Police state national ID card tucked in immigration bill

[badger2]

When it finally sinks in, the reader beholds in vivid intuition that one cannot legally buy a beer or rent a storage unit without a photo ID. Not all American-born citizens can obtain a photo ID.

 

[beagle9]

I honestly see nothing wrong with a national ID. They fact we don't have one already have one now, shows how behind the times America is. Every other country I've traveled and lived in has a national ID. Citizens are required to get one so everyone can be easily identified.

. Time for some here to quote some of the founders, and some of the prophets who saw this stuff coming for centuries now... So isn't that amazing ? How could people be so wise ?

 

[danielpalos]

Danielpalos in post #35 replies to badger 2 with an ID statement about immigrants, though badger's example shows the vicious circle an American-born citizen may confront when attempting to obtain a photo ID of any type.

two separate issues.

some on the right wing claim getting id is easy.

 

[badger2]

Well, John on Patmos came close to describing capitalism, though most of his visions are explainable due to interplays between siginifer and signified. The collective nature of the numbering number had already began to favor protection rackets during the Neolithic, when houses were placed in rows (striated space).

No, one issue: "right" may claim but cannot prove their claim. Our claim can be proven, and it has something (later) and nothing (now) to do with immigrants.

 

[MikeK]

Wouldn't need it if they aren't staying. Remember we are also going to enforce the border, so problem soon to be solved unless there is more to this stuff than meets the eye.

I am really curious about your opposition to the biometric ID card. You seem to believe it somehow represents an insidious threat to our freedom but I can't understand how that might work. The purpose of the card would be to immediately establish beyond any doubt that the holder is a citizen. Please tell us how you think such a card might be used to compromise our freedom.

 

[Montrovant]

Wouldn't need it if they aren't staying. Remember we are also going to enforce the border, so problem soon to be solved unless there is more to this stuff than meets the eye.

I am really curious about your opposition to the biometric ID card. You seem to believe it somehow represents an insidious threat to our freedom but I can't understand how that might work. The purpose of the card would be to immediately establish beyond any doubt that the holder is a citizen. Please tell us how you think such a card might be used to compromise our freedom.

You didn't direct that at me, but what about such a card requiring the government to collect and maintain information on the physical details of every US citizen? If I have done nothing wrong, why should the government be able to violate my privacy and collect and store the information required to make such an ID work?

 

[badger2]

It's more complicated than refusing to offer DNA. Epidemiology is one reason, though secondary to the main issue of identification. The State agent and Theologian would not have the prisoners forget 9-11 so that a chronic coercion can establish itself and more territory conquered by church-and-state-sponsored violence and fascism will ensue.

Thus, why should an immigrant be reified for identification in lieu of proper identification of American-born and American citizens? The machine in place for the latter two is faulty, as we can prove. Why allow media pimps to further the church-and-state copulative agenda? Begun at least as early as 1975 by the Catholics when founding the journal Islamochristiana, it is a Mike Pence bucket o'spit mistake to leave religion out of this politics.

This conundrum is defined by the interstice between privacy and safety, which includes another American freedom: freedom from religion.

 

[MikeK]

You didn't direct that at me, but what about such a card requiring the government to collect and maintain information on the physical details of every US citizen? If I have done nothing wrong, why should the government be able to violate my privacy and collect and store the information required to make such an ID work?

The government already has every bit of information on you (and me) it could possibly need to accommodate any insidious purpose you can imagine. And if it doesn't already have it, what do you suppose it doesn't have the ability to easily acquire?

Unless you are a high-level fugitive or an embedded foreign agent you have no valid negative concerns about the Citizen ID card.

 

[MindWars]

You didn't direct that at me, but what about such a card requiring the government to collect and maintain information on the physical details of every US citizen? If I have done nothing wrong, why should the government be able to violate my privacy and collect and store the information required to make such an ID work?

The government already has every bit of information on you (and me) it could possibly need to accommodate any insidious purpose you can imagine. And if it doesn't already have it, what do you suppose it doesn't have the ability to easily acquire?

Unless you are a high-level fugitive or an embedded foreign agent you have no valid negative concerns about the Citizen ID card.

If they only knew right?

 

[Montrovant]

You didn't direct that at me, but what about such a card requiring the government to collect and maintain information on the physical details of every US citizen? If I have done nothing wrong, why should the government be able to violate my privacy and collect and store the information required to make such an ID work?

The government already has every bit of information on you (and me) it could possibly need to accommodate any insidious purpose you can imagine. And if it doesn't already have it, what do you suppose it doesn't have the ability to easily acquire?

Unless you are a high-level fugitive or an embedded foreign agent you have no valid negative concerns about the Citizen ID card.

Depending on the data that would be used, that is not necessarily true. Even if it is true, that should mean that we work to have such records purged and prevent the government from continuing to do so in the future, not roll over and show our bellies because it's already being done.

Your reasoning here seems to be, "The government is already ignoring the fourth amendment, so let's just go along with that."

 

[MikeK]

Depending on the data that would be used, that is not necessarily true. Even if it is true, that should mean that we work to have such records purged and prevent the government from continuing to do so in the future, not roll over and show our bellies because it's already being done.

Your reasoning here seems to be, "The government is already ignoring the fourth amendment, so let's just go along with that."

Please tell us specifically what personal information you would choose to deny government access to? And why.

The Fourth Amendment protects you against unreasonable search and seizure of your papers and effects, and rightfully so. But considering the purpose of the proposed Citizen ID Card, specifically what personal information do you believe would be unreasonable for this card to contain?

 

[MindWars]

You didn't direct that at me, but what about such a card requiring the government to collect and maintain information on the physical details of every US citizen? If I have done nothing wrong, why should the government be able to violate my privacy and collect and store the information required to make such an ID work?

The government already has every bit of information on you (and me) it could possibly need to accommodate any insidious purpose you can imagine. And if it doesn't already have it, what do you suppose it doesn't have the ability to easily acquire?

Unless you are a high-level fugitive or an embedded foreign agent you have no valid negative concerns about the Citizen ID card.

Depending on the data that would be used, that is not necessarily true. Even if it is true, that should mean that we work to have such records purged and prevent the government from continuing to do so in the future, not roll over and show our bellies because it's already being done.

Your reasoning here seems to be, "The government is already ignoring the fourth amendment, so let's just go along with that."

An offshoot of facial recognition is the broader category of biometrics, the use of physical and biological traits unique to a person for identification. These can be anything from ordinary fingerprinting to cutting-edge DNA records and iris scans. (Biometrics is already big business and even has its own trade association in Washington.) One of the world’s largest known collections of biometric data is held by the Department of State. As of December 2009, its Consular Consolidated Database (CCD) contained more than 75 million photographs of Americans and foreigners and is growing at a rate of approximately 35,000 records per day. CCD also collects and stores indefinitely the fingerprints of all foreigners issued visas.


Prior to the cell phone decision, law enforcement held that if someone was arrested for, say, a traffic violation, the police had the right to examine the full contents of his or her cell phone—call lists, photos, social media, contacts, whatever was on the device. Police traditionally have been able to search physical objects they find on an arrestee without a warrant on the grounds that such searches are for the protection of the officers.



4 ways the Fourth Amendment won't protect you anymore.

 

[Montrovant]

Depending on the data that would be used, that is not necessarily true. Even if it is true, that should mean that we work to have such records purged and prevent the government from continuing to do so in the future, not roll over and show our bellies because it's already being done.

Your reasoning here seems to be, "The government is already ignoring the fourth amendment, so let's just go along with that."

Please tell us specifically what personal information you would choose to deny government access to? And why.

The Fourth Amendment protects you against unreasonable search and seizure of your papers and effects, and rightfully so. But considering the purpose of the proposed Citizen ID Card, specifically what personal information do you believe would be unreasonable for this card to contain?

Fingerprints, retinal scans, DNA information.....none of this is anything the government should be able to demand from citizens who have not done anything wrong. The purpose of the ID should not override Constitutional protections.

 

[whitehall]

You almost gotta laugh. The U.S. is educating and furnishing health care to ten million freaking undocumented illegal aliens that nobody can account for and the crazy left is hysterical about about a freaking impossible conspiracy theory they picked off their crazy left wing sites. No surprises here.

 

[MindWars]

You almost gotta laugh. The U.S. is educating and furnishing health care to ten million freaking undocumented illegal aliens that nobody can account for and the crazy left is hysterical about about a freaking impossible conspiracy theory they picked off their crazy left wing sites. No surprises here.

WHy do you think those born in the US are the fked over ones. They don't matter they get it all for free and we don't.

No different than the man in Italy who was kicked out of his home for the immigrants. lol

 

[badger2]

The contradiction is that those American and American-born citizens who cannot obtain a photo ID under current protocol could do so if they were an immigrant.

 

[badger2]

We asked the police about fingerprints, and they said "States differ." The state one is in and the state one was born in, may differ. The contradiction is that fingerprints don't differ. Because this new thing is not yet and for immigrants, it still proves that the priorities are skewed towards the immigrants and the ID mechanism is faulty.

 

[badger2]

The American and American-born citizen who does not have a photo ID cannot do what immigrants can do: 1.) fly within their own country 2.) fly to another country.

What To Do If You Lose Your Photo ID
What to Do if You Lose Your Photo ID

 

[danielpalos]

‘Police State’ National ID Card Tucked In Immigration Bill

Inserted in a sweeping House bill introduced earlier this month called Securing America’s Future Act of 2018 is the establishment of a new biometric National ID card for all Americans that has privacy activists sounding alarms. Introduced by Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., H.R. 4760 encompasses issues such as education, Homeland Security and the military. Buried in the 400-page legislation is the new mandatory national identification system in which citizens would be required to carry a government-approved ID containing “biometric features.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------

XXXX -- Mod Edit -- ONE TOPIC per OP.. Already too much thread noise about your 2nd topic.

All foreign nationals in the US should have federal id.

 

[MikeK]

Fingerprints, retinal scans, DNA information.....none of this is anything the government should be able to demand from citizens who have not done anything wrong. The purpose of the ID should not override Constitutional protections.

This argument ultimately rests on the merits of purpose, which in this example is perfectly reasonable. I'm quite sure the majority of ordinary Americans will agree that the proposed Citizen ID Card has a broadly beneficial purpose, i.e., control of illegal immigration.