Federal ID: The "Real-ID" ?

ebrown_p wrote:

There is a basic contradiction in your argument rabel. If the National ID card doesn't make a difference, then why should we go through the trouble and expense to make one?

That has to be one of the worst arguments I've ever read. "It might not work, so let's not even try." If we followed your reasoning, we'd all still be living in caves.

once again... you say it will allow them to intrude on your rights and privacy, but you dont' say how. HOW!?!?!?!?!?!? How does that let them control you or take away your rights ?

fishin wrote:

Richard Saunders wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

We live in a society of mostly good people but in which there are enough irresponsible and dangerous people to be of concern. And nobody is able to live out their lives in their own small community any more. Every bank transaction, credit card purchase, phone call, etc. etc. etc. is out there on the internet or on the airways and in danger of intercept by people in the next state or next country or across the world. And our society is mobile to an unprecedented extent.

To me a national ID makes very good sense to a) make sure child molesters and similar ilk aren't able to slip under the radar by changing locales; b) make it more difficult for convicted drunk drivers to buy alcohol; c) better ability to identify those in the country illegally; d) better protection against I.D. theft and no doubt many other purposes I'm not thinking of off the top of my head.

For the Real ID act it has been recommended that there be checkpoints where you would have to stop to show your papers.

Vere ah ur papers?

"Recommended" by whom? I have yet to see anyone "recommend" checkpoints (other than the existing security checkpoints at airports and such...). The uber-paranoid have suggested that they could be a possibility but no one in any position of authority or with half a brain has suggested it as any sort of reality.

It's evidently either in the legislation, or being discussed as follow up legislation. Congressman Ron Paul talked about it.

USAFHokie80 wrote:

once again... you say it will allow them to intrude on your rights and privacy, but you dont' say how. HOW!?!?!?!?!?!? How does that let them control you or take away your rights ?

A basic precept in American democracy is that the government can't poke its nose in my private affairs unless they have probable cause I have commited a crime.

If I want to open a bank account, or buy a book others might not like, or take a trip to California, I should be able to do so without a leaving a government controlled paper trail.

The use of Social Security numbers alone have been eroding my ability to do things in private (although the internet is giving these rights back some and the underground economy has always existed).

It is already the case that when you rent an apartment, rent a car, buy cold medicine or deposit money in a bank this transaction is linked to your social security number and accessible to anyone who has access to this data. (There are ways around this of course for people who need them).

The national ID will make it harder to do anything with a government searchable record, and easier for the government to poke its nose in your business.

...can verify that you are allowed to do so.

Quote:

...can verify that you are allowed to do so.

The very idea that anyone has to check if I am "allowed" to do something before I do it throws a basic precept of our Freedom upside down.

For the government to interfere in my private affairs, it needs to show probable cause that I am commiting a crime. If I am buying something from a business or person it between me and them. It is my private business.

If the government thinks I am breaking a crime, it needs to show probable cause before it pokes its nose in my private business.

The government has to prove that I am NOT allowed to do something.

Making me prove that I am allowed to do something goes against the principles of our free society.

The government exists because people prove time and time again that we are too stupid and petty to take care of ourselves.

Quote:

The government exists because people prove time and time again that we are too stupid and petty to take care of ourselves.

This is the core of our disagreement.

The founding fathers of our country would have strongly disagreed with you as well.

ebrown_p wrote:

Quote:

The government exists because people prove time and time again that we are too stupid and petty to take care of ourselves.

This is the core of our disagreement.

The founding fathers of our country would have strongly disagreed with you as well.

Objection. You cannot possible know what they were thinking when they wrote the constitution.

That being said, you're right, that is not the "reason" it exists. However, it is the major job of the government. It is our babysitter.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government

The constitution does not grant you the right to purchase x item without ID.

Quote:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government

What about when the people become destructive? We are. And someone (the gov't) needs to keep [some of] us in check.

The constitution does not grant you the right to purchase x item without ID.

Quote:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government

What about when the people become destructive? We are. And someone (the gov't) needs to keep [some of] us in check.

Have been an advocate for a national ID card for quite some time.

It certainly would be an effective weapon against illegal immigration and identity theft.

Richard Saunders wrote:

fishin wrote:

Richard Saunders wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

We live in a society of mostly good people but in which there are enough irresponsible and dangerous people to be of concern. And nobody is able to live out their lives in their own small community any more. Every bank transaction, credit card purchase, phone call, etc. etc. etc. is out there on the internet or on the airways and in danger of intercept by people in the next state or next country or across the world. And our society is mobile to an unprecedented extent.

To me a national ID makes very good sense to a) make sure child molesters and similar ilk aren't able to slip under the radar by changing locales; b) make it more difficult for convicted drunk drivers to buy alcohol; c) better ability to identify those in the country illegally; d) better protection against I.D. theft and no doubt many other purposes I'm not thinking of off the top of my head.

For the Real ID act it has been recommended that there be checkpoints where you would have to stop to show your papers.

Vere ah ur papers?

"Recommended" by whom? I have yet to see anyone "recommend" checkpoints (other than the existing security checkpoints at airports and such...). The uber-paranoid have suggested that they could be a possibility but no one in any position of authority or with half a brain has suggested it as any sort of reality.

It's evidently either in the legislation, or being discussed as follow up legislation. Congressman Ron Paul talked about it.

I suspect it is "None of the above". There are numerous quotes from Ron Paul about the Real ID Act and his opposition to it but not one makes any mention of anyone "recommending" any as you describe.

Quote:

The government exists because people prove time and time again that we are too stupid and petty to take care of ourselves.

This is the core of our disagreement.

The founding fathers of our country would have strongly disagreed with you as well.

The constitution does not grant you the right to purchase x item without ID.

Quote:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government

What about when the people become destructive? We are. And someone (the gov't) needs to keep [some of] us in check.

ugh. be realistic. from the way you're talking, you would rather have anarchy. which cannot possibly exist. there are only better and worse forms of government. count your blessings and stop bitching.