Wednesday, November 8, 2006

ID cards

It appears El Blair is pushing ahead with his ID card scheme/scam. I am fundamentally opposed to any such move. It will undermine the British peoples relationship with the state. Instead of being independent of the State we will be required to have an ID card with every single piece of information about us on it and stored in a national database that the government would likely sell information from to banks and other intrested parties. Having an ID card will not stop Terrorism in the slightest. Indeed the determined terrorist would find and exploit loopholes. As it was the london tube bombings were carried out by British citizens, so having an ID card would not have stopped that attack. Terrorists blend into the community and only get outed as Terrorists if they carry out an attack or if the police stop an attack and arrest them. "those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither". Benjamin Franklin Guardian comment is free NO2ID ID card's could fight illegal working arguement


Mr. Smarterthanyou said...

ID's that are part of a database is bad, ID's that are only issued to legitimate persons are good.

Unfortunately, the forces of the LEFT want the ID database, but then they don't want them required for voting, don't want them limited to citizens, don't want them to show citzenship status.

The way guns are sold in the US is good, background check at time of purchase, must be a citizen, but no registration lists.

Kevin said...

The American gun laws are lacking in a lot of areas. I don't see why anyone needs a high powered automatic weapon to go hunting or to protect the home.

And i shall leave you with this quote to ponder:
Political language — and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists — is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.
Politics and the English Language

Red Tulips said...

I do think ID cards are necessary for identification in an age of terror, but I worry what is on such an ID card, and I worry about who has access to that information. I read somewhere that medical data would be on the ID card. That is just downright scary. And yes, given you had homegrown terrorists commit 7/7 - hard to see the particular benefit.

Anonymous said...

I've come across this viewpoint before, but I am missing the point completly.

Why will ID cards mean that government will start selling your data to banks? Why can't they do it now if they want to? What's wrong with banks having your data? Don't you have a passport already + a driving license + National Insurance Number + ??? Aren't they all ID cards?

I am lost.

Red Tulips said...


You do have a point. My fear is of medical info being on the card, which I read about a while back.

Steven said...

I am 100% against ID cards, however I want to explain how they can help against terrorism. After an attack ID cards can be used to identify people quickly and track movements prior to the attacks. This will help build intelligence to stop more attacks.

I would carry a separate medical card, a passport is used to travel and a driving licence is used to drive. I would not want to be forced by law to carry universal ID card for the purpose of tracking individual citizens.

I am against ID cards because it is a danger to my freedom. ID cards will give me a unique ID... a number which can be used to connect various databases. I value my information and I do not have faith in the safeguards (or the government).

Mr. Smarterthanyou said...

We should have each state only give an ID to people who are verified as to who they are. They should be very hard to forge, and should be clearly marked for non-citizens. But no "list", no "smart card".

I like the gun law in Idaho. They make damn sure you are clean to own one, they make triple sure you are clean to carry one, but there are no registration lists on guns that could be used by a tyrannical gov't to confiscate them.

Kevin, there is a difference between automatic and semi-automatic. High powered is a matter of definition. The most popular hunting cartridges in the world are based on military cartridges, the .30-06 and the .308. .223 are also very popular for target shooting, and is the std military round too.

We do need powerful weapons in civilian hands for three main reasons that our founding fathers clearly enumerated:
1) Defence against a tyrannical gov't.
2) Defence against crime.
3) To have a populace that is "well regulated", which meant "skilled" at the time, in case of war. Face it, in war, we want people in the Army who already know one end of the gun from the other. We also want a populace that no potential invader would care to face.

Personally, I own para-military (legal, but generally suitable for combat) weapons, and have never used one by pulling the trigger. But one night, at about 11:30pm, a shotgun (scary police model) to keep a meth addict from entering my house. The next night, he and several Satan worshipping (no shit, they had all kinds of icons, books etc) meth addicts broke into the house next to me and occupied it. A neighbor and I, using evil, military type handguns, helped the lone cop surround the house until the Sheriffs Dept. could send several men over. This was in a very rural area.

Kevin said...

I do not like the ID cards simply because they will contain too much data in the national database the government want to create. Now if somebody hacked into that database and stole the information, then the advantages of having ID cards would go out the window. ID cards could tackle terrorism, however i think the scheme that Blair envisions goes too far.
I'm more inclined towards an ID card that only has limited information. Biometric data should be for passports only. As it is biometric technology is in it's infancy. It needs time to mature.

And MrSmarterthanyou, guns create an illusion of safety. That is all.
A few rednecks vs the US armed forces would'nt last 5 minutes. Given that they have access to much more sopshicated weaponary.
Times have changed since the founding fathers created the US constitution.

Anonymous said...


I am against ID cards because it is a danger to my freedom. ID cards will give me a unique ID... a number which can be used to connect various databases. I value my information and I do not have faith in the safeguards (or the government)

You already have lots of unique IDs and numbers which can connect to various databases. What about your name? What about your passport number? I don't trust governments either, but they can screw you just the same without a new ID card if they want to because as a law-obiding citizen you HAVE ID.

It's only the ones that don't have IDs for a reason and can't be required to produce one that will suffer. Makes no difference to anyone else.

There are already thousdands of databases. You don't need a new ID card to create one.

Kevin said...

shlemazl -
The British Government are proposing an ID card and a national database where all the information pertaining to each ID card issued is stored.
If the ID card has every single bit of information about you stored on it and then theres a national database with that same information on it, then there will be no need for other databases at least at government level. Though i guess the national DNA database will be kept seperate.

Mr. Smarterthanyou said...

A few suicidal buttwipes are lasting against the US military in Iraq, so a few rednecks with deer rifles and ar-15's can do pretty well too.

The statement that guns only give the illusion of security is a cute cliche, but facts do not bear it out. Cities with strict gun control have the highest crime, places like Idaho have more than one gun per per capita, and low crime.

I realize that many wusses cannot imagine having the courage nor the skill to use one in self defence, but for them to assume that everyone is in the same boat is pretty arrogant.

I imagine many people felt the same way about the US Revolution, or about the Viet Cong standing up to us, or the Afganis vs the USSR.