Do you support the REAL ID act?

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
The latest in the Europeanization of America. What's next, Kings and Queens?

You mean like Bush & Clinton dynasties?

 

[Modelworks]

I don't support having any sort of national ID that tracks information, aka social security number does now just without the picture. I think thats good enough.

I do support making a standard for state Id though.
Each state has a different layout and it would be better if they could come up with a standard layout where the details are all in the same places.

 

[manowar821]

"Papers please"

No fucking thanks.

edit: Obama is for it...? WTF?

 

[Kur]

No problem with it as long as it doesn't have anymore information then what my current drivers licenses has on it.

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
To the OP, The topic should be REAL ID not READ ID, but I understood what you meant.

I had a thread about it for NC.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...ight_key=y&keyword1=NC

Retards in washington think they own us like cattle.

*hangs head in shame*

good call.

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Originally posted by: manowar821
"Papers please"

No fucking thanks.

edit: Obama is for it...? WTF?

Yeah I know. And he voted for the renewed Patriot Act. Unfortunately he's not too friendly towards our liberties..

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Hell no. I think it leads to a gross loss of privacy with the almost certainty of abuse by the government and otherwise. Not only that, but the federal government is pushing this mandate on the states that do not want it. It is an unfunded mandate which infringes on powers traditionally in state hands. No thanks... May it go down in flames...

Its not unfunded. Originally you would be correct. The 2005 Real ID Act was unfunded. The Dems funded it in 2007. As for going down in flames.

Its already been passed into law, you are three years late.

Its good that they are funding it to keep the pressure off the states. Thanks for correcting me on that one. As far as being three years too late, I don't think the true threshold has been passed yet. Since many states are actively opposing this along with many citizens, the time may come where it is repealed or shot down in part by the courts before it fully takes effect. Only time will tell.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Originally posted by: manowar821
"Papers please"

No fucking thanks.

edit: Obama is for it...? WTF?

Yeah I know. And he voted for the renewed Patriot Act. Unfortunately he's not too friendly towards our liberties..

Last I checked, the Patriot Act Reauthorization bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Wreckem
Who ever thinks this puts drivers licenses information or issuance to the Feds has been horribly misled and should go read the bill themselves.

That doesn't make it a good idea. Oh, it's not a horrible privacy invasion? Well that's all I need to approve of it :roll:

What are they invading?

Tell me.

Right now theres a big push internationally(not by the US, but by the UN/Interpol) to more or less standardize passports with much TIGHTER security. I can see that as being an issue.

But if you read the Real ID act, its not the things some people are saying it is. It also isn't going to cost billions. And like I said, some states already meet the criteria prior to its passage.

Did you read my post? I said that a lack of horrible privacy invasion doesn't make something a good idea...which seems to be your core argument. I think it's a solution in search of a problem, that alone makes it unworthy of our time and effort, regardless of whether it costs "billions" or not.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Hell no. I think it leads to a gross loss of privacy with the almost certainty of abuse by the government and otherwise. Not only that, but the federal government is pushing this mandate on the states that do not want it. It is an unfunded mandate which infringes on powers traditionally in state hands. No thanks... May it go down in flames...

Its not unfunded. Originally you would be correct. The 2005 Real ID Act was unfunded. The Dems funded it in 2007. As for going down in flames.

Its already been passed into law, you are three years late.

Its good that they are funding it to keep the pressure off the states. Thanks for correcting me on that one. As far as being three years too late, I don't think the true threshold has been passed yet. Since many states are actively opposing this along with many citizens, the time may come where it is repealed or shot down in part by the courts before it fully takes effect. Only time will tell.

The states and people can reject it, but the courts wont overturn it. Most states have rejected it because it would cost them money.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Originally posted by: manowar821
"Papers please"

No fucking thanks.

edit: Obama is for it...? WTF?

Yeah I know. And he voted for the renewed Patriot Act. Unfortunately he's not too friendly towards our liberties..

Last I checked, the Patriot Act Reauthorization bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent.

Further proof those talking heads don't have our best interests at heart. Fuckers.

 

[spittledip]

I don't want any RFID thing on my person. Thanks anyway.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: spittledip
I don't want any RFID thing on my person. Thanks anyway.

There is absolutely ZERO LANGUAGE that says anything about RFID.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: spittledip
I don't want any RFID thing on my person. Thanks anyway.

There is absolutely ZERO LANGUAGE that says anything about RFID.

Already on passports, how much longer or how much of a stretch would it be for the REAL ID to be next?

 

[spittledip]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: spittledip
I don't want any RFID thing on my person. Thanks anyway.

There is absolutely ZERO LANGUAGE that says anything about RFID.

just you wait and see... maybe not this time around, but next time they'll GETCHA!!!!

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: spittledip
I don't want any RFID thing on my person. Thanks anyway.

There is absolutely ZERO LANGUAGE that says anything about RFID.

Already on passports, how much longer or how much of a stretch would it be for the REAL ID to be next?

As it currently stands, RFID is NOT apart of the Real ID standards.

The Real ID standards are pretty basic.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: spittledip

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: spittledip
I don't want any RFID thing on my person. Thanks anyway.

There is absolutely ZERO LANGUAGE that says anything about RFID.

just you wait and see... maybe not this time around, but next time they'll GETCHA!!!!

Well, 99% of the Real ID Act was passed in 2004 under the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. You'd think if they were going to add RFID they'd have snuck it in the second go around before making a massive investment.

Nope. I think the problem is your tinfoil hat interfering with your brainwaves. Well and there is a absurd amount of misinformation about the Real ID act roaming around.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: spittledip
I don't want any RFID thing on my person. Thanks anyway.

There is absolutely ZERO LANGUAGE that says anything about RFID.

Already on passports, how much longer or how much of a stretch would it be for the REAL ID to be next?

As it currently stands, RFID is NOT apart of the Real ID standards.

The Real ID standards are pretty basic.

I understand that. But what I was trying to point out was passports (a form of identification) is already being fitted with RFID. Now how much of a stretch would it be to think the REAL ID would be next? I personally think RFID on passports are way over the top. Our overlords say its for my safety (like patriot act) but I would rather them keep their "safety" while I keep my Liberty. TYVM

 

[spittledip]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: spittledip

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: spittledip
I don't want any RFID thing on my person. Thanks anyway.

There is absolutely ZERO LANGUAGE that says anything about RFID.

just you wait and see... maybe not this time around, but next time they'll GETCHA!!!!

Well, 99% of the Real ID Act was passed in 2004 under the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. You'd think if they were going to add RFID they'd have snuck it in the second go around before making a massive investment.

Nope. I think the problem is your tinfoil hat interfering with your brainwaves. Well and there is a absurd amount of misinformation about the Real ID act roaming around.

Seriously, that whole 'tinfoil hat' expression is beyond old and is dead and buried and yet people like to keep digging it up and using it over and over. It's old, please be more creative in your responses thank you.

Anyway, you can say what you want, but as PC says in the post above mine, if RFID is already on one form of ID, what is to stop it from being on anohter? Common sense my fat headed friend! common sense...

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: spittledip

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: spittledip

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: spittledip
I don't want any RFID thing on my person. Thanks anyway.

There is absolutely ZERO LANGUAGE that says anything about RFID.

just you wait and see... maybe not this time around, but next time they'll GETCHA!!!!

Well, 99% of the Real ID Act was passed in 2004 under the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. You'd think if they were going to add RFID they'd have snuck it in the second go around before making a massive investment.

Nope. I think the problem is your tinfoil hat interfering with your brainwaves. Well and there is a absurd amount of misinformation about the Real ID act roaming around.

Seriously, that whole 'tinfoil hat' expression is beyond old and is dead and buried and yet people like to keep digging it up and using it over and over. It's old, please be more creative in your responses thank you.

Anyway, you can say what you want, but as PC says in the post above mine, if RFID is already on one form of ID, what is to stop it from being on anohter? Common sense my fat headed friend! common sense...

And like I said, they've already had oppurtunities to do it, and haven't.

And like I said previously, if Interpol and the UN get their way, theres going to be a hell of alot more than RFID on passports.

 

[piasabird]

I dont think drivers licenses or driving laws should be controlled by the state. It should all be federal with a federal database. If the states want to have their own taxes and fees that is up to them.

 

[Modelworks]

If they do put RFID in a real ID I can see a booming black market.
Its actually easier to fake/change a rfid than it is the current printed id.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Hell no. I think it leads to a gross loss of privacy with the almost certainty of abuse by the government and otherwise. Not only that, but the federal government is pushing this mandate on the states that do not want it. It is an unfunded mandate which infringes on powers traditionally in state hands. No thanks... May it go down in flames...

Its not unfunded. Originally you would be correct. The 2005 Real ID Act was unfunded. The Dems funded it in 2007. As for going down in flames.

Its already been passed into law, you are three years late.

Its good that they are funding it to keep the pressure off the states. Thanks for correcting me on that one. As far as being three years too late, I don't think the true threshold has been passed yet. Since many states are actively opposing this along with many citizens, the time may come where it is repealed or shot down in part by the courts before it fully takes effect. Only time will tell.

The states and people can reject it, but the courts wont overturn it. Most states have rejected it because it would cost them money.

I'm not so sure. There could be challenges on 10th or 14th amendment grounds over the denial of access to federal facilities/services for those citizens of non-realID states. I'll have to look into it some more, but I think there will be some sort of challenge that can be posed.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

I'm not so sure. There could be challenges on 10th or 14th amendment grounds over the denial of access to federal facilities/services for those citizens of non-realID states. I'll have to look into it some more, but I think there will be some sort of challenge that can be posed.

Probably not, there is longstanding precedent of the federal government being able to make the money they give to states conditional upon certain actions. That's why the drinking age is 21 everywhere in fact.