Real ID

[MxAxC-_ATTACK]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kuuipo Maybe its being done in conjunction with all the cameras that are mounted on the street-not only to send people who speed or go through red lights tickets, but to catch criminals, jaywalkers,etc......In Hawaii, we have cameras everywhere,little tiny ones the size of a pencil sharpener. Who is watching us all the time? I was in the bus and noticed a security camera there too.

Those cameras are not owned by the United states government.
They are privately owned. The government only gets a small portion of the money those cameras bring in.

 

[Beauty Mark]

Terrorism will happen if terrorists wants it to. It hasn't really been that long since we had domestic terrorists, you know? US citizens, born and raised for who knows how many generations.

I'm so sick of terrorism being the reason behind everything.

 

[MxAxC-_ATTACK]

I'm still confused? How is privacy being taken away with a change of our I.D cards? all our info is already on them .. I figured they were just changing the way they looked.

 

[MxAxC-_ATTACK]

I Found more info on this at
REAL I.D

 

[Shimmer]

EPIC - National ID and REAL ID Act

Burton Group Identity Blog: Reporting on a REAL ID report

 

[CaraAmericana]

Call me a retard. But I am still not understanding what it is and means EXACTLY! lol someone break it down please. Is it another ID card to carry around, an addition to the D.L., just need to provide more documentation?

I visited the links but I am still not getting a grasp on this.

<-----slowness

 

[NubianHoneii]

For all of this they just need to put a damn scan chip in your ass when you are born.

Seriously, im all for homeland security but damn. I see all the complications now.

 

[*KT*]

I just understood it to be regulations on how "good" a state-issued license is as far as harder to duplicate, etc. Which left me scratching my head and wondering "This helps with terrorism how?" Like you need proper ID to be or not be a terrorist.

I can certainly think of a lot of better ways my state (MI) could use that money.

 

[purrtykitty]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaraAmericana Call me a retard. But I am still not understanding what it is and means EXACTLY! lol someone break it down please. Is it another ID card to carry around, an addition to the D.L., just need to provide more documentation? I visited the links but I am still not getting a grasp on this. <-----slowness

I *think* it's the same as your D.L., but the government is requiring that all state's D.L.'s meet certain federal specifications, otherwise they won't be accepted as a form of I.D. Like when you want to board an airplane, if your state's I.D. doesn't meet the specifications, then you will have to present a passport to board because the state I.D. wouldn't be sufficient.

I think the I.D.'s will be required to have certain safety features imbedded, in addition to the ability to being able to hold a certain amount of personal data...which is what worries most people.

Now, this could be a verrrry simplistic explanation, or I could be totally wrong. There was a news piece about it last night, and that's the way I understood it.

 

[Dizzy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaraAmericana Call me a retard. But I am still not understanding what it is and means EXACTLY! lol someone break it down please. Is it another ID card to carry around, an addition to the D.L., just need to provide more documentation? I visited the links but I am still not getting a grasp on this. <-----slowness

Basically, it's akin to a federally sanctioned Driver's Liscense/Identification Card/Internal Passport.

States are now required to put certain information on their driver's licenses and store that information in a database that connects to other state's databases. That information includes things like Social Security Number, proof of legal status, proof of full legal name and other things that are usually on driver's licenses. Original legislation (that was not passed into law) included the states' consent to let this information be shared not only with other states, but with both Canada and Mexico (part of the original uproar of the legislation).

Now the problem with the "Real ID Act" is dual: it has to do with privacy issues and states' rights issues. First- Americans enjoy a sort of dual status with their citizenship; not only are we Americans but we are also New Yorkers, Texans, Floridians, Washingtonians, etc. Why should I, as a New Yorker, have to have private information shared with a state like Ohio- a place that I've never been to and has no reason to know about me? The Constitution grants the right of the people to be left alone, and it's the foundation for our central government; so the question here is how are we being left alone if our government is taking our information and sharing it with other states?

And it's a state's rights issue because licenses are issued on the state level, not the national level. This potentially takes the Department of Motor Vehicles of (State) and turns it into a part of the Department of Homeland Security- a federal institution. This is effectively restricting the right of the states to protect their citizens, as well as stripping them of the DMV. Effectively, it completely erodes the separation of powers as defined within the Constitution and the Articles.

Then you've got the freedom issue. Internal passports were used in countries behind the Iron Curtain where government was huge and restrictive. America prides itself on her freedoms, which are the institutions by which we function. If we begin to change those, there are no more safeguards in place to keep our Constitutional Republic and we can very well end up gradually accepting more and more forms of rights being taken away until we end up in the same situation as those who lived behind the Iron Curtain. If that happens, we fought the Cold War for nothing.

America functions on its institutions- it's hard to add/change Amendments for a reason, we have a bureaucratic system to slow law-making down to provide for safeguards against corrupt policies, we have the separation of powers for a reason, etc. If we begin to let the government erase those institutions, we lose what America is because we're defined by those institutions. By erasing our right to privacy (defined in Amendments 3, 4, 5 and 9, according to Supreme Court cases), they are amending the Constitution without actually creating an Amendment. By blurring the line between states and federal rights, they are removing our foundation of government.

In a nutshell, that's the issues with it that most media outlets don't just come out and tell you. After all, we can't let the Constitution get in the way of fighting terrorism.

hth!

 

[Dizzy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SparklingWaves I feel the freedoms with which we hold dear will be taken away by implanting mental smoke screens of fear & a sense of powerlessness of many sources (ex. terrorism, uncontrolled criminal activity, etc). It really has already been at work, since 9/11.

It started way before 9/11. The PATRIOT Act was originally written in 1992, look at all of the attacks on the Second Amendment by left-leaning states (NY has particularly restricting ones), the quarantine of Japanese descended people during WWII, the fact that the UN has proposed numerous suggestions to tax American citizens although it doesn't have the right to (legislation has passed through Congress, but has not yet received enough support) and many other attacks.

It's been moving faster since the late 80s, but there have always been attacks on our civil liberties. It's just becoming more mainstream for the media to report it now, but even so most people don't take the time to think of the implications (or maybe they don't have the time?) and thus they stay quiet and let our Congresscritters influence us down a dangerous path "for the benefit of everyone".

Same old games, just a bit sneakier and in a "but it's good for you!" fashion.

 

[Marielle001]

I think it's a very interesting issue going back to state's rights. On the one hand, it seems practical to have the state databases coordinate, and on the other, it seems a little Big Brother to have all of these ID requirements and basically boils down to the federal government coercing states to participate by withdrawing funding. I think the program is just going to keep being delayed and delayed. I don't think it will be implemented as is. I DO think that it would serve to help prevent issuing driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, but would not serve to prevent terrorism.

I wonder what the authors of the Federalist papers would have to say about this.

 

[SparklingWaves]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dizzy It started way before 9/11. The PATRIOT Act was originally written in 1992, look at all of the attacks on the Second Amendment by left-leaning states (NY has particularly restricting ones), the quarantine of Japanese descended people during WWII, the fact that the UN has proposed numerous suggestions to tax American citizens although it doesn't have the right to (legislation has passed through Congress, but has not yet received enough support) and many other attacks. It's been moving faster since the late 80s, but there have always been attacks on our civil liberties. It's just becoming more mainstream for the media to report it now, but even so most people don't take the time to think of the implications (or maybe they don't have the time?) and thus they stay quiet and let our Congresscritters influence us down a dangerous path "for the benefit of everyone". Same old games, just a bit sneakier and in a "but it's good for you!" fashion.

The plans have been underway for a long time. I totally agree with you. This has all been mapped out carefully to get the mass population to accept this via strategic P.R. campaigns, i.e. 9/11 & others.

For example, the microchip studies in the 1960s were about mind control. (The origination of it came prior). Demonstrations were successful in working on a certain part of the brain in animals to create a rage response or non-reaction from remote distances.

Of course, the microchip is being as endorsed as for your benefit - carry your health information, blood type, stop identity theft, store all of your personal financial information, store DNA info, be able to turn lights off without using your hands, cashless society, being able to use your computers without touching them, know where your children are at all times, great tool for Alzheimer's patients, etc.

Many countries are embracing the concepts of the microchip due to terrorism. Uh, yes, it started with 9/11. Sure it did. That's what "they" are saying...

 

[Dizzy]

That chip, to me, is dangerous as hell. It's such a violation of everything America stands for- but I think that's going to be the point where people will either have to fight back (and thus turn off the damn TV) or roll over and accept our new huge government that we were warned about by the Founders.

What really scares me about all of this is how you never hear about it. You don't really hear people out in uproar and arguing against it, you don't hear the Presidential candidates saying anything about it (the only one whose writings I've read extensively though is Ron Paul's, so I don't know if anyone else has written anything about it), and we don't even get much debate about it in Congress anymore- legislation seems to be passed because of 'political favors' rather than 'whats best for the constituency'.

Now, I'm not one for conspiracy theories or the like. I like facts and stability, not rumors, but this makes me wonder. North Carolina has already instituted a program to update their drivers licenses, and there are the new "Real ID" licenses out there already. I could be mistaken, but I think NC is the first in the country to implement it.

That's the hologram on the back of it. It's not anything about the state other than the initials, but instead it's a silhouette of Canada, the US and Mexico. If I look at my current drivers license, it has my state flag's symbol on it with "Excelsior" written on it. It has an out line of NYS on the back and representations of Niagara Falls, the Catskills, the Hudson Valley and NYC on the top- all to reflect the state. Granted, I've not seen a NC license before, but they all reflect something of the state, so I'm going to assume it would be similar.

What gets me about that is that it's scarily similar to the logo of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). Why would the hologram include Canada and Mexico on it? And why would they leave that in after the uproar over sharing private citizen's information with these two countries? Why not something that has always traditionally stood for America- the Eagle with the olive branch? The Liberty Bell? The outline of the Constitution? The Washington Monument? A silhouette of the contiguous 48?

Like I said before, I don't like conspiracy theories, but the more I learn about the REAL ID Act the more it seems to become parallel with the rumors about the NAU. If you add this in with all of the pushes for universal health care, amnesty for illegal immigrants, raising taxes, the current push for use of eminent domain, legislation to let the UN tax Americans, etc., I'd say (as much as I hate to) those tin-foil hat people might just be onto something.

This has some seriously scary implications, and the worst part is nobody's saying two words about it. And, of course, it's all in the name of saving us from those darn terrorists- you know, the ones that Clinton was warned about but never did anything about.

 

[Shimmer]

I swear my backwoods property in rural nowhere looks better and better all the time.

 

[MAC_Whore]

Quote:

Originally Posted by purrtykitty I.....I think the I.D.'s will be required to have certain safety features imbedded, in addition to the ability to being able to hold a certain amount of personal data...which is what worries most people.....

The problem with is that technology generally cycles like this: Gov't and business spend millions of dollars to create the "safety" that will protect these cards. Then the criminal element cracks the code and is able to glean your info for their nefarious use. Then the whole thing cycles over again. The victim in this story = joe public whose info is taken and robbed blind.

Sorry, but I can't help reading about REAL IDs without hearing (in my best Stasi impression), "Paaaypers please." This just feels like the gov't sticking a Low-Jack up my ass.

I just don't think this is where we need the improvements for increased security. For the love of God, dump it into border control where lax control could allow a serious threat to enter the country via Mexico or Canada. Please note that I am not speaking poorly of Mexicans or Canadians, just pointing out that those countries are areas of entry to the US which a terrorist could exploit.

This, I do not like (from Homeland Security site):

"...Though States may independently choose to implement biometrics into their driver’s license process, the NPRM does not require a State to collect fingerprints, iris images, or other biometric data in connection with obtaining a license and has no plans to serve as a repository for the face images the states will collect. "

Fuck that. Don't make it a state to state free for all. That is even more dangerous. I know that the state which I will be living in at the time this would come to fruition, considering their past positions/voting records, would never be more stringent than the fed requirements on this issue, so I am at least thankful for that.

I generally can't stand the "conspiracy theory" folks either. I usually take in their chatter with a grain of salt and no interest whatsoever. Allthough, in this post, I kind of sound like one, eh?

I am all for the gov't being able to have all the power it needs to reign in terror threats, but with that power being in the hands of the folks on the ground facing the threats.

I don't know...as I learn more, I may change my position on this, but at current, I am not too thrilled.

 

[athena123]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marielle001 I think it's a very interesting issue going back to state's rights. On the one hand, it seems practical to have the state databases coordinate, and on the other, it seems a little Big Brother to have all of these ID requirements and basically boils down to the federal government coercing states to participate by withdrawing funding. I think the program is just going to keep being delayed and delayed. I don't think it will be implemented as is. I DO think that it would serve to help prevent issuing driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, but would not serve to prevent terrorism. I wonder what the authors of the Federalist papers would have to say about this.

The founding fathers would be rolling in their graves at the concept of federal ID papers; they would also completely AGAINST the slow erosion of our civil rights in the name of safety and protectionism. Take another look at the bill of rights and see how carefully they crafted them to protect the people from an overly intrusive government. A real ID won't protect us from terrorists; instead, it'll create yet another layer of government intrusion. Law abiding citizens will pay the price. Terrorists, illegal immigrants, thieves who have no respect for the law will find ways to get around this.

mac_whore made a good point that the real id won't prevent illegal immigrants from crossing the border any more than it'll prevent terrorists from crossing over. If you're concerned about illegal immigration and terrorists, the only way to stop it is to increase our border patrol by land and sea.

 

[Marielle001]

Haha, I think the founding fathers have been rolling in their graves way sooner than this...

Quote:

legislation to let the UN tax Americans

That would make me so angry I think my head would explode...

 

[Dizzy]

If this government isn't reined in, I don't see UN taxes being too far off, tbh.

They seem to have forgotten who they work for.

 

[Kuuipo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MxAxC-_ATTACK Those cameras are not owned by the United states government. They are privately owned. The government only gets a small portion of the money those cameras bring in.

Ours are state government owned. So is it like "little brother is watching you?"