0
   

National Identification Cards and Database

 
 
Reply Sun 8 May, 2005 11:12 am
The cited article suggests that we may soon have a national identity card and database.

National Idenification Card and Database

As I'm sure most of you know, I'm a conservative and supporter of this administration's efforts against international radical Islamic terrorism. I am not easily given to alarm over emergency measures intended to provide us with national security during dangerous times.

There are always dangers when civil liberties are abridged, but sometimes the threat justifies restrictions. The Constitution provides for the suspension of Habeas Corpus, and during the Civil War Habeas Corpus was suspended. During WWI and WWII and even during the heights of the Cold War some of our civil liberties were restricted in the interest of national security. Once the danger to the nation passed, civil liberties were restored and even further enhanced. The Department of Homeland Security to coordinate efforts to protect us from terrorist acts is probably justified, though it certainly does have dangerous potential. Creation of a national identity card and database poses an unacceptable threat to our civil liberties that once in place would be permanent … and should be vigorously resisted by .all Americans.

Adoption of a national identification system would effectively eliminate personal privacy, and create a government file on every citizen. No one would have any choice in the matter, and we could never escape the watchful eye of database managers. Every financial transaction that we made, or change of address would be on file. To be without the required identity card would certainly be suspicious, if not criminal, and would be constantly checked by a host of monitors. Who would be watching us 24/7? A Washington bureaucrat, a political hack? J. Edgar Hoover's FBI files on a few citizens were nothing compared to the files that would exist on everyone in the country. Dissent would be chilled, and the potential for silencing or manipulating the political processes so great that this system has to be resisted if we want to maintain our freedoms. This system IS Big Brother made real, a nightmare Police State from which there would be no escape, no awakening.

I doubt that anyone would describe me as Chicken Little, or as an alarmist, but this initiative must not be permitted to come into being.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 8,071 • Replies: 39
No top replies

 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 May, 2005 11:16 am
Agreed, Asherman, but the first steps have already been taken. I'm afraid we're dealing with a runaway freight train at the present.

Might be hard to stop.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 10:42 am
For the very first time ever, I could have a closer view at an US driver license recently: I really wonder, why you actually need ID-cards at all: those driver licenses have got more information on it than any law would (until now) would allow on our ID-cards!
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 10:52 am
In Ohio, at least, i have the right to insist that my social security account number be omitted from my drivers license, and i do. Additionally, i have the right to refuse to allow those checking my age when purchasing tobacco or alcohol to "swipe" my ID through a card read on their cash register, and cannot be refused the purchase on that basis. Given my age and appearance, that is rarely an issue, although i've had to refuse it on two occassions, and then raise a stink until a manager would sell me cigarettes.

I'm with Ash on this one. Courts have held in the past that having identificaiton in one's possession does not require an individual to have have identification on their person, only that they be able to produce the identification in a properly constituted court. I've read (so long ago that i cannot provide a reference) that prior to 1948, no statute existed anywhere in this country which required a person to possess and produce identification. All of this does have the air of a cheesey WWII era pot boiler with the Nazi demanding to see one's papers . . .
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 10:53 am
Interesting, isn't it, Walter? I've always thought that the idea of saying whether you're going to donate organs or not on the driver license wasn't a bad idea at all....
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 11:02 am
Jeez Louise I agree with Asherman 100%. On another thread I'm in complete agreement with Woiyo.

And you say Jesus isn't on the way back.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 11:29 am
Asherman, I started a thread on this last week. I don't think enough people 'get it" for it to be stopped.

They don't even seem to care that Homeland can seize your property without payment in the name of security.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=50638&start=60
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 11:37 am
It seems like we are all in agreement here.... Anyone gonna present the other side (outside of the context of immigration that is)?

I vividly remember from my youth in a Conservative Baptist church seeing movies about the mark of the Beast. Based on Revelations which says that people will be "unable to buy or sell" without the mark, these movies showed the lives of the brave Christians who refused the mark (at the time it was barcodes) and were persecuted before being snatched up to be with Jesus.

These movies scared my 11 or 12 year old self half to death.

I am far from Conservative Baptist as an adult, but I wonder how many of us will refuse such a card on principle (religious or otherwise).

I am pretty sure I will refuse such a card on principle, at least until it is made way too painful (i.e. my family is starving).

If enough people simply refuse to own one of these cards, isn't that a good way to stop them? (If the Bible is correct, it should at least ensure our place in Heaven).

You all with me?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 11:49 am
How would having this card be any different than owning a drivers license for the average American?

I demand that my ID is checked whenever I use my credit card. It says "Check ID" where the signature line is.

My insurance company demands I show ID whenever I visit a doctor so as to prove I am the insured.

If I pay cash, no ID is asked for, why would that change with the ID system?

If I rent a car, ID is required.

If I get a hotel room, ID is required if not paying cash, and in most cases a credit card is needed, which requires an ID.

I do not see this program as being big brother and there is nothing new in the ZDnet article that does not already happen.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 12:00 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Jeez Louise I agree with Asherman 100%. On another thread I'm in complete agreement with Woiyo.

And you say Jesus isn't on the way back.


"Adoption of a national identification system would effectively eliminate personal privacy, and create a government file on every citizen."

I am not convinced "another" card will eliminate what has already been eliminated relative to privacy. I leave you with these:

1. Your SS Card/number
2. Drivers Lic.
3. ATM Card
4. Credit Card
5. Vehicle Transponder (E-Z Pass or Fast lane)

EVERYONE of us has at least 2 of these and I have all of these. Do you think the Govt can't find me if they really wanted to by just using the above?

Somebody above mentioned a "runaway train". Well, that train left the station YEARS ago.

It would be another waste of taxpayer dollars to have the Govt create ANOTHER silly card for your wallet.

Maybe the Govt should try to enforce the laws already on the books before the create ANOTHER useless activity for Homeboy Security.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 12:09 pm
Besides the database oc info on CITIZENS, I have a major problem with the fact that this bill will suspend habeas corpus.


Quote:
In Brown v. Vasquez, 952 F.2d 1164, 1166 (9th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 1778 (1992), the court observed that the Supreme Court has "recognized the fact that`[t]he writ of habeas corpus is the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action.' Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286, 290-91 (1969). " Therefore, the writ must be "administered with the initiative and flexibility essential to insure that miscarriages of justice within its reach are surfaced and corrected." Harris, 394 U.S. at 291.


http://www.lectlaw.com/def/h001.htm


Quote:
The Real I.D. Act is a sweeping measure to curtail immigrants' rights, in terms of livelihood, like drivers licenses, Juan had mentioned, in terms of access to courts if they're being deported. For the first time since the Civil War, the Real I.D. Act actually proposes to suspend habeas corpus. Now for anyone that has read the Constitution -- I'm not sure the Congress members have -- but for anyone who has read the Constitution, habeas is a Constitutional right. Other things the Real I.D. does is it empowers bounty hunters, private police forces, to go ahead and arrest immigrants that may be in deportation proceedings with virtually no oversight. It also gives the Department of Homeland Security carte blanche to basically go ahead and do what it wants to at the border. I don't know if they're trying to create a little Iraq at the border, I'm not sure what they're trying to do at the border, but that's basically what Real I.D. does. Quickly, why this is so terrifying is a matter of process....

... But at this point, it seems it actually might go true. And so, I mean, just if I can, I want to get right to the point, whether or not it goes through, we have to try our best to stop it, because I would hate to see people not knowing about it until it's passed and the damage is done, and then we mourn the fact that our Constitution doesn't matter, people can't drive in this country without proving that they're citizens, etc., etc.


http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/29/1351235
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 12:11 pm
I'm amazed that such a proposal has gotten as far as it has. The danger to individual liberty seems to have escaped notice in most of the comments I've seen. Existing information available on citizens is already extremely large and detailed. The trend away from personal privacy has been constant for the last fifty years, and the rate of intrusion is still increasing as technology gets better, more efficient and faster. In many ways we all benefit from having our information available to businesses and government, but at a price.

Once upon a time, a bankrupt, or young person who got into minor trouble with the law would simply "go to Texas" and start their life over with a clean slate. People "invented" and redefined themselves with few questions so long as they conformed to community standards. One of the proudest boasts of Americans was that "we don't have to carry identity papers and show them to every hotel keeper, copper, or layabout who wants to see them like those Europeans do". We have always resisted the idea that government should keep an eye on its citizens. The Bill of Rights was adopted to keep the prying hands of government out of the personal affairs of ordinary citizens. This proposal may seem like a logical extension of existing identification and a reasonable means of staunching the flow of illegals across our borders, it is not. This is a direct assault on our most precious freedoms. A Federal usurpation of State's rights that will, if enacted, destroy the Constitutional balances that have stood us so well.

This law would end up putting unbelievable power into the hands of Federal Bureaucrats and political appointees. Imagine what J.Edgar, or Richard Nixon could have done with this information. The driver's license would become a Federal, not State, document that would be demanded every time you got onto a bus, train, or airplane. Go to take out a mortgage, or to buy a new automobile, and you would be asked for your identification card. The information gathered, as I understand it, can be determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security without ANY oversight by Congress or the Courts. This is would make the Executive branch beyond the reach of Constitutional restraint.

The chill such a system would exert over freedom of expression and dissent would be devastating. Already we have trouble finding worthy people who will endure the public flogging required of candidates to elected or appointed office. Don't want to offend Big Brother! Imagine the sort of candidates that would fill government posts when government knows the most intimate details about personal lives. Who will watch the watchers?

Once such a system is in place, it will never be dismantled. No one in government will ever want to give up such a rich source of information. The quality and timeliness of information available to government will make law enforcement and taxation soooo much more efficient. There would be no need to "register" guns directly, they would be just another element in the personal dossier of every citizen. No ID card? The assumption would be that you are not a citizen, and should be detained without the rights available to citizens. See how easy it would be to eliminate an irritant ... even with the best of intentions. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

This is not part of some weird right-wing conspiracy. This is a rush to enact well intentioned law to improve our security and stem the tide of illegal immigration. It must be stopped. Hopefully the Senate will defeat this monster, or the President will veto it out of hand. The attachment of such an important rider to an essential defense spending bill is unconscionable, and this underscores the need for the President to have line-item veto power. Sound the alarm, our liberty is in grave danger.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 12:16 pm
(Usually when I argue with McGentrix, it is he who takes the conservative position.)

The problem is that this puts the government in the middle of what should be private matters.

For example, when I open a bank account, it is a personal business arrangement between me, and the bank.

If I am depositing money into an account which I will withdraw from... it is a simple matter. There is very little risk from the bank and no reason that they should demand more "security" than I as the customer demand. There is absolutely no reason for the Federal Government to be involved... especially when I as the customer don't want their help.

If McGentrix wants a bank that will will require a full ID with retinal scan and records kept in a National database... that is fine provided it is he, as a private citizen who chooses to give up his privacy for security.

I don't want to bank in this type of institution and prefer that my personal life remains personal. I want the right to choose a bank that will cater to my perceived security needs.

To require people to give up this information to the Federal government in personal transactions between two private entities is dangerous and wrong.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 12:18 pm
Asherman, I must say, I love it when I agree with you. Maybe, deep down, I am a true conservative after all.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 12:19 pm
"This is not part of some weird right-wing conspiracy. This is a rush to enact well intentioned law to improve our security and stem the tide of illegal immigration. It must be stopped. Hopefully the Senate will defeat this monster, or the President will veto it out of hand. The attachment of such an important rider to an essential defense spending bill is unconscionable, and this underscores the need for the President to have line-item veto power. Sound the alarm, our liberty is in grave danger."

Very well said.

Another "card" will not solve a problem our elected officals have ignored, illegal immigration.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 12:22 pm
When I see Asherman, myself, woiyo, squinney, e brown, in perfect agreement on fundamental and important issues such as this it makes me think perhaps America as a whole may wake up before it's too late. That at least is encouraging.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 01:09 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
When I see Asherman, myself, woiyo, squinney, e brown, in perfect agreement on fundamental and important issues such as this it makes me think perhaps America as a whole may wake up before it's too late. That at least is encouraging.


Why are you surprised???

There are certain fundemental values/issues that 100% of americans can agree on.

1.Freedom
2. Liberty
3. Govt's inability over the past 30 years to protect the above.

I think we can all agree that if we do not fix #3, we will lose numbers 1 & 2. Without 1 & 2, everything else we may disgree on is irrelevant
0 Replies
 
Sanctuary
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 01:12 pm
It is issues like this that strongly encourage me to move out of country. Strongly.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 01:12 pm
woiyo wrote:
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
When I see Asherman, myself, woiyo, squinney, e brown, in perfect agreement on fundamental and important issues such as this it makes me think perhaps America as a whole may wake up before it's too late. That at least is encouraging.


Why are you surprised???

There are certain fundemental values/issues that 100% of americans can agree on.

1.Freedom
2. Liberty
3. Govt's inability over the past 30 years to protect the above.

I think we can all agree that if we do not fix #3, we will lose numbers 1 & 2. Without 1 & 2, everything else we may disgree on is irrelevant


But they do not, unfortunately. ESPECIALLY number three.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 May, 2005 01:40 pm
McGentrix wrote:
If I pay cash, no ID is asked for, why would that change with the ID system?


This is precisely why the government knows feck-all about me. I make an occassional online purchase--otherwise, i don't use my credit card to make purchases, i head to the ATM for cash (or the Interac machine in Canadia). Right now, i have several hundred dollars US and about the same Canajun in my wallet. I've been doing this for years. I write about 18 checks a year--twelve for rent, and about a half dozen for electricity (i send the jokers a hundred dollars now and then, and never get cut-off notices or pay any late fees--they know i'm good for it).

While not paranoid, i decided a long time ago that as innocent as my life is, no one needs to have a paper trail which leads from my wallet or to my door.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » National Identification Cards and Database
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/18/2021 at 12:38:56