MyFox
 

BDABRock's Blog

by BDABRock from Rockwall TX

Last Post 350 days, 19 hours Ago


We all know that bad people usually have multiple ID's, and driver's licenses.

Like, the hi-jackers.

We are commencing the final planning and will begin implementing the "Real ID" driver's license.

Some states object. Some are on-board.

The ACLU objects and says it will "irreparably damage the fabric of American life."

I ask you---what does that statement mean---especially in relation to the bad guys being the one who always used such identities for bad?

I am as Patriotic as they come. I grew up in the 40's and 50's and I think a 'secure' ID is a MUST.

Am I wrong? If you think I am, tell me how I am?

 

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/01/11/real.id.ap/index.h
tml

 

 

11 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 11
Page 1 of 1
Grimpeur read my blog
Jan 11, 2008 | 9:24 PM

The only real problems are 1) when having a "real ID" becomes a requirement for ordinary, day-to-day activities: traveling, commerce, checking out library books, etc., and 2) keeping the data base secure from non-government entities.

Regarding #1: unless the government offers them for free, they should not be required in order to vote (voter fraud is not nearly as huge a problem as vote-counting fraud; and see here before taking seriously your politicians' worries about voter fraud). Not everyone has a driver's-license-quality I.D. today, yet they can ride buses, trains, pay cash for things, etc. And why should they not?

Entering the country is one thing; going about your daily business as a private individual is quite another. What we don't want to do is give them (any government) the unhindered ability to track our every movement, at any time they choose, and we're perilously close to that already. You're supposed to need a court order for that sort of thing, else it's an invasion of privacy.

So before going to the expense of implementing it, we really need to ask if the putative benefit outweighs the risks, and how well we can prevent excessive government intrusion that it might enable.

I have a "real ID" myself: it's called a US passport, and it's a really good ID. But I rarely use it, and only need to show it to a government person when traveling internationally. I like it that way.

seaangelrainqueen read my blog view my photos
Jan 12, 2008 | 3:59 PM

Well, I personally feel as if NC had "already" met this condition for a REAL ID, when it began using the "holograms" on the citizens driver's license! If this can be duplicated, then I guess that it is just as suseptible as U.S. currency is, since they are constantly changing the "design" and including "threads" and images, yet people continue to manufacture "counterfeit" money!!! I do not see that NC sending the citizens driver's license to Raleigh, and then "mailing it back" to the person as a way to deter "terrorists" or anyone who commits identity theft from getting their hands on it, or making their own! The idea of having "one driver's license, all states" is ridiculous as each state has its own requirements! If that is to come to fruition, then someone had better start rewriting the U.S. Constitution, which gives each state the right to conduct its own laws and affairs!

eddievaliant read my blog view my photos
Jan 12, 2008 | 4:09 PM

I haven't made up my mind on this yet. On the "pro" side, maybe this is one of those issues whose time has come. I'm for aggressive enforcement of our laws.

However, at my very core I'm against it for the simple reason that I don't trust the government. The federal government has a long, glorious history of taking good single-use ideas and letting them get way out of hand (income tax, social security numbers etc.). A national ID card with an accompanying database is a very dangerous tool to give the feds. To those who naively believe '...if you done nothing wrong, you got nothing to worry about..." I suggest they imagine this database in the hands of (God forbid) President Hilary Clinton and whatever communist AG she might appoint. I digress...

Another con is that a national ID card won't be secure. All ID cards will always be compromised by people who want to get around them, whether by duplication or theft.

CrabbiePants read my blog
Jan 12, 2008 | 6:31 PM

Since I grew up in the 40's I can tell you that I wish we had to have no such ID's. We are losing our freedsoms of course, as we become 'more civilized'.
So, we don't seem to like anything they come up with.
What to do?
Leave it up to the criminals?

JQPublix read my blog view my photos
Jan 12, 2008 | 11:17 PM

The arguement is not of merit. The UN has failed.

UncommonValor
Jan 13, 2008 | 12:03 PM

Grimpeur is correct that 1) we should not need a "Real ID" (whatever that is) as most of us have some type of ID (driver license, passport, credit card, library card, plain identification card, etc). 2) keeping the database secure from non-government entities, is not possible. All things are sold and bought. Personnally, I have no problem with a national ID as long as it is given to me after an extensive background check (only about $5,000) to ensure that I am, in fact, a United States Citizen. Otherwise, it is just a way for raising money for some other government project.

As far as the government keeping up with your movements and needing a court order or otherwise it is invasion of your privacy, I can guarantee you that if the government (whoever that is) wants to keep tabs on you, they will and there is nothing you can do about it. For instance, some, if not all, cellular telephone companies provided to a specific government entity all the information on you that the particular entity desired. Every time you use your credit card, a trail is left that anyone (including me) can follow. Again, everything is for sale.

I am not particularly for a national ID; however, some real work needs to be done to the illegal alien problem I am for catching them and then sending a bill to the President of Mexico or other pertinent central/south American leader, and demanding reimbursement for all the expense of catching, prosecuting and incarcerating, and later repatriating the illegal alien. Remember, if an illegal alien from Mexico is arrested, the USA is required to not

UncommonValor
Jan 13, 2008 | 12:05 PM

the USA is required to notify the Mexican government so that they can monitor (ensure adequate legal representation) of the illegal alien during the procedures.

I better quit not.

eholder1 read my blog view my photos
Jan 15, 2008 | 9:53 AM

NC is already using the "Real ID". I have one. No real noticeable difference. The DL examiner did explain to me some of the differences because, of course, I am curious. The most noteable difference is the picture. It is standardized so that computer analysis can be done on your photo if necessary. If you'll look at a new ID, you will see the face of the person fills the entire frame. This is to allow plotting of the person's features. Somehow, this is supposed to be a tool for fighting against people who intend us harm.

Preachervern read my blog view my photos
Jan 15, 2008 | 6:07 PM

Everyone has already have an ID its called social security number, way not use that? IF you live in the USA you have one and if you are not from the USA guess what you don't have one unless is a fake one.

JQPublix read my blog view my photos
Jan 16, 2008 | 1:21 AM

Its a progression of government. Plain and simple.

ProudAmerican read my blog view my photos
Jan 17, 2008 | 8:26 PM

I can't believe I'm going to say this but I agree with Grimpeur.

Never thought that would happen. But then again I heard it snowed in Hell last week.

Page 1 of 1


Write your comment below:




BDABRock

I am still cogitating about this info. I rather doubt if anything I say will change a heart or a life, but one never knows.

Member Since: 3/22/2007