Ohio's knee-jerk underaged alcohol & tobacco prevention program.

[UltraQuiet]

I actually do have a way of knowing that. I am 19, and in college. I could go right now and get one of several legal aged people to buy me some alcohol. So you see, it doesn't matter (for me the underaged person) what is on the person who is above the legal age's card.

So what? You've found a way around it. If you find a way to get your nail clippers on an airplane should we abandon all airport security?

 

[thraashman]

Most of you are just a bunch of paranoid, consipiracy theory "uber-geeks". You need to realize that security devices such as swiping your card are there for, yep you guessed it, your security. (hard to figure that one out, huh) What's the big deal. So they swipe your card. If you don't let them, they have no reason to have to sell you anything. And damaging the strip intentionally is altering a legal document which is illegal. I'll sometime later link my driver's license photo, and not a single one of you will think I'm under 30, but in the picture I'm 20. By your logic because I look old enough I should've been allowed to buy alcohol. If you don't like to do what is required of you, then don't drink. But regardless of anything, stop whining about it.

 

[flavio]

Whether or not it is being used right now, there is alot of information that can be made available by swiping your ID card. It's easy for these invasions of privacy to creep up on you and become regular practice. It is much harder to get them stopped once they are put into regular use.

What could easily happen is that government agencies could track your purchases for a variety of reasons or the information could be sold to marketing agencies so they can focus on you more effectively. I'm not interested in either of those things ever happening, so I strongly oppose this.

Don't be foolish enough to confuse this with paranoia.

 

[Triumph]

Originally posted by: atrowe

Originally posted by: rgwalt
Balancing a person's right to privacy with the good of the public is a difficult thing. I tend to lean to the side of guaranteeing a person's rights and their privacy, but others are willing to give that up to be protected by the government.

I know one thing... The day that they force me to get a chip implant or a barcode tatoo in order to function in society is the day I throw in the towel and move "off the grid".

Ryan

What "right to privacy" are you talking about? Please show me where one's "right to privacy" is outlined in the Constitution.

Regardless of the fact that the Supreme Court has ruled on this many times, the way you phrase it, it sounds like you don't even want people to have any privacy.