Slashdot Mirror
Bill Introduced To Require ID When Purchasing "Burner Phones" (house.gov)
insitus quotes a report from Speier.House.Gov: Congresswoman Jackie Speier (D-San Francisco/San Mateo) introduced the Closing the Pre-Paid Mobile Device Security Gap Act of 2016, which would require people to present identification when purchasing "burner phones" and other pre-paid mobile devices, as well as requiring merchants to keep records of those purchases. "Burner phones" are pre-paid phones that terrorists, human traffickers, and narcotics dealers often use to avoid scrutiny by law enforcement because they can be purchased without identification and record-keeping requirements. This bill would close that legal gap.
"This bill would close one of the most significant gaps in our ability to track and prevent acts of terror, drug trafficking, and modern-day slavery," said Speier. "The 'burner phone' loophole is an egregious gap in our legal framework that allows actors like the 9/11 hijackers and the Times Square bomber to evade law enforcement while they plot to take innocent lives. The Paris attackers also used 'burner phones.' As we've seen so vividly over the past few days, we cannot afford to take those kinds of risks. It's time to close this 'burner phone' loophole for good."
The bill is going to be useless unless the used phone market is eliminated.
I mean, no-one has ever faked ID. Or paid a kid $20 to go buy a couple of phones.
And where will it end? ID to buy box-cutters to close the box-cutter loophole? ID to buy nails because they're used in nail bombs? ID to buy pressure cookers?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
How about you make getting an ID free then?
It certainly seems to be increasingly required for just about everything these days....
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
I'm not afraid of terrorists (even though I live in a power point that they'd probably love to attack). The government, otoh, and don't give me that BS about "if you ain't got nothing to hide, you needn't worry". EVERYBODY has skeletons in their closets.
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
Just off the top of my head the only problem I can see with this is it also precludes the possibility of someone being able to make an anonymous call. It's no longer the case that there are payphones everywhere, that you can call 911 for free from, or drop coins into the slot and make an anonymous call that way. If ID is required for a burn phone then for all intents and purposes all calls made can be traced back to the individual.
Can anyone else come up with valid reasons why a non-criminal, non-terrorist would need to make an anonymous phone call?
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
These kinds of laws are utterly pointless and ineffective in preventing terrorism. They are, however, very effective means by which government can terrorize law abiding citizens, by going on legal fishing expeditions and blackmailing people with legal but embarrassing personal conduct.
Not everybody. Some of us mash the bones up, mix them with clay and make sculptures with it. Or plates.
Ummm ... that's what, yeah, a guy said, who was on the creative writing course I took.
BRB, door.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
We should just make terrorism illegal. That will fix everything!
Well, we still have burner phones... For now...
You know, for the children and because of terrorists and shit. Because before cellphones, absolutely NO ONE EVER stood by a payphone waiting for a call, usually from their counterpart calling from another payphone.
> When was the last time a US government agency massacred dozens of people
Last month, I suppose.
> here in the US?
In the US, I'm not sure when was the LAST time, but I sure remember when they did so a few miles down the road from me, in Waco.
> a school or theater and shot dozens of folks?
Ever notice those virtually always happen in "gun free" zones (aka defenseless victim zones)?
Lots more stolen phones, and phones smuggled from Mexico/Canada.
Seems to me that, while looking good on the surface, once you really start to think about it this is a bad idea.
Draft text
https://www.govtrack.us/congre...
If you want to pass a law for its instrumental value, then you need make a case that it's actually going to work.
If this law works as intended, what would success look like? Maybe one of these things:
- Actually intercepting terrorists' communications before an attack?
- Actually intercepting terrorists' communications during an attack?
- Making it so terrorists can only communicate by ways other than cell phone during a terrorist attack?
- Making it so we can easily identify terrorists who used a cell phone during a terrorist attack after the attack is done?
Or something else I haven't thought of?
Are we already achieving any of those things by other means in some cases? If so, when aren't we, and would the law help us with that?
As background for figuring out if we will achieve our goal(s), let's get some more info about the world.
Currently terrorists purchase prepaid phones without ID and use them before and during terrorist attacks. If the proposed law was in effect, what would they do instead?
- Would they still be able to acquire a cellphone from a retailer without actually identifying themselves?
- Also, are there any other ways that a terrorist could obtain cellphones without identifying themselves?
If you want people to think up ideas about that you've probably come to the right place.
* Giving fake info to an online retailer
* Giving another person's info to an online retailer
* Paying an unrelated third party (e.g. a homeless person) to buy a phone and give it to them
* Stealing phones
Supposing that none of that worked and the terrorists lost access to anonymous phones, and they changed their practices, would they change them in a way that would achieve the goal?
When terrorists kill more people than choking on chicken wings, I'll be appropriately scared of them. 9/11 was a significant thing. And it was *entirely* resolved by 3 things. 1. reinforced/locked cockpit doors 2. Me. 3. You.
The old understood contract of just sit tight during a hijacking and get let off in Cuba or wherever was ripped to shreds as evidenced by Flight 93 in PA. NOBODY is going to sit idly by anymore.
I've always wondered about burner phones for this specific reason though. In a world where every 'number' should have a person assoc with it, it seems odd that it would be allowable to have completely anonymous phones able to be used. I understand the myriad of reasons why LOTS of people might want and legitimately need a burner phone, but that ability comes with societal costs such as people using them for 'bad' (TM) reasons; same obviously go's for crowbars and baseball bats.
A burner phone is a tool that can be used for good or ill and should we ban 'tools' simply because it can be abused? In most cases, I'm firmly in the 'no' category and deal with it. In this case, I'm conflicted...
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
Killing dozens at once? And federal government only? Ok, it's reasonabl rare for the US government to kill lots of people at once here, have to go back to the Waco massacre for that one. It kills lots of people at once in other countries on a regular basis, of course.
Killing people one by one? And including state and local governments? Dude, have you somehow missed the recent uproar over police shootings? And it's nothing new, the War on (Some) Drugs has had cops killing people for decades.
If you're not afraid of the government, that's a sign that either 1) you're white and rich and of sufficient status that you're glad to have the state keep "those people" in line with deadly force, or 2) you don't have a clue what's going on.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
There are some pretty cheap Android tablets out there that can use apps like Skype over the Internet that aren't really phones. Just go to a place where there is an open Wi-Fi connection and talk away. Amazon was selling their Fire tablet for something like $25 awhile ago. Might even be cheaper than a phone. Are these banned in the proposed bill? You gotta have an ID to by a cheap tablet?
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
"Sir, our records showed that you purchased ten burner phones that were used for..."
"Oh yea, those - damnedest thing, someone broke into my car and stole them. I have the police report and everything".
The end of anonymity is nigh though, it constantly ratchets tighter every day.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
That's the reason for the D or R after the name: You literally cannot tell them apart without a score card any more (and haven't been able to for decades).
They all ultimately want the same thing: to go through your pockets for loose change they missed last time.
I noticed before sometimes in the United States when people want your government to control people more it says "D something" by their name. What does the D mean?
Abbreviation for party affiliation. So far I've seen:
D- Democrat
R- Republican
I- Independent (not affiliated with a major party - usually someone who lost a primary and ran anyway, sometimes someone who just ran without going through a party mechanism)
L- Libertarian
A- American Independent (historic: George Wallace's party from the '60s)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Uh, this may be because of something I said...
I called the decryption demand by the FBI stupid in front of her, and pointed out that all the Charlie Hebdo terrorists in the Paris attack coordinated with burner phones that they didn't use before or after the actual incident.
Perhaps she didn't get the fact that they didn't turn the phones in to the local "terrorist burner phone convenience dropbox" after the event?
Getting real tired of this meme.
"EVERYTHING I DON'T LIKE IS A """LOOPHOLE""""
Sure makes for some good fearmongering though.
I've got a solution: Make diabetes illegal.
Seems to misunderstand that more "burner phones" are bought by battered women than by terrorists.
Why do you want to see battered women die, Jackie?
--
BMO
Phones used in Paris were acquired hours before the attacks. The terrorists most likely had no expectation of surviving. The suicide bombers in Paris and Brussels certainly didn't. So unless this information raises a flag with law enforcement immediately, identification is pointless. The next attack will be coordinated using phones purchased with proper identification. So the next step will be to provide law enforcement with real time subscriber information from the telecoms. And maybe a blacklist, like the TSA's no-fly list, of suspects not allowed to purchase phones. Maybe a five day waiting period as well.
Have gnu, will travel.
Beyond killing, en-mass or singly, they can throw you in jail, arrest and jail you, seize your possessions, real property, bank accounts, etc. Government agents can do that pretty much without fear of retribution or harm to their career on the flimsiest circumstance. Might you get out jail without an indictment or conviction? Or your property back? Perhaps, eventually, but there's likely to be a heavy cost.
Require everyone have identification to purchase a phone but don't require people to have identification to prove they are eligible to vote.
Free public WiFi assigns you an arbitrary IP address. I guess we could all stab away at random IP addresses and maybe reach our friend, if they're in range of a WiFi access point....
You're more likely to be killed by your own toddler with your own gun than be killed by terrorists.
Different day, same old bullshit line from the progressive propaganda playbook. The reason for the 2nd amendment is to give the people the ability to overthrow a tyrannical government. Read the Federalist papers, read the Declaration of Independence, read memoirs and biographies. Nowhere do they say it's for only an army, or because they hate the army, or anything else you want to pull out of your ass as a fairy tale. Tyranny is a repeating theme throughout all of written history, you should really spend time learning and repeating history instead of propaganda.
The founders were extremely intelligent, each studied Political Philosophy and contributed to the creation and method of maintaining a Republic. All of the "They never saw this one coming." is pure bullshit. Just because you are a sucker that fell for the lines does not mean other people should be tricked into that way of thinking.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
When they buy the phones hours before the attack it will be completely pointless. Yet another win for terrorists as this will likely prevent nothing related to terrorism whatsoever.
I'm going to have to convince homeless people and drug addicts to buy burned phones to prop up my criminal empire. Oh well, it's not really going to stop me.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Leave Slick Willie alone. The man just wanted to bang the young pussy running around. The sad part is he's the best President we've had since Reagan's first term.
Next thing you know we'll be outlawing stupid, flippant and ignorant.
That was an interesting post.
I too kind am kinda moderate about guns. On the one hand, I've done my research. Various gun laws have been enacted in various places, and we have the statistics to see what the results are. We don't have to predict what the results might be, we have the numbers. The facts show, unequivocally, that gun bans and strict gun laws are correlated with an increase in violent crimes, and a large increase in sexual assault and rape. That's just a fact- when politicians remove womens' ability protect themselves, many more women get raped. (I can provide a link to full statistics from official government sources , and further explanation, upon request) .
On the other hand, at one time in my life I decided that it would be best for me to not have handguns in my house. Mostly because I had two curious young children in the house, and we lived in a safe neighborhood.
The Constitution guarantees me ten essential rights and the right to make that choice about guns is one of them.
As far as laws go, I did find one thing that was proven effective ; actually a combination of two things. First, Texas added a minimum mandatory sentence for using a weapon in the commission of a felony, then they ADVERTISED it widely, with ads on city busses, billboards, etc. Word got around that robbery would get you five years, having a gun on you when you got caught would get you an additional ten years in the slammer. That worked.
After that was successful, Texas ran a similar advertising campaign about their concealed carry law. Law-abiding citizens might now shoot back, the ads warned. Thinking of robbing a store? You don't know which of the customers behind you is packing a .45. That also worked, though probably not as well as advertising the mandatory sentence for using a weapon in the commission of a felony.
If you think about it, it makes sense. Billions of dollars have been spent figuring out how to create ads which effectively influence people's behavior. If you want to influence the behavior of thugs in your city, it makes sense to leverage that knowledge.
It is easier to track a small number of unregistered phones than a large number of registered ones and they could not even track the smaller number.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
that would be (G)ungan.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
And require ID to get it!
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
Next thing you know we'll be outlawing stupid, flippant and ignorant.
That's not possible - Congress always exempts itself from laws!
#DeleteChrome