Why not a national ID card?

[Biscuit]

Why does it have to be perfect or instantaneous? Is that your standard for all things, or just national ID cards?

My point being that even on a state level that system is time consuming and often contains errors, so multiply that by a Nation wide system that everyone from employers to the DMV must access and you have a disaster on your hands.
Just the traffic stops nationwide would crash the system.

Not to mention that a passport is good for ten years but a card like this used for everything would require the same kind of updates to its security features that a drivers license does. Do you re-issue the updates nationwide? The cost of this is insane and I still don't know what problem it solves. If you don't make everyone get a new one you will have multiple cards all valid at once in less than a decade. It's a terrible idea.

The fact is a fake card will not fool anyone in the government who has a need to see it.

That's funny. And a fake credit card will never work and there is no such thing as fraud and Santa is watching so be good for goodness sake.

 

[Trakar]

I agree. You haven't gone down the paranoia road, and it makes your arguments stronger. However, I am now wondering why it has to be "an individual's entire information and identity profile" if it's just an ID card?

So you would agree to make it a crime to use or tie the national identification system to any other information? In other words, presumably there would be a unique file or acct. # which ties your specific ID information to you, would you advocate that if banks, credit card companies, utilities, local library, nightclub, local, state or federal law enforcement, the military or any other individual, company or agency used that acct. # in any way, shape or form that they would be guilty of serious crimes and liable for high level punative damages ($50K to $1M depending upon whether it was an incidental single instance or widespread intentional endeavor) to the individuals whose privacy was violated?

Unless you believe a loss of privacy is a harm, in and of itself.

Not so much the "loss," but the forcible removal, yes. Individuals can choose to sacrifice or surrender whatever they wish, but the choice should be theirs.

I support transparency for those who hold my data and would like the right to dispute what they hold or prevent some types of information from being stored at all.

Good-luck, once you give up a right, you rarely have the option to recover or regain it, or any control over it; the erosion of rights is almost never a reversible process. That is the problem now, a bank's information about you is not "your" information, it is the bank's proprietary information about you.

 

[Mark6]

None of these are arguments I have used, nor are they serious concerns of mine. I am largely unconcerned about government tracking,

True, and I apologize if you thought I was referring to you personally. My post was a response to Beerina's snarky "1984" reference -- which IMO is Godwin-equivalent in any debate about electronic identifications.

Good-luck, once you give up a right, you rarely have the option to recover or regain it, or any control over it; the erosion of rights is almost never a reversible process.

Yes, which is why suspects in police custody get rubber-hose treatment so much more today than in 1920.

 

[Biscuit]

The only reason for a national ID card is to give police the authority to ask for it.

 

[NewtonTrino]

Not a fan of id cards in general. It's basically impossible to make them secure so if that's the argument for having them it's silly. For anyone needing a national ID we already have passports.

Personally I don't care that much though because the US government already knows more about me than my own mother.

 

[Mark6]

Then maybe the proper solution is better passports.

Really, the way they are made now is several decades behind state of the art.

 

[Bob001]

Then maybe the proper solution is better passports.

Really, the way they are made now is several decades behind state of the art.

Just curious, what don't they have? I think the passports that have been issued in recent years look pretty sophisticated, have RFID chips in the covers, and are linked to a secure federal database. I think many Americans would openly revolt against using fingerprints and retinal scans, and if they were used you wouldn't need the document at all; the print or the scan would be linked directly to the database. What would you change?
http://www.ehow.com/list_7550344_security-features-american-passport.html

 

[Trakar]

Yes, which is why suspects in police custody get rubber-hose treatment so much more today than in 1920.

speaking of "snark"

Demonstrate the law which authorized police to use rubber hoses on suspects in 1920. Now they have legal abilities to use tasers, stress positions and depending on your definition of "police" water-boarding, indefinite detention without charges etc.,.

We aren't talking about abuses that officials or individuals get(got) away with, we are talking about instituting laws and practices that legally seize or abbrogate indivduals' rights and freedoms.

 

[marplots]

We aren't talking about abuses that officials or individuals get(got) away with, we are talking about instituting laws and practices that legally seize or abbrogate indivduals' rights and freedoms.

But isn't this the very mechanism that is preventing a national ID in the first place? I don't see how our impulses to privacy would disappear if we did have one, nor our ability to influence what it's used for.

 

[Trakar]

But isn't this the very mechanism that is preventing a national ID in the first place? I don't see how our impulses to privacy would disappear if we did have one, nor our ability to influence what it's used for.

That is why the legislation establishing such would have to be carefully crafted to criminalize with substantive penalty any one who attempts to use it as anything other than that the card I have says I am the same person I say I am, without tying that to any database acct. identifier that might be usable to cross reference any individual. IOW, its like having a personal voucher for one's basic ID (photo, name, whether you are an adult or a minor and your public PIN not much else) I probably wouldn't object to that, because that would still instill the need for (multiple) alternative IDs for any of the purposes that would cause me concern and eliminate the ability to create an all inclusive, unified database around the system. At least not legally or or without risk of substantive punative penalty. I'd probably still oppose it for the simple reason that I've yet to see a good legislative intention that proved incorruptable in the face of modern special interest lobbiests and corrupt career politicians willing to be pandered to by them.

 

[Mark6]

That is why the legislation establishing such would have to be carefully crafted to criminalize with substantive penalty any one who attempts to use it as anything other than that the card I have says I am the same person I say I am, without tying that to any database acct. identifier that might be usable to cross reference any individual. IOW, its like having a personal voucher for one's basic ID (photo, name, whether you are an adult or a minor and your public PIN not much else) I probably wouldn't object to that, because that would still instill the need for (multiple) alternative IDs for any of the purposes that would cause me concern and eliminate the ability to create an all inclusive, unified database around the system.

Not sure about Bob001, but that's exactly the kind of national ID I am in favor of. Of course, passport is already that, just outdated and all-too-easily counterfeit.

 

[Trakar]

Not sure about Bob001, but that's exactly the kind of national ID I am in favor of. Of course, passport is already that, just outdated and all-too-easily counterfeit.

It wouldn't be useful for most of the purposes I hear many here (and elsewhere) discuss as the reasons they want national ID cards. no birthdate, no uniquely identifying information at all, no criminal record, no citizenship status, and no one would ever be required to have one, nor present one if they did have one. I still don't see what use this ID would be, but I'd be interested in how you see it as useful.

 

[Biscuit]

It wouldn't be useful for most of the purposes I hear many here (and elsewhere) discuss as the reasons they want national ID cards. no birthdate, no uniquely identifying information at all, no criminal record, no citizenship status, and no one would ever be required to have one, nor present one if they did have one. I still don't see what use this ID would be, but I'd be interested in how you see it as useful.

Yup!

Its too great a risk to have an "everything" type card and anything less doesn't seem to have a purpose.