Slashdot Mirror
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."
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!
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
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?
FREE magazine : http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/prior/
I... am not sure I understand what the summary means. There is something wrong with those sentences. They give me a headache.
Not in New Hampshire. We rejected Real-ID, and any de facto national identification card system.
Part of the Second American Revolution!
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....
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
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.
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.
Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
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.
Two words:
"internal passport"
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
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.
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.
To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem. ~ h2g2
Heads up! Goatse link!!
V for Vendetta: People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.
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.
No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
... set fire to the Reichstag building.
On second thought, that's been done already. Never mind.
Have gnu, will travel.
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.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
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.
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.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
"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."
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
"... 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."
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.
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.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
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.
why should I?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
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.
"But this one goes to 11!"
How the fuck does this get modded insightful?
Step 1: Government hands you a plastic card
Step 2: ???
Step 3: 1984!
I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
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.
Non-Linux Penguins ?
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.