The journey from there to here

As I have watched the debate unfold on JoeUser over the "RealID" the government is pushing through the backdoor, I am fearful in my concern that the opinions on JoeUser may reflect the opinions of the nation at large. The recent poll in which high school seniors viewed the first amendment as going too far would indicate to me that it is.

And that is sad.

Am I the only one who finds irony in the fact that the Republican party, which has long supported the NRA's position against registering firearms, is now the champion for registering PEOPLE? Am I the only one who fears the potential misuse of a smalltown cop who, through the convenience of a national ID, can now gain information to harass innocent civilians without the benefit of a warrant? Sure, a warrant will supposedly be needed, but warrants USED to be needed for wiretaps, too

What disturbs me is that I see a number of conservatives I greatly respect championing this proposal. Sure, our resident fascist who champions the ban of everything he deems objectionable supports the national ID, but these are hardcore REPUBLICANS following this trail. And what they have so far been unable to explain is how this will make our country in any way more secure. All someone has to do is ask for FOUR forged documents instead of just a couple.

I have yet to decide if I will comply with the law. Frankly, I don't even HAVE four forms of ID (my driver's license obviously doesn't count), let alone a second form of picture ID. Yes, a passport could be used, but this would obviously make it extremely difficult for convicted felons to get an ID; guess they can forget about cashing a paycheck, huh?

If I wanted to break down the number of ways that this national ID card could infringe on the constitutional rights of Americans, I could. A lot of them could be considered to be paranoid ravings, but I'm pretty sure that if you described a future such as the Third Reich in Germany in the early 1900's, those fears would be similarly dismissed.

How have we gone so far in 216 years that we have considered the Constitution to be a failed document? How have we become so eager to surrender our rights to the first government official to demand them? These are questions we need to seriously ask ourselves.

The question I'm asking myself, however, is whether I intend to live my life as a criminal due to noncompliance. I have to discuss this thoroughly with my family first.


Comments (Page 1)
on May 11, 2005
Your not the only one that is concerned about this (and other) trends in our nation. But I was not aware that the constitution was considered a failed document. As for being a criminal, well as my economics teacher said, by making us pay taxes the government makes us all criminals. So a criminal I shall be
on May 11, 2005
I have no intention of complying, if that makes me a criminal then ok.
on May 11, 2005
If I wanted to break down the number of ways that this national ID card could infringe on the constitutional rights of Americans, I could.


I'd like to see it.
on May 11, 2005
I'm troubled by this law passing Gid.

When this law is implemented, i will still continue to use my passport as ID. It already has the security features that the new ID has.
on May 11, 2005
I guess I'm the resident fascist. Regardless I still have a couple of problems with the overall theme...

A) From what I understand, there won't be any complying for you to do. The states themselves will just alter the drivers license formats to accomodate the national standard. Drive without a license if you like.

No one, and I have challenged people to, have offered the first example of how this robs us of Liberty or can be abused to turn the US into a "Big Brother" state. I've asked 3 or 4 times on the other blog.

Granted, folks like R.H. just assume we are going to be in internment camps in the next few years, but strangely enough I'm not satisfied just assimilating to such paranoia without SOMEONE being able to explain to me why a national driver's license standared is such a big deal...

People said these same things when they started issuing Social Security numbers. Some people even thought it was the "sign of the beast" if you can believe it. Paranoia without content isn't useful. You are too articulate and too thoughtful, Gid, to discard an idea like this without being able to at least show what the horrible danger is.
on May 11, 2005
I would challenge you Gid to do a thoughtful, point by point article on what you think the tangible damage of a standardized driver's license would be.

I want to know what "rights" we are surrendering, and I want to know how this is unconstitutional. I told you on the other blog, I neither support or loathe this. It looks like more admistrative junk to me, neither overly beneficial or threatening.
on May 11, 2005

Granted, folks like R.H. just assume we are going to be in internment camps in the next few years, but strangely enough I'm not satisfied just assimilating to such paranoia without SOMEONE being able to explain to me why a national driver's license standared is such a big deal...

Baker,

So if someone can't offer a concrete example of why a system can be abused, you think we should rubber stamp it? I'm very concerned at that mindset.

First and foremost, a national ID card is NOT a federally granted power by the Constitution. I challenge you to show me where it is.

Second, a national ID card will NOT be a deterrent to terrorists; the ostensible reason for its implementation. Again, I challenge you to show me how it will be.

Third, a national ID card will almost certainly have the end result of establishing a federal database where private information can be gained on an individual without a warrant. Illegal search and seizure via electronic means is STILL illegal search and seizure

We will NEVER have "complete" safety and security. Every death will be used as justification for tighter and tighter security on the flawed premise that somehow we can have 100% security for all Americans. Ironically, the only "100% security" we have as citizens is when the only enemy we have is the government. And the government can be a fearsome enemy.

You challenged me months ago on my assertion that we lost the Cold War, yet here you are acquiescing to government policies that well could have been made by the Kremlin, circa 1980. The thing is, while RH's internment camp scenario may be "out there", it's definitely within the realm of possibility, and legislation such as this makes it even more so.

More realistic, however, are possibilities of children whose parents have had involvement with child protective services having future children removed from them at birth after the hospital runs their national ID through the database. Or of the national ID being used to "track" purchases and movements illegally of government "subversives" who oppose government action but are no means violent individuals. The National Guard won't have to shoot college students at Kent State anymore; the police will be able to arrest them in their dorm after they buy a copy of "The Anarchist Cookbook" or "The Turner Diaries" at an online bookstore.

Again, I expect both you and Island to write these off as "paranoid fantasies", but again, I am not talking about what WILL happen, but about what CAN POTENTIALLY HAPPEN when a national ID is implemented. And Island, if you expect me to come up with every single scenario, you expect far too much intelligence out of me, sorry. I'm just not smart enough to think of EVERY possibility.

I still have to ask why gun registration is considered wrong by Republicans, yet people registration isn't.

on May 11, 2005
Don't be so dramatic about this issue. You know in the end you're going to get this photo ID done and there's no two ways about it. Talking about living life as a criminal and such is just drama since we all know the final outcome. You will eventually submit, and you will do it by some form of rationalization. What form it will be is anyone's guess. I think it will be the form about 90% of Americans will take. "It's just an ID card no different than a driver's licence"...."what's the big deal just do it"...."fine but this is the last time I'm going to buckle like soft wimpy butter"....One thing I teach my kids about is that the America of today is very different from the America I grew up believing in. The old days are just that, old. Gone. History. Finished. Spent. Just plain gone. It's not easy to teach my children about the reality behind current events and their implications. It's not easy having kids who already know Bush is nothing but a liar whose lies have killed so many humans. So f**king many. It's not right. Gid this is only the beginning so I advise you to either get serious about fighting this or just give up and comply and rid yourself of those dramatic illusions you still carry with you. Americans are going to be interred in America itself one day soon. My guess is at least 6 to 8 years from now. And the groundwork is already being set for this coming reality. Americans in general not all of course boast of how rough and tough they are, flexing their muscles all over the place. But the people not all of course are also submissive metal pussies who scare at the sound of a mouse farting. I just can't understand it. A state of fear is what the planners want you all to experience. Don't let them do that to you and realize what your nation is becoming. Show the world you're serious about democracy and freedom in your own country before whining about spreading freedom to an ungrateful world. The rest of the world Europe especially know about the liberties being lost in the US so the US looks pretty two-faced and contradictory.
on May 11, 2005

Talking about living life as a criminal and such is just drama since we all know the final outcome. You will eventually submit, and you will do it by some form of rationalization.

Actually, Reiki...this statement shows you know NOTHING about me.

on May 11, 2005
Am I the only one who fears the potential misuse of a smalltown cop who, through the convenience of a national ID, can now gain information to harass innocent civilians without the benefit of a warrant? Sure, a warrant will supposedly be needed, but warrants USED to be needed for wiretaps, too." border=0 ALIGN="absmiddle">

Gideon, you have a well-deserved reputation for being a sensible fellow. That makes the above remark appear even more bizarre than it normally would.

Are you seriously arguing that the only thing keeping smalltown cops from being corrupt, malicious, or incompetent is the lack of a national ID?

SMALLTOWN COP: Do you know how fast you were going, Miss?

TOURIST FROM OUT OF TOWN: I'm sorry officer, I didnt' realize I was speeding. I'll be happy to pay the fine.

SMALLTOWN COP: You sure got a purty mouth... but without a national ID, I guess I can't abuse my position of authority and exploit you in any way. I'm letting you off with a warning.

TOURIST FROM OUT OF TOWN: It's a good thing I didn't tell him I had my Passport in my purse!
on May 11, 2005

Gideon, you have a well-deserved reputation for being a sensible fellow. That makes the above remark appear even more bizarre than it normally would.

stute,

The statement was designed to provide one POSSIBLE scenario, as I was challenged to do on several occasions. Honestly, I feel that 99% of the people with access to the information can and would use it responsibly. It's the idea of giving yet another weapon to the unscrupulous 1% that concerns me.

Again, I have a real life card I could play, but telling you that would be unwise. Maybe later.

on May 11, 2005
"First and foremost, a national ID card is NOT a federally granted power by the Constitution. I challenge you to show me where it is."


I challenge you to show me where it is forbidden. There's plenty of precidents for federal standards on "state's rights" issues. If states are inept, they should expect it.

"Second, a national ID card will NOT be a deterrent to terrorists; the ostensible reason for its implementation. Again, I challenge you to show me how it will be."


I challenge you to show me where the government is required to have complete assurance of success before they attempt to fix a problem. People walking around with expired visas and 6-year driver's licenses IS a problem.

"More realistic, however, are possibilities of children whose parents have had involvement with child protective services having future children removed from them at birth after the hospital runs their national ID through the database."


Not to say the child protective system isn't broken. The problem isn't kids being taken away, it is the arbitrary way they are taken away. I think what you are suggesting would require child protective services at the national level, wouldn't it?

You think maybe people raising their future kids in hiding is somehow a good dodge of the current system? What about the people who really SHOULDN'T be raising kids?

"Or of the national ID being used to "track" purchases and movements illegally of government "subversives" who oppose government action but are no means violent individuals. The National Guard won't have to shoot college students at Kent State anymore; the police will be able to arrest them in their dorm after they buy a copy of "The Anarchist Cookbook" or "The Turner Diaries" at an online bookstore."


Are you plotting revolution? LOL. This isn't even a national-ID. Even the ACLU admits it is the first, very small step in what might later become a national ID.

Gideon is preaching NRA and marching alongside the ACLU and pro-illegal alien, open border folks. This is one of those faux-Conservative issues that appears to be home-spun on the surface, but when you really look at it is just an excuse for the paranoid to protest alongside bleeding heart liberals.

I am beginning to see that Libertarians don't address problems, they address solutions they don't like. Sounds very Pelosi-Democratic to me. Why come up with a solution when you can just oppose the other guy's?
on May 11, 2005

I am beginning to see that Libertarians don't address problems, they address solutions they don't like.

You haven't looked at the LP platform very closely. The LP actually commended Bush for addressing the Social Security issue.

I challenge you to show me where it is forbidden. There's plenty of precidents for federal standards on "state's rights" issues. If states are inept, they should expect it.

How about the tenth amendment? Just because state's rights have been consistently violated for over 140 years doesn't mean that the government has been correct in doing so.

I apologize for the visceral reaction in branding you a "fascist", baker. That was out of line. But the fact is, you are usually a reasonable defender of individual liberties, and I was quite taken off guard by the fact that you could consider this proposal to be a good thing in ANY way. The fact is, I fail to see how it will address the illegal immigration issue at ALL (one of the few areas where I diverge from the LP platform; incidentally, so did 2004 LP candidate Michael Badnarik), or for that matter the issue of terrorism. It will be as ineffective as the 20 year "war on drugs", and will spend money for feel good, but ineffectual legislation. The ONLY people who stand to be inconvenienced by it, in fact, are American citizens.

When I advocate for a miniarchist government, I stand in pretty good company. The fact that a few fringe loonies may carry the same banner does not change the legitimacy of the initial message.

on May 11, 2005
to arrest them in their dorm after they buy a copy of "The Anarchist Cookbook" or "The Turner Diaries" at an online bookstore."


Are you plotting revolution? LOL. This isn't even a national-ID. Even the ACLU admits it is the first, very small step in what might later become a national ID


Once again you have side-stepped the issue!
on May 11, 2005
I'm still waiting to hear how it violates the Constitution.
Meta
Views
» 641
Comments
» 31
Category
Sponsored Links