, adopted."

Kim Possible and Dr. Director have a lot to answer for

Re:States exchanging drivers license info ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, if all the CITIZENS of the country were carrying the card and lets say it is a card that is very hard to forge, then it would be very easy to round up all the illegals. This is the real reason. Our current system of uniquely identifying people is antiquated.

How do you truly prove that you are who you say you are and that you are really a citizens. A lot of Canadians speak pretty good American. How do you know I am me and not my brother, 3 years my senior? The only true system would be a DNA database, full 3 billion base pair mapping not this shit they do for courts. But that will never happen and if it did, it would so get abused by the courts and police.

666

[Kazoo the Clown]

Can't we get the fundies stirred up on this? They usually equate this sort of thing with "the mark of the beast." Perhaps it's a good time for a reminder...

Troll mod? Okay, I'll post it again

[spun]

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/publications/terror-from-the-right

Read it and weep, you fucking terrorists. This isn't trolling, this is patriotism, calling out the madmen who attack my country. You want to mod me troll? Bring it, I've got karma to burn.

Re:Troll mod? Okay, I'll post it again

[Jane Q. Public]

"Read it and weep, you fucking terrorists. This isn't trolling, this is patriotism, calling out the madmen who attack my country. You want to mod me troll? Bring it, I've got karma to burn."

And you conveniently forget (or perhaps didn't even know?) about all the left-wing shootings and terror bombings that took place in the U.S. in the 1960s - 1980s?

FAR more than anybody in the "right wing" has ever pulled. If you don't believe that, I can pull up references. But you can yourself, too. Just look up these names, and learn about the things they took "credit" for doing: "Black Panthers", "Weather Underground".

There were more left-wing terrorist bombings just in Washington D.C. during that period, than all "right-wing" bombings combined.

Re:Troll mod? Okay, I'll post it again

[causality]

"Read it and weep, you fucking terrorists. This isn't trolling, this is patriotism, calling out the madmen who attack my country. You want to mod me troll? Bring it, I've got karma to burn."

And you conveniently forget (or perhaps didn't even know?) about all the left-wing shootings and terror bombings that took place in the U.S. in the 1960s - 1980s?

FAR more than anybody in the "right wing" has ever pulled. If you don't believe that, I can pull up references. But you can yourself, too. Just look up these names, and learn about the things they took "credit" for doing: "Black Panthers", "Weather Underground".

There were more left-wing terrorist bombings just in Washington D.C. during that period, than all "right-wing" bombings combined.

While you're absolutely right, I think the whole "right vs left" deal glosses over a lot of important things.

All I want is maximum freedom for consenting adults who do not use force or fraud to achieve their goals. All I want is the minimum possible government that can still provide effective public works, law enforcement (but only to prevent one person from using force/fraud to deprive another of civil rights), and national defense (against unprovoked foreign enemies -- to paraphrase Franklin, provoking foreign powers who otherwise would have left us alone is inconsistent with our form of government).

Both the leftist terrorist bombers and the right-wing terorrist bombers have one thing in common: they are willing to use lethal force in the form of unprovoked attack to attempt to achieve their goals. I really don't care in what name they perform these acts. It is the acts themselves and the willingness to perform them because they have no persuasive argument that is the problem.

As far as I am concerned, those who would expand government into tyranny in the name of safety and protection from threats are cut from the same cloth as those terrorists who think that blowing shit up is the very best way to make a statement. People are not supposed to fear their own government. That means they are both terrorists. The only difference is that one is institutional and organizational while the other is underground and ragtag.

Re:Troll mod? Okay, I'll post it again

[Anonymous Coward]

This is my problem with modern society. Instead of using evidence to form rational opinions, they form opinions and pick evidence that seems to support said opinion. Both parent and GP have showed a rash of terrorism from U.S. citizens. Both have picked different time frames. Neither has formed a conclusion to determine how or why these conflagrations began beyond the same typical left v. right trash.

Re:Troll mod? Okay, I'll post it again

[Jane Q. Public]

I'm with you on that. I did not intend to characterize it as a left-vs-right thing, but GP decided to pick on one side, I decided to set him straight.

Anybody who uses bombs (or shootings, or threats of same) as a tool for terrorism in America is a whacko. I don't care if they're "left" or "right" or something else.

Government can't protect people from crazies, because they're not rational. That's what "crazy" means.

Re:Troll mod? Okay, I'll post it again

[Jane Q. Public]

By the way: anybody who is the least bit interested in the subject of terrorism, and what is actually behind it, should read this study of the matter by Max Abrahms, which you can download from Stanford University: What Terrorists Really Want

Almost without exception, terrorists do not want what they say they want. They do not want to achieve political goals; if they did, once their goals were achieved they would disband, yes? But they don't. They find some other cause to terrorize over. They do not want to win a war (same reasoning). What do they really want? Peer recognition. Just like any street gang. That's all. Which makes them even worse.

It's a good read. Very educational. And it shows why these government measures to stop terrorism will not accomplish what the government says it intends.

Re:Troll mod? Okay, I'll post it again

[causality]

I'm with you on that. I did not intend to characterize it as a left-vs-right thing, but GP decided to pick on one side, I decided to set him straight.

Anybody who uses bombs (or shootings, or threats of same) as a tool for terrorism in America is a whacko. I don't care if they're "left" or "right" or something else.

Government can't protect people from crazies, because they're not rational. That's what "crazy" means.

You're fine. From reading your posts before, I really didn't think you viewed this in such a narrow perspective of (literally two points and a line) one-dimensional thought as "left vs. right".

I wrote my post as a reply to you not so much because I thought I was telling you anything you didn't know. I was fairly certain I wasn't doing that. This time, I responded to you because I thought you were far more likely to appreciate what I was saying than the other poster. He or she placed far too much importance on party lines.

Rather than bicker with the other poster about why choosing narrowmindedness is a bad thing, I'd prefer to provide a demonstration of what such a conversation looks like when it's not so artificially constrained. You can't really change a mentality like that by telling it that it's invalid. Occasionally, rarely, you can change it by providing a contrast and demonstrating why something else is better. You seemed handy.

Re:Troll mod? Okay, I'll post it again

[causality]

It's a good read. Very educational. And it shows why these government measures to stop terrorism will not accomplish what the government says it intends.

Despite outward appearances, the people who wield the real power within government are actually not stupid. I believe they know this. Terrorists are just a convenient excuse for doing things they'd like to do anyway.

Old-fashioned thesis, antithesis, synthesis.

Re:Troll mod? Okay, I'll post it again

[Anonymous Coward]

That isn't a problem with modern society, it's a problem with humanity in general. There was never a time when most people didn't behave in the way you describe.

Re:Troll mod? Okay, I'll post it again

[Jane Q. Public]

"Terrorists are just a convenient excuse for doing things they'd like to do anyway."

That is my conclusion as well. But there are a lot of people who prefer not to see that.

Re:Troll mod? Okay, I'll post it again

[causality]

"Terrorists are just a convenient excuse for doing things they'd like to do anyway."

That is my conclusion as well. But there are a lot of people who prefer not to see that.

I'm generally plain-spoken and this will unfortunately be no exception: that's because they're cowards. At least, for the most part. Many of the rest are unable to see it for what it is despite having courage because they are what you could call "educated stupid". It's part of the function of the public schools.

It's nothing but FUD.

[Jane Q. Public]

No less than 25 states have passed resolutions or laws saying that they will not comply with Real ID. Period. It is dead in the water, it will never fly.

Faced with this state refusal, every year since Congress has voted to "delay" the program for another year. They haven't killed it, simply because they don't want to lose face over having voted to pass a law that is universally despised throughout the U.S. They simply don't want it to come to people's attention.

If they tried to enforce it tomorrow, my guess is that even more states would refuse.

It's FUD. It will never fly. Forget about it. Or if you are concerned at all, write your Congresscritters and tell them to stuff it. They do listen, because they want votes.

Real ID brought about by some states

[cdrguru]

The whole Real ID mess came about because a number of states (Illinois for one) decided to abandon any real standard for issuing state-backed identification. I was recently in Germany and they accepted my Arizona driver's license as a valid ID - no passport required after the guy at the airport. I'm sure they would accept an Illinois driver's license equally well - in fact, they did the time before I went to Germany and was living in Illinois.

The problem is, in Illinois you an get a driver's license that says pretty much whatever the heck you want. When I got my first driver's license I had to come in with a certified copy of a birth certificate plus a bunch of other stuff that "proved" I had a valid address in the state. This changed a while back because it was decided that it would be better if illegal immigrants (or undocumented workers) had real driver's licenses from Illinois rather either nothing or a Mexican driver's license which I guess has equally bad standards as Illinois does now. But how do you prove who someone is when they have no papers of any sort? Well, in Illinois they decided they would take a rather unofficial note from the Mexican consulate that said this person seems to be who they say they are. And that is the extent of it.

In no way is this "official" document tracable back to someone taking responsibility for it. Could it be copied? Sure. Could it be forged? Absolutely. So then what good is an Illinois driver's license if I can get one that says I'm Albert E. Enstein? Not a whole heck of a lot.

The Federal response was the Real ID act with an attempt to shore up the driver's license to have some actual tracability back to a person and to keep them from having 17 of them in different names. I don't think Illinois signed on to it, however. And Real ID is likely going to fail to really be enforced so that means many states can be considered to be issuing utterly bogus documents which prove nothing. Next time you are in an accident and ask to see the other person's driver's license remember this - they might have gotten it out of a Cracker Jack box ... I mean from Illinois or any one of the other states accepting Matricula Consular as a valid ID.

Re:Real ID brought about by some states

[Jane Q. Public]

There are a lot more reasons the Feds have for wanting Real ID than just that. They just don't talk about them. The situation you describe probably isn't even a major motivation; it's just an excuse.

Re:Real ID brought about by some states

[lamber45]

Perhaps you know the difference, but just so no one else is confused: the "Matricula Consular" is not the same thing as "a rather unofficial note", which I would assume is a letter on Consulate letterhead or something like that. It's an ID-sized card with a photo, vital data, and an issue and expiration date. To issue one, the consul requires proof of Mexican nationality (birth certificate, naturalization paper, passport), identity (photo ID: Mexican voter registration card, Mexican or American driver's license, Mexican school transcript - which has photos of the student for each year of his studies, passport, or "any other document accepted at the judgement of the Consul"), and residence in the consular district (which could cover more than one state, but the Florida consul should not issue cards for people from Oregon: home-related bills, American driver's license, or proof of paying Social Security and income taxes). The consul keeps a file copy of all probative documents submitted, and the cards are actually produced at the consulate the same day that the applicant appears but the data are submitted electronically to Mexico where they could presumably be used to catch patterns of malfeasance. Full details are in English on a random travel website, or in Spanish on any consul's website, such as the Miami one.

Even if it is easy to get a matricula consular (or other "easy-to-forge" document) and then an Illinois for a made-up or stolen identity, the state of Illinois still has a high-quality original photo of the anonymous individual or thief.

Michigan went the other direction a few years back, and it caused a certain amount of trouble for my wife, who was naturalized in 1995 and had had a state ID card more-or-less continuously since she was 18 (that is, 1997 or so) but didn't seriously pursue a drivers' license until she was about 28. The last time she went to take the written test and renew her learner's permit (after which she could have taken the road test the same day if they issued it), she was told that her marriage license did not quite match her state ID, and thus did not establish a chain of proof between her naturalization certificate and her current name - even though she must have used that marriage license to change her name to get an updated state ID, and an updated social security card, when we we first married five years before! Eventually we got it straightened out, and the end result is that our marriage license is also more accurate, but I was very unhappy with the new law at that time.

Terror arrest in 3, 2, 1

[icebike]

Quote from TFA:

With another faux implementation deadline looming in May, the DHS is almost certain to issue a blanket extension of the compliance deadline again soon.

Smith, King, and Sensenbrenner don't want that to happen. They cite the arrest of Khalid Aldawsari in Texas as a reason for "immediate implementation of REAL ID."

So I predict a scheduled event in in May, about 15 days before the deadline. That should give enough time for sensational stories to be published, State Legislatures to be stampeded, and federal mandates to be imposed. Its time for the curtain to go up on another Act in the Security Theater.

What was that comrade?

[atari2600a]

The KGB isn't meeting their daily quota?

The super rich don't think in terms of homeland

[rsilvergun]

why should I?

Re:The super rich don't think in terms of homeland

[causality]

why should I?

How much like them do you really want to be?

I for 1 disagree with most of slashdot

[bussdriver]

I am pretty big on privacy but aspects of a national ID I fully support.

I'm just trolling here because this topic brings out irrational emotional rants but I'll post something because I'm board at the moment.

Government can provide an ID system without taking over your life-- that is a SEPARATE issue. Its your collective fault if they take over your life and they don't need an ID system to do this. (the IRS has done quite well already.)

Social Security numbers are given to everybody and I am totally for them but I think we need to ENFORCE the law and prohibit their use as a unique identifier-- its already illegal to use the SS# for stuff-- no identity troubles could happen outside of SS check fraud if we just enforced the law.

ANYBODY who drives a car should be required to pass a test-- a federally defined test that is at least 2x as difficult as it stands today. They let anybody get one who can barely turn the wheel and is illiterate (our exam had diagrams, audio, and writing and was a total joke! Sorry but I don't think people with a 70 IQ should drive- at least make me retake the exam when I'm really old...)
Driving permits should remain PERMITS and not a valid ID.

We've been hacking old systems for a poorly designed authentication system WHICH IS NEEDED but the paranoid prevent a proper solution.

Slashdot should be discussing viable authentication systems not how we don't need to know who anybody is...ever...

Government has all your data already. the lower orders don't and maybe thats a good thing; however, its only a matter of time until it gets more connected. Private corps have even more data on you and you won't even know the stuff they are messing with in your life-- like when you don't get employment because facebook data tied to a 3rd party consultant ranks you poorly to all their clients. Credit reports on people were abused and still are abused to a degree; that is just an old system we know about! Its going to be much worse and outside government and largely unseen.

We need a physical ID with a digital fingerprint for REAL AUTHENTICATION NEEDS. The government is pretty much the only good source for issuing these things and it must be federally regulated since some states are run by morons (too many if you ask me.) NEXT you pass laws prohibiting places from forcing you to use this new digital national ID. Facebook shouldn't be able to force me to use it to sign up, for example (I won't sign up anyway.) But when I open a BANK ACCOUNT I should be required to present an ID and when I withdraw money... I also should be able to control how my money can be withdrawn; do my digital ID could be prohibited from withdrawals.

My driver's PERMIT must be with me in my car. But I don't give a rip if the cop isn't sure who I am; all the cop needs to know is all my data related to the car. An ID can come into the picture if things get serious... but I shouldn't need to carry an official ID just to drive my CAR! there, take that you paranoids! you don't want any ID but you are just fine with an ID to drive a car... I'm not.

If fact, we should have a digital ID to prove AGE and qualifications and possibly cards too. I shouldn't have to show you my ID (authenticate) just to buy alcohol... yeah, young people would 'borrow' but like any of that crap really stops them... it never did and never will; unless you are stupid, then you shouldn't get the stuff anyway. ONLINE we need a digital ID without identity for things we want to shelter children from.... I'm sure slashdot people would love a solution to this problem over the eventual censorship/ratings system that WILL happen eventually "to protect the children." Or somebody will find a way to take that driver's ID you all love and put in that number online to do stuff.... of course your credit card history already profiles you and is fairly easy for gov to get...

or how about a GUN? you could get a background check card and save all the trouble... I wonder how good the nuts would be at bypassing that one.

Re:I for 1 disagree with most of slashdot

[Em Adespoton]

I think I personally agree with every point you made... well done!

Background checks are my biggest pain point... because of the privacy laws here, I need to renew my checks every 2 years -- for EACH place that requires a certain level rating. This means that I'm pretty well known at the local constabulary, as I have to keep coming in and filling out the SAME FORMS for different agencies.

And states can do the same

[Anonymous Coward]

And states can do the same. Unless you enforce laws saying they can't. But then you have laws that overreach. So why are some such laws OK but other such laws not?

Re:And states can do the same

[shutdown -p now]

But then you have laws that overreach. So why are some such laws OK but other such laws not?

Because some laws (and, generally speaking, rights and freedoms) are more fundamental and universal than others.

Re:And states can do the same

[Mister Whirly]

But who gets to decide which are the important ones and which are not? That is the $64,000 question.

Re:And states can do the same

[shutdown -p now]

This is effectively defined by how constitutions are normally ratified and amendment. A generic answer would be that you need a supermajority of citizens to decide, and then the same to change it once it's decided.

I am an endpoint

[haapi]

I already have an IPv6 address. Isn't that good enough?