Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by Bud Lee, Oct 31, 2012.
You can thank the ragheads for that.
I don't think I'd go that far. It would give the "government" - really just people who can and do make mistakes - too much power. Warrants still need to play a prominent role when the government wants to monitor peoples' actions.
The FBI's efforts in articles like this one concern me: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-5...-signs-of-carrier-roadblocks-to-surveillance/
I undertand that in timely intelligence is critical. But if the FBI has its way, then Big Brother is one big step closer to becoming reality.
Agree, up to a point. We're of course responding to a threat that we didn't create. But how we respond to that threat is on us. If we overreact and take away too much privacy and too many liberties, then we're responsible for that part of the equation.
And now we've completely over reacted. Look at what the TSA gets away with. The monitoring of emails, key phrases or words in emails, etc, etc. We have lost all of our freedoms of privacy in the name of security.
Sure, but how exactly is a secure ID taking away any of our liberties? Fast-tracking us through airports and borders and helping prevent identity theft sound pretty good to me. What freedom have I lost? The freedom to wait in line? The freedom to have my credit ruined by a thief?
More uneducated fear-mongering. Going back to the Louisiana ID, the reason it's not meeting the requirements is because the state isn't keeping information it already collects long enough to qualify. They just need to extend how long the records are kept and the Louisiana ID is basically approved. No one is giving up biological or biometric data. No national database of where you have been or where you are right now is being created. It's less intrusive than a Social Security Card, which everyone is required to have to get anywhere in life in this country.
Next legal requirement will likely be some sort of implanted chip with your info. Or maybe just tatooing 666 across your forehead.
If everyone behaved as irrationally, we'd all be stuck in Europe right now too afraid of falling off of the edge of the world...
If you wear your tinfoil helmet, you have nothing to fear from this . . . or from the black helicopters.
Two part response:
(1) If the secure ID is used only for the current purposes (flights, receiving any federal assistance, entering federal buildings, etc.), then the only impact I could see is that groups like Anonymous would have to hack/disrupt only 1 database to compromise personal information on every US citizen with a driver's license. Which may be a small risk of a big problem. I don't have 20/20 foresight on this.
(2) What I'm more concerned about is the "death by 1,000 paper cuts" or "mission creep" angle. In an of itself, the sercure ID likely does much more good than harm. But if you put that together with what the FBI is trying to do with obtaining a back door to Facebook, and if you assume as I do that over time, the secure ID will be used for many more purposes than just federal gov matters, then we'll have even more personal information stored on multiple databases, all of which could be hacked. And the government (federal and state) and possibly private entities could have the ability to know quite a bit about each of us.
I know its a largely abstract concern at this point. But I don't like the way all this is trending.
Separate names with a comma.