Why not a national ID card?

[Babbylonian]

I'll admit that my support for a national ID card (in the US of course) is both theoretical and conditional. In theory, the idea of having a standard national ID card sounds like a good idea; I don't think it would be any easier to steal identities because it seems logical that having 50 different ID cards - with validity supported in the Constitution by the "full faith and credit" clause - makes fraud even easier.

My conditions would include that no one should be required to carry their card or show it for anything but proving one's age for age-dependent purchases or one's identity in business transactions. Since we already do that with state IDs, again, I don't think the risk of fraud is significantly increased. In fact, for most low-level fraud it should be reduced by the fact that those reviewing the ID would become very familiar with the anti-counterfeiting measures nationally; this is not at all true with out-of-state IDs. Bartenders/bankers/etc. here in my part of Oregon will be intimately familiar with Oregon (and probably Washington) cards while a fake card from elsewhere would be more difficult to identify.

Anecdote: I've refused to show my ID to a police officer who had no probable cause to ask for it (someone called the police to report a fat, bearded man with a limp walking down their street, which was my street as well). The officer stopped me, told me that the police had been called because I was "suspicious," and asked to see my identification. I told him that, no, I wouldn't be doing that unless he could come up with a better reason.

I support retaining the right not to present ID to police officers who are harassing people on the street, and I think the fear of losing that right is enough to ensure a national ID card never comes to pass.

 

[Trakar]

The boat sailed long ago on that one. It would be possible to limit the circumstances in which authorities could request the card. I have a driver's license, and when I am driving I have to show it to any police officer who asks for it. But I don't have to show it to walk down the street, and a police officer can only request ID from me if he has a valid reason. But if I open a bank account, get on a plane, go to a doctor, apply for a job, rent an apartment, write a check to a store, buy alcohol, or even pick up concert tickets, all kinds of private parties can demand my ID or refuse to provide the service I am seeking. When you sign up for a phone -- landline or cell -- or internet service, join a health club or buy almost any service that requires a contract, the provider runs a credit check. Cameras observe you on highways, city streets and in public buildings. Everybody who doesn't live in a cave needs ID. The question is whether a national ID card would be more secure and less subject to fraud than driver's licenses issued by 50 states according to their own standards, a paper Social Security card that has NO security features, etc. What would I lose with a standard national ID card that I haven't already lost with a driver's license and passport?

You can easily choose not to get a driver's license or passport, and rarely, if ever, are those the only acceptable identifications for other purposes. I have several different, valid federal and state forms of ID and rarely have any difficulty in using any of several to use as ID. I would rather carry 10 different IDs where I can choose which ones I wish to use for different activities/transactions, than only having only one that is uniformly applicable. I am unconcerned about cameras, or physiometric verification applications, I am not trying to hide from anyone or conceal my identity, I just don't want to bundle my identity and information into a connected and indexed format to make it easy for criminals or those with maleficent intent to discover every aspect of my life through the casual discovery of one piece of information about me. I would rather be in 100 different largely distinct databases than have all of my individual information tied together "for the sake of convenience" in one common database.

 

[Trakar]

I'll take that bet. Credit cards with chips haver never been forged as far as I know.

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/security/chip-and-pin-the-technology-is-no-longer-secure/3153

 

[fuelair]

I think standardization is a good argument. It would be a lot easier if you could have your drivers license/passport etc. in one, and an id with a chip is nearly impossible to forge.

And. I always have my card passport on me - in case I need to make a quick getaway!!!

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/security/chip-and-pin-the-technology-is-no-longer-secure/3153

Do you have an example of a faked card being used?

Also from the article:

“The whole purpose behind security is to make it more difficult so thieves will go somewhere else as well as eliminating amateurs. Still no matter what you develop, there’s going to be someone who’s going to find a way around it.”

 

[Trakar]

I've been in Sweden for 12 years and I've never been stopped by the police and asked for my national ID for no reason and never met anyone else who has either.

Come to think of it, though we all have national ID numbers used for everything, there isn't any requirement to have your ID on your person at all times, or even have one.

This thread seems to come with the assumption that if you have a national ID card then everyone *has* to have one and *has* to carry it all the time.

Why is that assumed?

Because in the US, for some groups of people, in some parts of the country, this is close to true with lesser forms of ID now, why should we expect things to be different because we adopt a more invasive and intrusive form of national public ID?

What benefits (and why do you consider these benefits) do you perceive to having one national form of ID?

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

And. I always have my card passport on me - in case I need to make a quick getaway!!!

Who doesn't?

No, it just sounds like a whole bunch of people being scared of technology. Besides, I don't see a reason why all your information should be stored in the same place just because you use a single card?

 

[icerat]

What benefits (and why do you consider these benefits) do you perceive to having one national form of ID?

simplicity. Back in Oz if I wanted to do things like open accounts I'd need multiple forms of ID, occasionally needing them signed by someone who would vouch it was me, or otherwise certified.

Here I just give them my ID card.

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

And to get such a card you would only have to show your Long Form Certificate of Live Birth.

 

[Trakar]

The first problem in establishing an indisputable proof of my identity is that I must first indisputably prove my identity to the people issuing the IDs. How do I do that? Birth certificate? Passport? Drivers license? How can a secure form of ID possibly be based on inherently insecure IDs?

Additionally, if people are in the authorization and production chain, there are issues of corruption that are assured. How would you defend yourself against the fraudulent usage of your ID if it was supposedly foolproof? Personally, I'm more about the privacy issues, but I find the fraud argument to be worthy of consideration.

 

[crimresearch]

You don't "simply" steal from a place like that. The place would have the same security level as the US Mint. I'm not saying there's such a thing as a 100% secure system but it can be made much safer than the current one.

The US Mint is secure?

Errrrmmm... You do know where the US Mint gets all the supplies they need to make money from, don't you? Same place that Iraq, Iran and North Korea do...
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33324.pdf


In the real world, if the value if worth the effort and risk, it's going to be stolen.

 

[Trakar]

Would you support it if you had control of access level on it? Not just an "everything on" or "no ID," but a way to authorize keeping parts private? I don't see this as a problem and you still get the benefits of showing it to verify your identity when you only wish that function.

I think your objection is so common that it would have to be a part of any program that has a chance of passing. Further, we could add a provision that private companies could no longer keep your information on file for sale. How's that?

I prefer to have multiple forms of acceptable ID, rather than a One-for-All national public database record.

 

[I Ratant]

You don't "simply" steal from a place like that. The place would have the same security level as the US Mint. I'm not saying there's such a thing as a 100% secure system but it can be made much safer than the current one.

.
Unless of course it's the Chinese government setting up the chip duplicating system.
There's so much faux stuff coming from there the gummint has to be involved.

 

[marplots]

How do we manage to avoid rampant fraud with physical cash?

If I understand the premise correctly, there is no system that cannot be beat. My question is then, since counterfeit money must be getting "beat," is that level of security enough or not enough?

And, I haven't seen the idea of bio-metric linking as an anti-fraud measure mentioned. I think bio-metrics, coupled with a central database that allowed easy inquiry (but not necessarily release of other information) would dramatically reduce the chance of fraud.

Remember, to be more attractive, it only has to lessen fraud significantly from the current level, not eliminate it entirely.

 

[KlLLUMINATI]

This writer -- for a proudly left-wing publication -- makes a strong case for a secure national ID card, and anybody who has a passport or a passport card already has one. I would see a national ID as a tool that would make it harder for anyone else to steal my identity or to defraud me by claiming to be someone else. But, as the writer observes, the concept is vigorously opposed by liberals, conservations conservatives and libertarians. So what's the downside to a national ID card?

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/national-id-card-voter-fraud-solution

next we will have barcodes

 

[Trakar]

Do you have an example of a faked card being used?

Your statement was "Credit cards with chips haver never been forged"

my provided link challenges that contention.

 

[Trakar]

simplicity. Back in Oz if I wanted to do things like open accounts I'd need multiple forms of ID, occasionally needing them signed by someone who would vouch it was me, or otherwise certified.

Here I just give them my ID card.

I prefer to know the people I deal with (personally) and the people I deal with to know me (personally), and am uninterested in making things simple or convenient when it comes to accounts or trustworthiness. I prefer privacy to security and am willing to sacrifce and surrender a great deal of security in exchange for privacy.

 

[Bob001]

..... I would rather be in 100 different largely distinct databases than have all of my individual information tied together "for the sake of convenience" in one common database.

But there would be no reason to have, and a lot of reasons NOT to have, a common database. A secure ID would simply confirm that you are who you say you are, and harder for someone else to claim that they are you. It wouldn't provide any additional information. You give up your Social Security number for all kinds of transactions, but your doctor's office, the DMV, your credit cards, the credit bureaus, your bank, your landlord, your employer, your insurance companies, your phone company etc. all maintain separate databases. They can't communicate with each other. There's no reason to think a secure ID would cause that to change, and privacy laws could be toughened if they needed to be.

For the folks who are chiming in from Sweden, Germany and other countries that use national IDs, how does it work there, how do you get your card, what do you use it for, and what kinds of problems have you or others experienced?

 

[crimresearch]

How do we manage to avoid rampant fraud with physical cash?

If I understand the premise correctly, there is no system that cannot be beat. My question is then, since counterfeit money must be getting "beat," is that level of security enough or not enough?

And, I haven't seen the idea of bio-metric linking as an anti-fraud measure mentioned. I think bio-metrics, coupled with a central database that allowed easy inquiry (but not necessarily release of other information) would dramatically reduce the chance of fraud.

Remember, to be more attractive, it only has to lessen fraud significantly from the current level, not eliminate it entirely.

Is the reason we have financial/identity fraud now, merely the dearth of biometric scanners and databases?

Or is it greed, politics and so forth?

Because there is no logical basis to suppose that more of the former will overcome the latter.

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Your statement was "Credit cards with chips haver never been forged"

my provided link challenges that contention.

No. They managed to get information from it. The didn't make a fake card.