House approves electronic ID cards...

[TallBill]

I dont really find anything wrong with this. I already carry 2 ID's around and soon a 3rd. Whats another?

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: conjur
Or, for helping ensure voting goes more smoothly, require a state-issued photo ID when voting.

Heh...there are some states that fight that tooth and nail (Wisconsin being one I believe).

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: Zim Hosein

Republican politicians argued that the new rules were necessary to thwart terrorists, saying that four of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers possessed valid state-issued driver's licenses. "When I get on an airplane and someone shows ID, I'd like to be sure they are who they say they are," said Rep. Tom Davis, a Virginia Republican, during a floor debate that started Wednesday.

So now we end up with terrorists with valid Real ID cards.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Spencer278
You don't need any ID to use a credit card. Basing a planes safety on weather or not a passager can con some idiot at the DMV into giving them a lincesses is stupid and pointless. And that is assume you know the names of every one you don't want on the plane.

Really? I get asked for my ID to use my credit card at stores regularly. Just last night at Publix for instance.

Airports use IDs to ensure that the person using the ticket matches the name on the ticket. There's also a database of individuals who are basically on a "Do Not Fly" list that the ID can be checked against.

 

[speed01]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: speed01

Originally posted by: Vic
They may as well just break out the tatoos guns and start putting barcodes on everyone's foreheads. Thank God that "Freedom First!" GW Bush is in office! :roll:

Right, because we all know that this was all W's idea and if Kerry was in office none of this would be happening..:roll:

Speed

I did not say that. You ASSumed that. However, last I checked, the OP put an informative article in his original post for you to review. I suggest you do so.

My beef about GW in this regard has nothing to do with partisan politics. You ASSumed that. It has to do with his many proclamations of faith, when in fact this type of action that he fully supported is strictly contrary to that faith he frequently proclaims. On top of that, it's contrary to the banner of freedom he claims to hold high (and that pisses me off even more).
That Kerry likely would have done the same, I don't doubt. But I think that at least he wouldn't have been a lying hypocrite about it.

Vic, since you appear to be so fond of emphasizing the beginning of a certain word, don't do the same thing by presuming that I didn't read the article. The way your post was worded (or at least the way I percieved it), alluded to the concept that if someone else was in office things would be different and I simply made the next logical conclusion.

Speed

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: DougK62
So what's the big deal? All it means is that we get standardized IDs and have to use them to get into federal buildings. Big deal.

I'm a big privacy advocate and even I don't have a bg beef with this.

What's next?

Originally posted by: mcvickj
I'm not sure about your point Vic. If the police stop you and ask for ID you are required to show them. Who cares what card you show them? Be it a state issued drivers license or some federal form of ID.

If they stop me in my car, then of course I will have to show my drivers license. If not in a car and they have no valid reason or probable cause, then no, I'm not required to provide them with ID. What kind of country do you think we live in where we have to prove our right to live here anytime some fat bureaucrat asks us to?

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: Vic
I simply see it as a massive invasion of privacy.

Unfortunately our constitution was never intended to protect our privacy at all. All it does is protect our publicity.

 

[Legendary]

These cards are either 1. going to cost SO much money to be secure or 2. will cost little and be easily forged by anyone who REALLY wants (aka terrorists).

Either way we lose.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: SagaLore
So now we end up with terrorists with valid Real ID cards.

Bingo. Which is why they'll be calling for even more stringent ID controls next, perhaps even an RFID chip under the skin. Of course, then we'll have terrorists with chips too. Why not? No amount of freedom sacrificed will ever buy us safety. That is a myth.

Originally posted by: speed01
Vic, since you appear to be so fond of emphasizing the beginning of a certain word, don't do the same thing by presuming that I didn't read the article. The way your post was worded (or at least the way I percieved it), alluded to the concept that if someone else was in office things would be different and I simply made the next logical conclusion.

Speed

I see your point. My apologies. This issue makes me cranky because of course 90% of the posters will completely fail to understand the implications, and will respond believing that apathy makes a strong argument. In other words, sheep. I hate 'em.

 

[Zanix]

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: Vic
I simply see it as a massive invasion of privacy.

Unfortunately our constitution was never intended to protect our privacy at all. All it does is protect our publicity.

So what's all that stuff about liberty for?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: TallBill
I dont really find anything wrong with this. I already carry 2 ID's around and soon a 3rd. Whats another?

Can track your every move. You happy with that too??? 😕

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: logic1485
You guy's don't have IDs apart from driving licenses? I find that weird, because I think that almost everywhere in the EU there is a proper type of ID that must be carried at all times.

Passports still don't have a tracking ability as far as I know.

 

[digitalsm]

This isnt a national id card jackasses.

Its passing standards for id cards. Which is needed, there are to many states out there with easy to forge ids.

 

[Hammer]

texas driver's licenses already complies with this, as do most states. no big deal. i don't know of any states that use the old style licenses anymore. I remember oklahoma did back when i was in college (my fake was from there).

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: logic1485
You guy's don't have IDs apart from driving licenses? I find that weird, because I think that almost everywhere in the EU there is a proper type of ID that must be carried at all times.

Passports still don't have a tracking ability as far as I know.

'Tracking" ability. If you f'in commit a crime in one state, they should know about it in another state.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: Vic
I simply see it as a massive invasion of privacy.

Unfortunately our constitution was never intended to protect our privacy at all. All it does is protect our publicity.

Guaranteeing the right to be secure in my person, house, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and searches, seems to me like a very good privacy protection was built into the Constitution. It also means that Constitutionally I don't have to present some national ID card to every fat donut-eater who wants to see it so he can justify his taxpayer-derived salary.

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: digitalsm
This isnt a national id card jackasses.

Its passing standards for id cards. Which is needed, there are to many states out there with easy to forge ids.

Is forge ID's a real problem besides people under 21 buying beer?

 

[mcvickj]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: TallBill
I dont really find anything wrong with this. I already carry 2 ID's around and soon a 3rd. Whats another?

Can track your every move. You happy with that too??? 😕

If I remember correctly TallBill is in the military so they already know where he is. 🙂

TallBill - What is the 3rd ID?

 

[DougK62]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: DougK62
So what's the big deal? All it means is that we get standardized IDs and have to use them to get into federal buildings. Big deal.

I'm a big privacy advocate and even I don't have a bg beef with this.

What's next?

The "what's next?" argument is a poor one. It's just like suggesting that letting gays marry will open the door for people to marry dogs and group marriages.

You look at each issue independantly, and as it's own seperate issue I don't have a problem with this.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: digitalsm
This isnt a national id card jackasses.

Its passing standards for id cards. Which is needed, there are to many states out there with easy to forge ids.

And when every "state-issued" ID is exactly the same, made to the same standard and recorded in the same federal database, that would be a national ID card now wouldn't it?

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: Hammer
texas driver's licenses already complies with this, as do most states. no big deal. i don't know of any states that use the old style licenses anymore. I remember oklahoma did back when i was in college (my fake was from there).

There are still a handfull of smaller states that use the old outdated cards. This is who the feds are aiming at.

Though they are wanting states to link their DMV databasess together. Which is good IMHO.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: digitalsm
This isnt a national id card jackasses.

Its passing standards for id cards. Which is needed, there are to many states out there with easy to forge ids.

And when every "state-issued" ID is exactly the same, made to the same standard and recorded in the same federal database, that would be a national ID card now wouldn't it?

No where does the bill say anything about a federal database. It is requiring STATES to link together, not to a federal hub.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: logic1485
You guy's don't have IDs apart from driving licenses? I find that weird, because I think that almost everywhere in the EU there is a proper type of ID that must be carried at all times.

Passports still don't have a tracking ability as far as I know.

'Tracking" ability. If you f'in commit a crime in one state, they should know about it in another state.

if you have a warrant other states know about it already. They may not know you have an outstanding parking ticket it mambojambo louisiana but they will knwo about warrants.

they made do without this for many many decades. Im know we can get by without it. Who is paying for this anyways?? oh yeah thats right we are and we dont even get a say in it.....so sad.

 

[mcvickj]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: Vic
I simply see it as a massive invasion of privacy.

Unfortunately our constitution was never intended to protect our privacy at all. All it does is protect our publicity.

Guaranteeing the right to be secure in my person, house, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and searches, seems to me like a very good privacy protection was built into the Constitution. It also means that Constitutionally I don't have to present some national ID card to every fat donut-eater who wants to see it so he can justify his taxpayer-derived salary.

I think your blowing things out of proportion. What makes you think they are going to start carding people just because they can? I don't see anything changing.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: digitalsm
This isnt a national id card jackasses.

Its passing standards for id cards. Which is needed, there are to many states out there with easy to forge ids.

Is forge ID's a real problem besides people under 21 buying beer?

Actually it is.