Friday, February 11, 2005
Re: National ID
Not sure if I can go along with Jason on this one or not. The idea of a mandatory ID has, in the past, been viewed as a step toward invasions of privacy, and ultimately a Police State. I can't tell if that is what this is or not, so I think this needs a careful read. I think that reforming Drivers liscences is definatelly necesary, the fact that there are at least half a dozen types of ID's and drivers licences just for Maryland.
I am all for this, standardizing ID's would allow them to be verified much easier, and prevent all types of problems (underage drinking and terrorism alike). Also, I would be careful to note that the opponents of the bill are missing the fact that the bill standardizes IDs, but doesn't require citizens to carry IDs. As it stands now, we all have to show IDs to board planes anyway. Why not have them at least be somewhat standardized.
On the otherside of the issue, I am a die hard Second Amendment fan, and the idea that this could be used to encroach on fire-arm purchases, while slightly far-fetched, is still worisome.
And as for this:
Come on. They are (smacks forhead) undocumented immigrants! They shouldn't have drivers licences, because they shouldn't even be here!
What I am getting at is that standardizing ID cards and licences is not the same as mandating them. If such a bill were up, I would be as against it as the ACLU. But these are not the same thing.
The measure, called the Real ID Act, says that driver's licenses and other ID cards must include a digital photograph, anticounterfeiting features and undefined "machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements" that could include a magnetic strip or RFID tag. The Department of Homeland Security would be charged with drafting the details of the regulation.
I am all for this, standardizing ID's would allow them to be verified much easier, and prevent all types of problems (underage drinking and terrorism alike). Also, I would be careful to note that the opponents of the bill are missing the fact that the bill standardizes IDs, but doesn't require citizens to carry IDs. As it stands now, we all have to show IDs to board planes anyway. Why not have them at least be somewhat standardized.
On the otherside of the issue, I am a die hard Second Amendment fan, and the idea that this could be used to encroach on fire-arm purchases, while slightly far-fetched, is still worisome.
And as for this:
The American Civil Liberties Union likened the new rules to a "de facto national ID card," saying that the measure would force "states to deny driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants" and make DMV employees act as agents of the federal immigration service.
Come on. They are (smacks forhead) undocumented immigrants! They shouldn't have drivers licences, because they shouldn't even be here!
What I am getting at is that standardizing ID cards and licences is not the same as mandating them. If such a bill were up, I would be as against it as the ACLU. But these are not the same thing.
Comments:
Post a Comment
